Tweet
I’ll be liveblogging the president’s speech tonight. Here are the excerpts that are available at the moment:
“The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 – the fastest pace possible – so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers. They will increase our ability to train competent Afghan Security Forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans.”
“Because this is an international effort, I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies. Some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what’s at stake is not simply a test of NATO’s credibility – what’s at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world.”
“Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan’s Security Forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people – that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country.”
7:03 p.m. – September 11. Note: Al-Qaida is not in Afghanistan. Just saying.
7:06 p.m. – The president says we’ll have combat brigades out of Iraq by the end of next summer.
7:07 p.m. – The president just said, I kid you not, that the Afghan government is legitimate. Again, not so much.
7:11 p.m. – President refuting the right-wing talking point that he is "denying resources" via deliberation. Ah, there it is. 30,000 troops. Question, Mr. President: Where exactly will those troops come from? VoteVets:
By deploying an additional 34k troops, without speeding up the departure from Iraq, our force will remain overstretched. How does the administration reconcile this issue? …Where do these troops come from, and what does it leave to take care of any emergencies in Korea, Iran, or at home?…Additionally, will this strategy mean a return to deployments longer than 12 months? It is hard to see how deployment times don’t go up again. We’ve seen a record rate of suicide in the Army, linked to longer and more frequent deployments, making this a top consideration.
Richard Allen Smith at VetVoice is also liveblogging, BTW.
7:18 p.m. – "taking into account conditions on the ground" …There’s the line that means this isn’t a real exit.
7:18 p.m. – "President Karzai’s inauguration speech sent the right message about moving in a new direction" –Too bad his election fraud sent a whole other set of messages.
7:23 p.m. – "Public opinion has turned…" This public opinion?
7:24 p.m. -
Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action. Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now – and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance – would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.
Can someone explain to me how this affects the Vietnam comparison re: our prospects for success?
7:26 p.m. – I just choked on my soda. Did he say he’d be addressing the war-driven deficit while adding 30,000 troops at the cost of $1 million per troop, per year?
7:27 p.m. – "Not open-ended." See 7:18 p.m.
Coda:
We are picking up speed on the slippery slope of escalation. During the campaign, President Obama led the public to believe that he would consider sending “two, maybe three” additional brigades to Afghanistan. That’s about 12,000 troops, or about 5,000 fewer than he ordered in his first escalation. For his second escalation, he’s sending roughly three times the total troop increase on which he campaigned. Gone are the “he said he was going to do it before we elected him” defenses. Please point me to the moment in the campaign where we were debating 50,000 more troops.
7:30 p.m. – Theologizing about the "special burden" born by the U.S. in world history. This portion of the speech is about is totally whitewashed as American history gets. This is my favorite:
We have not always been thanked for these efforts
7:34 p.m. – He’s nodding to the intense opposition to further escalation. He should:
The president faces a big challenge in convincing the American public that sending new troops to Afghanistan is the right thing to do. Support for sending more troops has increased over the last several weeks, which is good news for Obama. The not-so-good news is that, even with the recent shift, less than half of Americans would tell Obama to send in more troops. The rest either say that he should begin withdrawing troops, or keep the troop level as it is.
But now he’s conflating "unity" in favor of his policy with the American creed.
7:37 p.m. – And we’re out. A note to the president: if you’re looking for the exit from Afghanistan, it’s behind you.
7:42 p.m. – Post-game, Rachel Maddow gets it totally wrong. The left is not appeased by this milquetoast mirage of an "exit date." Obama did not set an end date in this speech, period. I’m still angry. You?
Note: Derrick Crowe is the Afghanistan blog fellow for Brave New Foundation / The Seminal. You can learn more about the dangers posed to U.S. national security by the war in Afghanistan by watching Rethink Afghanistan (Part Six): Security, or by visiting http://rethinkafghanistan.com/blog.
422 Comments
Here we go!
Speech starting now
Hankie in one hand…pitchfork in the other!
“Successful conclusion” … not possible.
Here’s the remarks:
Good evening. To the United States Corps of Cadets, to the men and women of our armed services, and to my fellow Americans: I want to speak to you tonight about our effort in Afghanistan – the nature of our commitment there, the scope of our interests, and the strategy that my Administration will pursue to bring this war to a successful conclusion. It is an honor for me to do so here – at West Point – where so many men and women have prepared to stand up for our security, and to represent what is finest about our country.
To address these issues, it is important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, nineteen men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women, and children without regard to their faith or race or station. Were it not for the heroic actions of the passengers on board one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great symbols of our democracy in Washington, and killed many more.
As we know, these men belonged to al Qaeda – a group of extremists who have distorted and defiled Islam, one of the world’s great religions, to justify the slaughter of innocents. Al Qaeda’s base of operations was in Afghanistan, where they were harbored by the Taliban – a ruthless, repressive and radical movement that seized control of that country after it was ravaged by years of Soviet occupation and civil war, and after the attention of America and our friends had turned elsewhere.
Just days after 9/11, Congress authorized the use of force against al Qaeda and those who harbored them – an authorization that continues to this day. The vote in the Senate was 98 to 0. The vote in the House was 420 to 1. For the first time in its history, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization invoked Article 5 – the commitment that says an attack on one member nation is an attack on all. And the United Nations Security Council endorsed the use of all necessary steps to respond to the 9/11 attacks. America, our allies and the world were acting as one to destroy al Qaeda’s terrorist network, and to protect our common security.
Under the banner of this domestic unity and international legitimacy – and only after the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden – we sent our troops into Afghanistan. Within a matter of months, al Qaeda was scattered and many of its operatives were killed. The Taliban was driven from power and pushed back on its heels. A place that had known decades of fear now had reason to hope. At a conference convened by the UN, a provisional government was established under President Hamid Karzai. And an International Security Assistance Force was established to help bring a lasting peace to a war-torn country.
Then, in early 2003, the decision was made to wage a second war in Iraq. The wrenching debate over the Iraq War is well-known and need not be repeated here. It is enough to say that for the next six years, the Iraq War drew the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our diplomacy, and our national attention – and that the decision to go into Iraq caused substantial rifts between America and much of the world.
Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the Iraq war to a responsible end. We will remove our combat brigades from Iraq by the end of next summer, and all of our troops by the end of 2011. That we are doing so is a testament to the character of our men and women in uniform. Thanks to their courage, grit and perseverance , we have given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully leaving Iraq to its people.
But while we have achieved hard-earned milestones in Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. After escaping across the border into Pakistan in 2001 and 2002, al Qaeda’s leadership established a safe-haven there. Although a legitimate government was elected by the Afghan people, it has been hampered by corruption, the drug trade, an under-developed economy, and insufficient Security Forces. Over the last several years, the Taliban has maintained common cause with al Qaeda, as they both seek an overthrow of the Afghan government. Gradually, the Taliban has begun to take control over swaths of Afghanistan, while engaging in increasingly brazen and devastating acts of terrorism against the Pakistani people.
Throughout this period, our troop levels in Afghanistan remained a fraction of what they were in Iraq. When I took office, we had just over 32,000 Americans serving in Afghanistan, compared to 160,000 in Iraq at the peak of the war. Commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban, but these reinforcements did not arrive. That’s why, shortly after taking office, I approved a long-standing request for more troops. After consultations with our allies, I then announced a strategy recognizing the fundamental connection between our war effort in Afghanistan, and the extremist safe-havens in Pakistan. I set a goal that was narrowly defined as disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and pledged to better coordinate our military and civilian effort.
Since then, we have made progress on some important objectives. High-ranking al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed, and we have stepped up the pressure on al Qaeda world-wide. In Pakistan, that nation’s Army has gone on its largest offensive in years. In Afghanistan, we and our allies prevented the Taliban from stopping a presidential election, and – although it was marred by fraud – that election produced a government that is consistent with Afghanistan’s laws and Constitution.
Yet huge challenges remain. Afghanistan is not lost, but for several years it has moved backwards. There is no imminent threat of the government being overthrown, but the Taliban has gained momentum. Al Qaeda has not reemerged in Afghanistan in the same numbers as before 9/11, but they retain their safe-havens along the border. And our forces lack the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan Security Forces and better secure the population. Our new Commander in Afghanistan – General McChrystal – has reported that the security situation is more serious than he anticipated. In short: the status quo is not sustainable.
As cadets, you volunteered for service during this time of danger. Some of you have fought in Afghanistan. Many will deploy there. As your Commander-in-Chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly defined, and worthy of your service. That is why, after the Afghan voting was completed, I insisted on a thorough review of our strategy. Let me be clear: there has never been an option before me that called for troop deployments before 2010, so there has been no delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war. Instead, the review has allowed me ask the hard questions, and to explore all of the different options along with my national security team, our military and civilian leadership in Afghanistan, and with our key partners. Given the stakes involved, I owed the American people – and our troops – no less.
This review is now complete. And as Commander-in-Chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.
I do not make this decision lightly. I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force, and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions. We have been at war for eight years, at enormous cost in lives and resources. Years of debate over Iraq and terrorism have left our unity on national security issues in tatters, and created a highly polarized and partisan backdrop for this effort. And having just experienced the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, the American people are understandably focused on rebuilding our economy and putting people to work here at home.
Most of all, I know that this decision asks even more of you – a military that, along with your families, has already borne the heaviest of all burdens. As President, I have signed a letter of condolence to the family of each American who gives their life in these wars. I have read the letters from the parents and spouses of those who deployed. I have visited our courageous wounded warriors at Walter Reed. I have travelled to Dover to meet the flag-draped caskets of 18 Americans returning home to their final resting place. I see firsthand the terrible wages of war. If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.
So no – I do not make this decision lightly. I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. This danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and al Qaeda can operate with impunity. We must keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and to do that, we must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region.
Of course, this burden is not ours alone to bear. This is not just America’s war. Since 9/11, al Qaeda’s safe-havens have been the source of attacks against London and Amman and Bali. The people and governments of both Afghanistan and Pakistan are endangered. And the stakes are even higher within a nuclear-armed Pakistan, because we know that al Qaeda and other extremists seek nuclear weapons, and we have every reason to believe that they would use them.
These facts compel us to act along with our friends and allies. Our overarching goal remains the same: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.
To meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny al Qaeda a safe-haven. We must reverse the Taliban’s momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan’s Security Forces and government, so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan’s future.
We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban’s momentum and increase Afghanistan’s capacity over the next 18 months.
The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 – the fastest pace possible – so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers. They will increase our ability to train competent Afghan Security Forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans.
Because this is an international effort, I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies. Some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what’s at stake is not simply a test of NATO’s credibility – what’s at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world.
Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan’s Security Forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people – that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country.
Second, we will work with our partners, the UN, and the Afghan people to pursue a more effective civilian strategy, so that the government can take advantage of improved security.
This effort must be based on performance. The days of providing a blank check are over. President Karzai’s inauguration speech sent the right message about moving in a new direction. And going forward, we will be clear about what we expect from those who receive our assistance. We will support Afghan Ministries, Governors, and local leaders that combat corruption and deliver for the people. We expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable. And we will also focus our assistance in areas – such as agriculture – that can make an immediate impact in the lives of the Afghan people.
The people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have been confronted with occupation – by the Soviet Union, and then by foreign al Qaeda fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes. So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand – America seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. We have no interest in occupying your country. We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens. And we will seek a partnership with Afghanistan grounded in mutual respect – to isolate those who destroy; to strengthen those who build; to hasten the day when our troops will leave; and to forge a lasting friendship in which America is your partner, and never your patron.
Third, we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.
We are in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That is why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.
In the past, there have been those in Pakistan who have argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight, and that Pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence. But in recent years, as innocents have been killed from Karachi to Islamabad, it has become clear that it is the Pakistani people who are the most endangered by extremism. Public opinion has turned. The Pakistani Army has waged an offensive in Swat and South Waziristan. And there is no doubt that the United States and Pakistan share a common enemy.
In the past, we too often defined our relationship with Pakistan narrowly. Those days are over. Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interests, mutual respect, and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe-haven for terrorists whose location is known, and whose intentions are clear. America is also providing substantial resources to support Pakistan’s democracy and development. We are the largest international supporter for those Pakistanis displaced by the fighting. And going forward, the Pakistani people must know: America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan’s security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people can be unleashed.
These are the three core elements of our strategy: a military effort to create the conditions for a transition; a civilian surge that reinforces positive action; and an effective partnership with Pakistan.
I recognize that there are a range of concerns about our approach. So let me briefly address a few of the prominent arguments that I have heard, and which I take very seriously.
First, there are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam. They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we are better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. Yet this argument depends upon a false reading of history. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action. Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now – and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance – would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.
Second, there are those who acknowledge that we cannot leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we have. But this would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through, and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there. It would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan, because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train Afghan Security Forces and give them the space to take over.
Finally, there are those who oppose identifying a timeframe for our transition to Afghan responsibility. Indeed, some call for a more dramatic and open-ended escalation of our war effort – one that would commit us to a nation building project of up to a decade. I reject this course because it sets goals that are beyond what we can achieve at a reasonable cost, and what we need to achieve to secure our interests. Furthermore, the absence of a timeframe for transition would deny us any sense of urgency in working with the Afghan government. It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security, and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in Afghanistan.
As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, our or interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I do not have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I am mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who – in discussing our national security – said, “Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.”
Over the past several years, we have lost that balance, and failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our friends and neighbors are out of work and struggle to pay the bills, and too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we simply cannot afford to ignore the price of these wars.
All told, by the time I took office the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan approached a trillion dollars. Going forward, I am committed to addressing these costs openly and honestly. Our new approach in Afghanistan is likely to cost us roughly 30 billion dollars for the military this year, and I will work closely with Congress to address these costs as we work to bring down our deficit.
But as we end the war in Iraq and transition to Afghan responsibility, we must rebuild our strength here at home. Our prosperity provides a foundation for our power. It pays for our military. It underwrites our diplomacy. It taps the potential of our people, and allows investment in new industry. And it will allow us to compete in this century as successfully as we did in the last. That is why our troop commitment in Afghanistan cannot be open-ended – because the nation that I am most interested in building is our own.
Let me be clear: none of this will be easy. The struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly, and it extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will be an enduring test of our free society, and our leadership in the world. And unlike the great power conflicts and clear lines of division that defined the 20th century, our effort will involve disorderly regions and diffuse enemies.
So as a result, America will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars and prevent conflict. We will have to be nimble and precise in our use of military power. Where al Qaeda and its allies attempt to establish a foothold – whether in Somalia or Yemen or elsewhere – they must be confronted by growing pressure and strong partnerships.
And we cannot count on military might alone. We have to invest in our homeland security, because we cannot capture or kill every violent extremist abroad. We have to improve and better coordinate our intelligence, so that we stay one step ahead of shadowy networks.
We will have to take away the tools of mass destruction. That is why I have made it a central pillar of my foreign policy to secure loose nuclear materials from terrorists; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to pursue the goal of a world without them. Because every nation must understand that true security will never come from an endless race for ever-more destructive weapons – true security will come for those who reject them.
We will have to use diplomacy, because no one nation can meet the challenges of an interconnected world acting alone. I have spent this year renewing our alliances and forging new partnerships. And we have forged a new beginning between America and the Muslim World – one that recognizes our mutual interest in breaking a cycle of conflict, and that promises a future in which those who kill innocents are isolated by those who stand up for peace and prosperity and human dignity.
Finally, we must draw on the strength of our values – for the challenges that we face may have changed, but the things that we believe in must not. That is why we must promote our values by living them at home – which is why I have prohibited torture and will close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. And we must make it clear to every man, woman and child around the world who lives under the dark cloud of tyranny that America will speak out on behalf of their human rights, and tend to the light of freedom, and justice, and opportunity, and respect for the dignity of all peoples. That is who we are. That is the moral source of America’s authority.
Since the days of Franklin Roosevelt, and the service and sacrifice of our grandparents, our country has borne a special burden in global affairs. We have spilled American blood in many countries on multiple continents. We have spent our revenue to help others rebuild from rubble and develop their own economies. We have joined with others to develop an architecture of institutions – from the United Nations to NATO to the World Bank – that provide for the common security and prosperity of human beings.
We have not always been thanked for these efforts, and we have at times made mistakes. But more than any other nation, the United States of America has underwritten global security for over six decades – a time that, for all its problems, has seen walls come down, markets open, billions lifted from poverty, unparalleled scientific progress, and advancing frontiers of human liberty.
For unlike the great powers of old, we have not sought world domination. Our union was founded in resistance to oppression. We do not seek to occupy other nations. We will not claim another nation’s resources or target other peoples because their faith or ethnicity is different from ours. What we have fought for – and what we continue to fight for – is a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and access opportunity.
As a country, we are not as young – and perhaps not as innocent – as we were when Roosevelt was President. Yet we are still heirs to a noble struggle for freedom. Now we must summon all of our might and moral suasion to meet the challenges of a new age.
In the end, our security and leadership does not come solely from the strength of our arms. It derives from our people – from the workers and businesses who will rebuild our economy; from the entrepreneurs and researchers who will pioneer new industries; from the teachers that will educate our children, and the service of those who work in our communities at home; from the diplomats and Peace Corps volunteers who spread hope abroad; and from the men and women in uniform who are part of an unbroken line of sacrifice that has made government of the people, by the people, and for the people a reality on this Earth.
This vast and diverse citizenry will not always agree on every issue – nor should we. But I also know that we, as a country, cannot sustain our leadership nor navigate the momentous challenges of our time if we allow ourselves to be split asunder by the same rancor and cynicism and partisanship that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse.
It is easy to forget that when this war began, we were united – bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again. I believe with every fiber of my being that we – as Americans – can still come together behind a common purpose. For our values are not simply words written into parchment – they are a creed that calls us together, and that has carried us through the darkest of storms as one nation, one people.
America – we are passing through a time of great trial. And the message that we send in the midst of these storms must be clear: that our cause is just, our resolve unwavering. We will go forward with the confidence that right makes might, and with the commitment to forge an America that is safer, a world that is more secure, and a future that represents not the deepest of fears but the highest of hopes. Thank you, God Bless you, God Bless our troops, and may God Bless the United States of America.
thanks Derrick
9/11 … why does this sound so dreadfully familiar?
Pentagon says 100 AQ only left in Afghanistan btw.
Fuck you, Barack. This is not why we elected you.
He’s right, in that Afghanistan might have once been the “right war.” No longer.
Legal justifications up front. Not exactly wonderful.
9/11′s a drinking word. I came in a bit late but have counted 3 so far.
we’d be outta there if it weren’t for BushCo’s side trip to Iraq
*hic*
“lasting peace to a war torn country” Wow. really achieved that.
FOX won’t air Obama speeches. Unless, apparently, it’s to escalate wars.
Obama starts off by “reminding us” about 9/11–we had to go to Afghanistan because that’s where Al Qaeda was operating. This is simply a Bush tactic–he’s using 9/11 to justify fighting in Afghanistan more than 8 years after the 9/11 attacks, when Al Qaeda no longer operates there. I’m a bit confused–how does President Obama think staying in Afghanistan helps us to get Al Qaeda if they’re in Pakistan?
wtf does that mean?
we’re leaving there as a testament to the soldier’s courage
Declares Mission Accomplished in Iraq.
right you are
Thanks Derrick and Jason.
More boogie men.
Such cowards are we.
Did he say start withdrawing in 6 months. Maybe I was too hasty.
I think this speech might provoke some real bitterness, more than might have been expected. He owns this war completely now.
Aw comeon, give him his one applause line so far.
the bitterness is here already
And why did 9/11 happen, Barack. Maybe we should go back further as to why we were so hated? They hated us for our “freedoms” as W. said?
One doesn’t follow the other. Bush neglected Afghanistan. That doesn’t mean adding more troops now, 6 years later, will work.
Believe that and I have some Whitewater land for you… real cheap.
Brags that he got Pak to launch the 3d U.S. war against Islam as one of his measures of success.
Acknowledges we have no real partner in Afghanistan government.
wtf does that mean?
I thought he was referring to Iraq.
yeah, I’m sorry to say that some of this reminds me of Bush–the playing on fear
McChrystal reports that he has failed in his mission.
What evidence is there that we’re in danger from Afghanistan? Besides McCrystal’s word…
Probably something similar to Bush v. Gore?
Don’t take a bow for Iraq, BO. We gutted and destroyed a civilization. Baghdad was the Paris of the mideast. Now it is all a parking lot for carpetbagging strip malls and transnational BIG OIL reservations and a strategic war-mongering outpost for our imperialism.
Defensive much. No request for more troops before 2010.
even if he was announcing a fucking pullout he’d mention 9/11, jesus
I am glad he thought about this for a while. He still didn’t come to the right conclusion.
‘vital national interest’ ?!
and how’d that work out for us?
Poker tell: he puts is tongue against his lower lip with mouth closed when fibbing.
it means he’s dealing in Orwellian terminology…
We can look back to justify escalating forever wars, but can’t look back to hold people accountable for starting them?
We’re gonna be needing a big M.F. Breakfast again, tomorrow …
“I died in Afghanistan and all I got was this lousy condolence”
Oh I agree. But it has been hitting new levels today.
Security is another drinking word. Just had one. Wasn’t keeping track before.
The idea that Afghanistan represents a security threat is nuts.
Another drinking word.
Do you know whether the Russians, Chinese and friendly Arab Leaders are in agreement with Obama’s plan ?
holy shit I can’t believe he mentioned 9/11 in a speech about Afghanistan!
Yes, you’re correct. Out of Iraq next summer.
If the epicenter numbers 100 AQ, the threat is where?
Horseshit.
Here we go. The center tightrope. I have been against Iraq War. But Afghanistant a different story. Wants to appease both sides of the citizenry. Ya can’t do that re morality, Barack. Gamesmanship. Not statesmanship. Tough love the nation needs. Moral courage.
LBJ — read the writing on the wall, BO.
It is a civil war. And we ars shoring up one of the corrupt sides. How dare you commit lives and money and doom the non-one percenters economically drowning in this country.
What about our assassination squads? Why is Blackwater still in operation, raking in the bucks?
Just finished reading a book on the history of Afghanistan from 1919 to 2000 (written before 9/11). Author pointed out that as soon as Taliban got control of most of the country, they started to fractionate. No reason to think they won’t do the same thing this time.
The Taliban are not our enemy, defeating them is not in our security interests. Period.
I don’t know, it’s a good question.
Don’t hold your breath. Election looks less & less likely, which is the lynch pin of the U.S. withdrawal.
Yeah, everyone knows it was Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
and guns can do all of that????
like that would matter
MattBors: I love that our president can actually articulate his horrible decisions.
End this war successfully? What is victory?
shades of ‘peace with honor…’
fuck
Oh dear, NATO’s cred is at stake. F*ck NATO.
“international effort” … hmmm …. 500 more from UK?
The numbers on this are insane …
100K US troops plus how many contractors?
$1mill per soldier or $100,000,000,000 per year
100 AQ
Obama made a specific claim that planners in the Afganistan/Pakistan border region were behind recent efforts to attack the U.S. can this be verified? if it is true, does our having troops in Afghanistan address this? sounds vague to me…where exactly are these plans being hatched? in an area Pakistan controls? just not clear…
He said the word “clear”. Drink!
The defensive tone of this speech may have put a permanent sour in me. He’s clearly suffering from Wimpy Democrat Over-Compensation Syndrome and swallowing all of the tripe from the warmongers.
Obama is giving hints to that in his speech … it will be interesting to hear what messages come from those corners of the Globe, over the next few days.
“Clear” again! Drink!
putting 30,000 troops in by next summer – will that reduce dwell time for our troops, increasing the strain that has led to more suicides…?
I think Obama’s pledge to support those combating corruption and holding to account those who don’t will be put to a severe test.
a welcome laugh
Irak is a time bomb with a political trigger.
the “people of Afghanistan” … as we bomb their wedding parties?
So U.S. aid is conditional on performance of Afghan govt. But the U.S. can’t leave unless Taliban have been routed. So the worse the Afghan govt performs, the longer the U.S. stays because Taliban gets more power? Huh? TILT.
It’s the first I’ve heard of a such a direct connection.
Days of a blank check are over???
REALLY???(((BLANK STARE)))
So, Barack, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
So you are lost to the corporate matrix. Now you are lost to us in the military matrix.
Blank check????? The friggen Congress already authorized without a whimper from much of anyone $130 billion for this to happen Kucinich keeps saying.
No more blank checks????
Good thing we can give up SP … but money for death and destruction and transnational corporations to make the bottom 95% of the world serfs.
We have no interest in occupying your country so we are sending more troops.
Here or there? ;]
Love it.
Wonder where the source of war zombeism is in DC? Is that the secret Masonic cornerstone of the capital?
starting to sound like the coalition of the “willing”
Karzai is already refusing to sign the indictments against 5 govt figures whose corruption has been documented with clear evidence.
Probably just a plain vanilla lie.
I’m back to where I started: Fuck you, Obama. I expected better.
Escalation is a clear exit strategy.
I screamed and threw koosh balls against the tv at that phrase.
Boy, this is almost as bad a Bush’s crap.
no you didn’t
He’s saying that, assuming that we can stabilize Afghanistan, more and more Afghan militants will flee to neighboring Pakistan, which will surely be further destabilized as a result.
I agree with him. The problem isn’t just Afghanistan, but also Pakistan, which is in danger of becoming a failed state.
How long is this speech anyhow?
“…mutual trust…” Yeah, right. There isn’t an Afghan in the country who trusts us. With good reason.
It sounds so much like Bush’s surge. Ugh…
yeah, to the tunnel with the light at the end of it.
If he delivered the equivalent of the Gettysburg Address, many here would pan it.
Of course, it isn’t that, but so far, OK.
copy and paste it into word and look at the word count
don’t worry, he takes your concern ‘very seriously’….
Obama’s Exceedingly Familiar Justifications for Escalation
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald
And here’s what he SHOULD say, but won’t:
The Afghan Speech Obama Should Give (but Won’t)
[snip]
This evening, after a comprehensive policy review of our options in that region that has involved commanders in the field, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, National Security Advisor James Jones, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, top intelligence and State Department officials and key ambassadors, special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, and experts from inside and outside this administration, I have a very different kind of announcement to make.
[snip]
Given that, let me say as bluntly as I can that I have decided to send no more troops to Afghanistan. Beyond that, I believe it is in the national interest of the American people that this war, like the Iraq War, be drawn down. Over time, our troops and resources will be brought home in an orderly fashion, while we ensure that we provide adequate security for the men and women of our Armed Forces. Ours will be an administration that will stand or fall, as of today, on this essential position: that we ended, rather than extended, two wars.
[snip]
how dare you
“those who use violence” – i love it when US presidents denounce those who use violence.
thanks–yeah, I hadn’t heard this before–but still not sure whether Obama’s planned escalation really has anything to do with addressing this threat, wherever it is (and it was vague)
CoW=43 nations. Coulda fooled me.
A great piece.
Keeps over looking th 9/11 source; may have been plotted in Afghanistan (As well as Germany, New Jersey, Florida and Arizona) but was executed by Saudis.
INVADE SAUDI ARABIA!
You KNOW he’s lying-his lips are moving….
Afghan security forces aren’t nearly ready now. But the admin is talking about starting to hand over in 2011. One year? That’s how close they are? Come on.
I’m not watching but I keep seeing the aged face of LBJ and hearing him say “with a heavy heart…” I guess we never learn.
right–one of the many awful things here is that we think we can solve problems in another country when we’re not even functioning as a country here in the U.S. We have people sleeping in parking lots to get health care.
“…attacked from Afghanistan…” not “…attacked by Afganistan…” clever, but not clever enough Mr Preznint.
How much Likker ya got ?!! *g*
4,580 words. I’ll find where he is in a minute.
How do you stabilize Afghanistan?
Deploying some for the 4th and 5th time.
Anybody learn the right lesson from Ft. Hood. Desertions and suicides and depression and addictions and homelessness and death from underinsurance.
Barack, we are running out of cannon fodder. Gucci-loafered Congress and Prez … sit in comfortable conference rooms and doom hundreds of thousands for another decade or two.
Barack, am hearing your EGO coming out… you translating VN history. Dear God. I wish you were old enough to have learned those lessons.
Saudis were the 19 who attacked 9/11. Taliban wanted to negotiate over OBL … but Bush hubris refused. So that detail is buried.
Barack. Patriarchy. HUBRIS. Do you think now the Repubs will embrace you?
What about the drug trade? Why is Afghanistan the number 1 supplier of opium? Will that be our surviving economy now? Militarization and covert drug trading? Oh yeah and arms dealing.
I was late finishing dinner, so came upstairs without any. That’s why I’m so eager to have the speech be over. How about you?
Getting to cost, interesting…
that may well be, but I’m not sure I understand how his proposals will address problems in Pakistan
Ice 9?
Make that Sand 10
Put a magazine under one of the legs. /s
About 3/4 done.
banana magazine?
Blah blah blah. Most boring troop surge ever.
no, that works with the ottoman…. empire
Keeps playing in my head while I’m listening to Obama.
Sign me up as well.
Wow, this is a HORRIBLE speech: both ridiculous content and poorly presented.
I’ve got Chianti and Single Malt nearby … which one would you like ?
Frankly, there’s more being done in Pakistan than he’s acknowledging in this speech. He’s addressing the problem re Pakistan (which is a big problem), but he’s skipping over what he’s been doing about it.
who the fuck are you Everett Dirksen?
Oh, thank you all for posting. I’ve been in a situation where I just couldn’t tune in to the bullshit because I was dealing with a real life family member medical situation.
Not unlike our military families. When do they come onto the national attention screen? Have we no national shame?!
I knew this was coming. I feel sick.
How many were convinced? Raise your hands. That’s what I thought.
“TOOLS of mass destruction” – the Obama variant
oh and yeah, the diplomacy of predator drones.
I came. I teleprompted. I bored.
But Lib,you’re asking him to ELIMINATE confusion!!
Obama, apparently smart enough not to drag out the name of Osama bin Laden. Now A-Q is a strong enough buzz phrase.
Nuclear weapons out … except for Israel. They get to keep them because they have this lobby, see …
“unlike vietnam, now we have a coalition” ? we had a coalition in vietnam too. so?
Recipe for Hope.
Place turd in national punchbowl.
Repeat.
Raven, Our problem is as midwesterners, we weren’t weened on lemons.
“…we can’t capture or kill every terrorist…” Who’s better at targeted killing, us or Israel?
Chianti for now. Then I’ll break out a bottle of red and share with you.
Here’s my humble assessment of the situation. Republicans have made it clear that they will oppose anything he proposes. The one thing they cannot refuse easily without grave consequences is escalating war in Afghanistan. If the Republicans refuse an escalation, a “surge”, they will lose their base. It is the only way he can gain Republican cooperation.
Yeah, what Raven said. Double.
heh heh
Love it. Can you do it in Latin?
(((openhope)))
glad to hear that and hope there is a focus on Pakistan–but what’s still confusing is why we need tens of thousands of troops in Afganistan if the danger is in Pakistan…
AUMF means we pick some country try out our wonderful updated Magnificent “merican Murder Machine ,blow people to shit , run a diedolt voting scham elections,then decide how they are going to organize government to accede to our wishes.
Barrack if we aren’t dominating the world name the next country to our foreign bases.
THIS guy is wrong.
send a couple of ROK divisions and you’ll see some real death and destruction
hope your family member is ok
The rah rah America part. If only it weren’t when we were planning on further destroying another country.
Guess we could go away
Gargle, Rinse, and Repeat
I’m still choking here on the bit about:
It turns out that, in April, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India (acronymically TAPI) signed a Gas Pipeline Framework Agreement to build a U.S.-backed $7.6 billion pipeline. It would, of course, bypass Iran and new energy giant Russia, carrying Turkmeni natural gas and oil to Pakistan and India. Construction would, theoretically, begin in 2010. Put the emphasis on “theoretically,” because the pipeline is, once again, to run straight through Kandahar and so directly into the heartland of the Taliban insurgency. ”
Hmmm, new US backed pipeline will need go directly through the heartland of the Taliban insurgency…hmmm How can we do that unless….
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/335023
And 2 + 2 = ?
What I really hate is that we go and trash a country and then say “taking care of this mess is your own responsibility”. It so reminds me of battering husbands snarling “You MADE me do it! Now clean up that mess!”
I’m already half a bottle in and it’s not making me feel any better.
More than any other nation, the U.S. has overthrown more countries with subsequent disaster for their population. (Well perhaps Soviets got that prize but U.S. is right down there with the worst, and still at it.)
Wow, second modest applause line.
*Sending a healthful Glass of Chianti your way*
Oh Joy, death and destruction! Hallelujah
Isn’t that; Place turd in paper bag. Ring doorbell. Light fireworks to explode bag.
Run back to your buddies and laugh.
I am so angry, I could scream. Is war-mongering the new requirement to become President in this country? “We have to invest in homeland security?” How about investing in universal healthcare, education, infrastructure, clean energy? Oh, I am sorry. We are all out of money. We have to support the military industrial complex…
“We have to invest in our values?” What, like killing civilians in Afghanistan? Give me a break. They don’t even want us in their country.
This is it for me. I have been questioning his judgment for quite a while, but this tops the cake!
No, Goldman just wants to own them.
I was talking about our ally in the Nam
Rather cold applause from the crowd.
and you’re absolutely right re: military families. Obama needs to call on the entire country to help–it’s immoral for us to keep heaping this burden on a small percentage of the population
Shaking fingers at partisanship. Rs will bite it off.
Amen.
nlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action. Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan,
“we do not seek to occupy other nations” for some reason, it just keeps happening.
Thanks. *sipping*
follow the pipeline…follow the money
and that purpose is Afghanistan? Oh brother…
Uhh, my family member is in the best hands because he lives in a Social Democracy, Finland. With his American family’s deepest gratitude.
Just popped another cork.
Wooooooo boy. Tiger and White Horse battalions.
Veni. Teleprompt’em. Boredom.
God, what a awful speech!
Actually, what Obama’s been doing in Pakistan is morally questionable and a little frightening. Re our use of predator drones to attack people in Pakistan, see the most recent post here. The danger now, imo, comes from militants now in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Sucks to be an empire.
Well, I could have missed that. Or perhaps I did.
Gitch, this is so not surprising but still a kick in the stomach AND teeth.
How cruel. He had the potential. And now he is setting up the country to hand over to Palin or Petraes or McCain ….
HUBRIS.
Should have known “they” wouldn’t let a leader with moral courage near the highest job in the land.
And the media will spin the obama brand and we will be the infidels. We will be the ones against the troops, cuz we want to save their lives, bodies and/or sanity.
God bless America.
You screwed us Barack. You screwed us!!!
Raven, I recall Everett Dirksen, andI don’t get the reference here.
The speech was persuasive in rhetoric, but it didn’t lay out what victory would look like or how we’d get out at all.
Wow…. Articulating it well made it all sound much worse!
Worst speech ever.
And the ROK Marines
I’ll eat my shoes if the pipeline ever gets built.
True Dat!
Did any of you follow the last presidential campaign?
It’s official.
Obama Is A Warmongering Blue Dog.
US armed forces= mafia protection racket for big buisiness
WAR IS A RACKET
you were complaining about his delivery, Dirksen was known as a great orator. I was questioning your analysis of his style.
heh
Robert … amazing how that just happens, eh?
And I’ll eat one if it finished only to be constantly blown up forever and a day.
Oh boy! War Carousel music
IIRC we were in talks with the Taliban before 911 over this very pipeline.
Village (Temporary) Seal of Approval to com next, and last about 15 minutes. Rethugs will resume rancor in mere minutes.
By design, IMO.
Do you think the US has been operating Drone strikes without the support of the Pakistani Gov’t ?
Well that was hard to sit through.
I voted for change–
A leader who would do a job FOR us-not a hack who would do a job on us!
B.O.—-yep,sounds pretty accurate.
Yes.. and it’s why I didn’t vote for him.
*admires Raven’s restraint throughout this evening*
kiss kiss
If ya can’t dazzle ‘em with brilliance
Baffle ‘em with bullshit.
And he ends it with a pack of lies (paraphrasing) . We don’t torture, We don’t covet other nation’s resources. We don’t want to dominate the world? etc etc etc.
Garbage!
The US has been hitting targets provided by the Pakistani government. So, no.
Obama wants you to leave that part up to your imagination.
oh,but the money gets distributed anyway
Raven – why do we have to keep rehashing this. The terrorists were mainly from Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda will have its bases whereever they are welcome. Right now, apparently in Pakistan. Are we going to fight wars with all countries that harbor Al-Qaeda? How about diplomatic nation building, and law enforcement action to capture terrorists? My God, does every solution to a threat have to involve mass killings of mainly innocent people?
Derrick,
You are going to be busy for a looooong time.
98 to 0 for money for Afghanistan War from Senate. Not even Feingold? Byrd?
420 to 1 in the House, was that Kucinich I assume?
Mark Shields and David Brooks being respectful about the speech. This depresses me. Mainstream media has absolutely no moral sensibility, I mean not a molecule.
We are escalating for a conclusion!!!
Obama shake those hands of the soldiers whose lives you have doomed.
Shields saying Obama conflated Taliban with A-Q.
I am going to call Congress people tonight, and every night. And I know it has little hope of impact.
One more tragic reason to keep wearing the black arm band.
I only remember Dirksen as a meandering old fart.
But thanks for the clarification.
Best photo of the speech, IMO.
plus ca change
lol!
I look forward to you people putting me out of business with your activism.
Gotta propel the myths and propaganda. It’s what binds a tattered nation in decline.
Barack = Manchurian candidate
This is all about the military and corporate industrial complex. The carpetbagging from US imperialism.
And we have become the country-toppling domino-effect gamesman for decades the Communists were accused by America of being.
But when we do it … well… it is us. it is okay. it is for the best. because we are the USA ….
and might makes right. And Obama is using his rhetorical skills for evil, frankly.
thanks Derrick!
Everybody see this piece by Cenk Uygur at HuffPo?
Why I Changed My Mind About Afghanistan.
From what I can tell, the US has been operating drone strikes in order to support the Pakistani govt.
(Also, see my response to you @ 208)
That is a good answer.
I pasted it in and bolded FROM because my brother said her said BY. . .get it?
Thanks for hanging in there with us.
Our bark is stronger than our bite.
And my TV cuts to reality programming. Go America!
Read them both … thanks !
No no, thank you people. Now go get in the way, please.
so Tweety thinks West Point is the “enemy camp” for Obama and ya’ll think he is Rommel.
Rachel Maddow just commented that she believes Obama neutralized the situation. He appeased the right by sending troops, and he appeased the left by setting a firm exit date. Rachel, I seldom disagree with you, but, my God I hope you are wrong. I consider myself part of the left, and I am not feeling appeased AT ALL!
Wow, Chris Matthews is actually good on the speech.
Shhh.
That’s no accident.
Definitely. I heard that too and said a bad word. Or seven.
Took him awhile to figure it out.
Americans tend not to know that not every problem has a solution. So the Taliban are the scourge of the earth. So whadda we gonna do.
I heard Dirksen give a tub thumper of a speech in Galena, Illinois in the early 60s. He was a damn entertaining pol of the old school.
That photo is a post in and of itself!
There’s not enough money in it. It’s extremely difficult to maintain one’s empire, or get rich, if one cannot control and exploit the resources of other countries.
The alternative to Rachel’s opinion is that the speech fell decisively between stools, offering too little too late for both sides.
Right-o.
Only I’m rather unsure of what exactly TO do. It’s not exactly like I can have a Tinanmen Square moment and stand on a runway, blocking a C-5 on the way out of Petersen AFB. Hmmm.
Nic Robertson is perturbed that Obama did not disclose Classified Battle Plans …
It’s even more difficult to profit as an empire from taking other people’s countries if you destroy those countries in the process.
it was a good speech. Just an indefensible position on an intractable issue.
Emperor Obama your privates are exposed. Not pretty !
Presuming facts not in evidence: that there actually is a classified battle plan.
i have a really crazy idea
how about building schools hospitals etc…….instead of bombing them
I don’t think Obama is a warmonger but I can’t figure out exactly what he is. It’s a mystery to me why he feels we have to do this “surge”. He seems intelligent but makes some loopy decisions. It’s like 2 different people working in there.
McCaffrey said it was a “magnificent speech.”
Also thinks the strategy will work and McChrystal is the best counter-terrorism officer in the last 50 years.
Thank you, Derrick.
yes, well said. But what price political gamesmanship, eh? And do you think they will join forces henceforth with obama. That he is buying friends like Clinton thought selling out with Nafta.
I wonder if he got some markers from this to pass his wimpy Obamacare now.
Obama is still voting “present”. That was real foreshadowing.
Marwan Bishara on al jazeera english is pretty on point right now http://www.livestation.com/channels/3-al_jazeera_english
A wALLAHmart in every neighborhood …
*Hic* … that Chianti is stronger than I remember …
Obama’s speech was long on platitudes and short on substance. Maybe it was just me but he seemed to wander all over the place and there was a distinct lack of focus. The oratory magic definitely seems to have faded.
No trial. No investigation. No convictions. Just damn those Afghanis to hell. I feel sick, and it isn’t the wine.
I’m sure the thugs are happy with it.
LMAO! A shopperzein in every strip mall, hollering the call to shop, every hour on the hour!
oy~
Rachel, step away from the kool-aid of “pragmatism”!
But you see, foreigners can’t do that because the natives experience it as imposing foreign values on them. The 3 Cups of Tea guy does it painfully slowly with a huge amount of local collabortion & work, so they own the result. The U.S. govt could never do that.
Jeebus, is it Opposites Day in McCaffreyLand ?!!
Got some Ravenswood zinfandel when you’re ready.
Cuz it’s only improvement when Haliburton is misbuilding them.
Two people are working here. O and Emanuel.
Actually, the Taliban booted USA/Cheney/Halliburton OUT of the deal, and hence, we invaded and made taking DOWN the Taliban (our former Freedom Fighters), under the guise of getting OBL.
I’ve never bought that we did Tora Bora OR Afghan for OBL.
Not then, not now. I was arguing this invasion back then for the very same reasons on a bluegrass site that had a back room for non music, erm, ‘discussion’. Not a lot of discussion, but lots of right wing bullshit and flag waving at the time. Wish I had access to them old comments of mine. I got THAT info about the pipeline likely from Gilliard, or AW.com way back then . . .
Rachel’s full of shit tonight.
good evening PETROVANOVICHE
He’s got the same sparkleless look in his eyes Condi got. Selling your soul does that to a pair of eyes.
PEACE CORPS…it worked even Tweets joined
I would have been so much more impressed if when the camera panned to her, she had her forehead down on the desk shaking her head from side to side.
At least all those brave neo-cons are happy with joy. They got a LONG WAR! Or two more years longer, of Death Destruction and Drugs! They can again encourage other brave patriots to go fight for Oil Companies. An eight year cluster bomb of failure gets two more years. Empires Go To Afghanistan To Die!
To President Obama: YOU ARE NOT GEORGE, SO PLEASE STOP ACTING LIKE IT! You’re make me itch all over and I want the troops home now please!
Translation: you don’t agree with her tonight.
*Glug* … holds out glass …
Yes, Peace corp seems to have done good. But not much and not quickly. It won’t solve the Afghan civil society problem.
what a great opportunity for someone who has a community organizer sensibility. WTF happened?
tell me again, why Mr. Obama is SOOO much better than Clinton. As far as I can tell they look to have taken similar paths, but Barack is smooother! About all we have at this point is that I don’t think he will cheat on his wife. I think the world view of America changed for awhile when he was first elected but this, along with not prosecuting war crimes…certainly will undo any positive gain.
Good speech by Obama But i am still not convinced about our objective in Afghanistan. And what’s up with the Newsmax trolls on FDL Tonight?
{{{ Sadlyyes }}}
In addition to bombarding flooding your CongressSlimeCritters, and all the petition signing and join a local peace group and get out in the streets with them.
We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will give you no peace! (concluding sentences, Leaflet 4, White Rose)
The following clip was posted in March, 2009 after 8 years of “training”. A marine unit.
And here, a clip posted Oct, 2008. A Brit unit with the same problem.
I gave links in comments here at Jim White’s diary on the desertion rate of 25% among the ANA soldiers, and illiteracy rate of 80 to 90%. Karzai’s near relative is a CIA asset and one of the biggest druglords.
Sadly, golden rhetoric will not fix Afghanistan.
Rachel’s comment took my by surprise too, I think she didn’t want to dis the President right out of the block. The President didn’t ‘neutralize’ the ‘left’. I’ll hold judgement until her own show.
Thanks, Derrick, for the laugh.
I don’t think he is SOOO much better tha Clinton. I do think he is SOOO much better than Bush.
The Obama icon just morphed into the Bush icon. Next speech he gives will be totally incoherent. Soon he will be dancing on the steps of the White House or standing on the deck of an aircraft carrier with wood declaring v-i-c-t-o-r-y!
1 Obama unit = 3 Friedman units.
*pouring* Enjoy.
Same as it ever was.
can’t burn through a million bucks per soldier that way.
Agree with your premise, but Clinton did not inherit quite the mess Obama did.
I liked Clinton’s speeches better. O is boring. Bill was interesting, synthesizing things that you hadn’t put together before.
In this speech, Obama didn’t touch on many things that are happening and will be happening. Some of it he can’t talk about and some of it most Americans don’t want to hear or know about.
it could really help alot…being female in that country is an abomination too sad to speak about
I do all the spamming and the signing of petitions and I hang out with the Greens on this issue (the CO Green Party chair, Claire Ryder, lives 2 blocks from me so she just lets me know about demonstrations and POOF I go!
It just doesn’t seem enough.
VoteVets on the speech:
Vets Not Ready to Support New Afghanistan Strategy
http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3510
yup
The purported ‘threats’ are illusions created to forment the invasions, and continuing presences.
I’ll repost my comment, that’s below in other threads, once again:
Aside from losing our investments in trying to gain ground in controlling the gas, oil, drugs and distribution routes of AFPak, and Central Asia, and the Middle East, (and to keep China/Russia from getting them) what do we LOSE by leaving AfPak or Iraq?
Nothing.
Those countries are, and never will be, any threat to the US Mainland.
Al Queda is NOT well loved by the Talibani, which in itself is a LOOSELY confederated grouping of hundreds if not thousands of tribal and ethnic groups under a general and loosely interpreted version(s) of Islam.
Al Queda (small as it is) does not have a country of origin.
As long as Al Queda attacks civilian populations of ANY ethnic or religious origin in Central Asia or Middle East, they make enemies of other Muslim’s.
Al Queda can’t grow or prosper or threaten unless we are IN Iraq/AF-Pak, etc. Our presence only adds to the jihadist mindset and unifies what are elements who are opposed to each other in the first place!
So ANY discussion of if we pull out, ‘they win’ and will somehow be a THREAT to USA mainland is not only wrong, it’s insane.
We are there for the resources, and only the might of our country’s masses in the streets in the MILLIONS on a regular basis will get us out of there. Maybe.
We’re there for the resources, and in the process, many profit. It’s the system of USA.
Any other moral arguement or economic arguement pales in lieu of that fact. Until that fact is accepted, there can be no real discussion of who’s wrong and why.
Obama is proving to support the fact of our reason for being ‘over there’, whether he says it or not.
I WILL say, though, he COULD have sent 60K troops . . but 30K will rouse less people, methinks.
Leaving? Not hardly. Not Iraq, not AfPak, not as long as there’s gas, oil, drugs and distribution routes to be gained or held from Russia/China.
“Sometimes that shark he looks right into ya. Right into your eyes. And, you know, the thing about a shark… he’s got lifeless eyes. Black eyes. Like a doll’s eyes. When he comes at ya, doesn’t seem to be living… until he bites ya, and those black eyes roll over white and then… ah then you hear that terrible high-pitched screamin’. The ocean turns red, and despite all the poundin’ and the hollerin’, they all come in and they… rip you to pieces.”
Where in Afghanistan would I find San Diego? How about Hamburg? Perhaps Kuala Lumpur?
I tried here: Map of Afghanistan, but I had no luck. Can you help me out?
A start date for an end date.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/afghanistanunveiled/
must see
The ANSWER Coalition just posted their response to the President’s speech:
http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2?abbr=ANS_&page=NewsArticle&id=9237&news_iv_ctrl=1621
Yep, and that was about it, wasn’t it.
Welcome
- there is a sub species of lefty/Democrat out there – who don’t pay as close attention as we do here. they are intoxicated by their own fierce pragmatism, and frankly would dismiss the comments here as “knee jerk” blah, blah, blah, frankly, they are where Cenk used to be. and quite smug about how grown up a place it is to be. I used to call them the baked brie and chardonnay crowd –
anyhoo – these tend to be folks who donate in the $2500.00 and up range – and therefore matter to DNC Leaders. that is the left Rachel was probably talking about – I’m sure the speech went some distance to assuage their oh so adult concerns
It costs the US $800 to pay the insurgents (the guys killing our guys) to move a truck how many kilometers. The insurgents by the way are at times Karzai’s cousins. 10% of the DOD Afghan budget goes to the ENEMY for protection.
$1 million for each soldier for a year. For the troop to be killed or to be deranged with stress or debilitated with injuries. And so foreign innocents will die, since we are killing wedding parties etc. because they are relatives of hit list rival drug lord enemies at times. Meanwhile hunger in America is rising rising rising. And unemployment. And carpetbagging corporations import in cheap labor from E. Europe and Asia instead of offering jobs to Afghans or Iraqis.
What an evil nightmare. And tonight Obama didn’t turn the ship around at all. He said, STAY THE COURSE.
This is going to be as formidable as stopping the Viet Nam war but with a citizenry distracted by debilitating demoralizing poverty and personal horrors.
I tried to put it up, but the editor wouldn’t let me.
I agree about women’s status, but peace, not U.S. soldiers and U.S. bombs, is the only way their situation might improve.
aren’t you the working class hero
true dat
thanks Jason! they appeared to have initial trouble with the video, and once that was fixed, all their commentary went away
Oh, how I know that. But until the umbrella organizations can get a coalition going in order to organize a two million angry mothermothers march on Congress we do what we can. Show up once a week at your reps local office with a letter, on a different day each week.
thank you. Chilling but exactly, sadly.
Oh, shit, missed that one!!*g*
One American campaign date-rape does not make a non-violent conflict of humanity versus corporate interests in our global future something we just can’t do…cause we’re f%$king in hate with Hope and Change. No more whining. Release and prosper,grasshopper.
I apologize for an overly simplistic view if it frustrates some intellects. That said, some days out of the blue a phone call can change every rhythm in your life. Stop it dead in it’s tracks and from that moment on you are walking through a different time/space ratio than everyone else you meet. This has to be a mild version compared to what our American military families are going through. The most severe damage is done to the Iraqi’s,Afghan’s,Pakistani’s,Palestineians. We’re getting quite a “condolences” list building. Oh wait, Freedom means never having to say you’re sorry.
How many of those phone calls have we,the people, in our willingness to shed responsibility inflicted on how many people, how many families,how much damage can we do before we’re done?
hey, if the work shoe fits . . .
Any new recruits for black arm bands tonight? I may put one on my other arm.
Siun is, of course, upstairs.
Obama’s Lesson for “The Muslim World”
Seriously. You sound incoherent?
Thanks for the link.
Welcome to the Lake, by the by.
Fineman called the speech grim. What an accurate word.
*waves*
Well said.
Someone upthread was discussing Pipelineistan,Russia, and the route through Afghanistan.
Here’s a terrific piece by Pepe Escobar about that:
Iran, China and the New Silk Road – Asia Times Online :: China …Jul 26, 2009 … Iran and China are all about the New Silk Road – or routes – in Eurasia. Both are among the most venerable and ancient of (on the road) …
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KG26Ad02.html – Cached
The Real News Network – Iran/China and the New Silk RoadAug 7, 2009 … Iran/China and the New Silk Road. Pepe Escobar revisits the New Great … Great connection of China and Iran in regards to oppression of its …
therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content… – Cached
I agree. It was grim and I think that was the correct tone.
Inextricably linked to Pakistan, inextricably!?
Obama will be known for trying to talk out of both sides of his mouth.
His religion is the politically expedient geometric center. What a tragedy. And it won’t get him re-elected.
Well put, Larue. I agree with your assessment, it is just that I am so boiling mad, I don’t know what to do about it. What a waste of lives, resources, futures. I guess I am so disappointed because I did not expect the Intellectual Obama to feed into this Ponzi scheme. However, with that said, I should have known. He has been making one bad judgment call after the other. The economy (Geithner, Summers), energy policy (clean coal -WTF), healthcare. I guess today, my personal pot finally boiled over… I feel like it really doesn’t matter who you vote for, once they hit the White House, same shit, different President.
I would’ve bet “somber”
See. Sometimes he gets it right. Well. This time.
as in many visits from the grim reaper
remember the prisoners they put in metal containers……….oy
Word was we paid Charlie, I don’t know how much, not to rocket the Gulf Oil facilities at DaNang.
spot on………..disapointing
LOL … Michael Ware said, “Screwing” on CNN and no one threw a fit.
True. Mythology may be about all t hat’s left.
Get some of the black garters ya see on gamblers in westerns.
Obie …huge recipient of campaign contributions from MIC
oh yea
I am a great fan of FDL, but it took the President’s speech tonight to get my sorry butt into action.
he is teh SEXY……………im my …ho ho ho
The part of the speech that was missing was if 9/11 was so devastating to the people we lost (there were other people from other countries lost) that he should have mentioned that other countries are being asked to give more blood & sweat as well as dollars. Or, at least he is trying to create a larger coalition.
The world was with us on 9/11 so French Fries should still be popular as well as Spanish tortillas, Indian chai, and other countries that have been effected by al Quida.
Isn’t it?
AW.com and Gilliard were speaking of pipelines and pipeline deals BEFORE we invaded Afghanistan long ago.
It’s all about the resources and routes, indeed. Was then, is now.
OBL and any other ’causes’ handed out by our leaders and electeds are pure bullshit.
Our president handed out some bullshit tonight, sadly. But then, even if he DID want to change things, the system won’t allow him. He’d be dead the minute he tried to REALLY change anything.
Bodies in the streets, mass pressure from tens of millions, like before, will be the ONLY thing that brings change to the system.
Only, I’m not so sure of that, anymore . . . not cuz of fears of martial law and repression, just that something would be created to further distract the bodies . . .
Oh well, as things get worse domestically shit’s gonna happen anyway, with or without wasted wars abroad.
General Stanley McChrystal, commander of US and NATO troops in Afghanistan, issued a statement on Tuesday expressing clear support for President Obama’s strategy in the region.
Full text:
The Afghanistan-Pakistan review led by the President has provided me with a clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task. The clarity, commitment and resolve outlined in the President’s address are critical steps toward bringing security to Afghanistan and eliminating terrorist safe havens that threaten regional and global security.
I have lost hope. Can you name one decisive decision that is for the the good of the ordinary Joes and Jills?
so what do you do for fun?
Get Marcy back on quickly !
100% corrrecto…imo
I found myself loathing this man more and more as he talked. The speech recited America’s purity of motives and character, it’s innocence and nobleness and charity and most of all its love of peace and respect for the dignity of mankind. All this with a straight face.
I think people are beginning to catch on that this guy is a sham and a huckster, he reminds me more and more of Clinton’s false attempts at sincerity. It was there all along but only now we are more aware of it.
First of all the US brings attacks on itself because of what it does to other people around the globe. It is attacked in response to the havoc it wreaks on other people. And it wreaks this havoc precisely for the reason that Obama denied. It wants other people’s goods through the use of force if all else fails.
All of South America still harbors ill will against the US for the pillaging of its natural resources and the death it conspired in in the pursuit of those resources. The same holds across the Mid East and Southeast Asia. Also across post war Europe and Japan after they were destroyed. The motive is always the same, the pursuit of other people’s resources one way or the other.
Al Qaeda attacked the US because of its collusion with Israel in the usurpation of Palestine and the inhuman treatment of its rightful occupants, for the descration of their holy land in Saudi Arabia and for upholding corrupt Kingdoms and Emirates. And for the pillaging of their oil. Until the US ceases causing these grievances the reprisals will continue.
The US has no willing partners in Afghanistan as it pursues OBL and never will. At best its presence as in every other instance is tolerated. The Taliban being Afghans themselves will continue to fight against foreign American troops on their land as you would expect anyone to do in their place.
No one mistakes what the US aims are and are not swayed with lofty words of admiration and good will for their people. They know that the US is in their country to aquire the oil and natural gas that lies to the north, and to lord over the region.
The Afghans will just bide their time until the American troops leave and in the mean time continue to respond to grivances as long as the US continues to inflict them.
This was my reaction, Hugh.
I felt like both the decision and the speech were directed at protecting his “right flank” — inoculating himself against attacks from the Right. It was as though he started with the decision ["send more troops"] and then cast around for the justification.
In doing so, he had to repeat the discredited canards about “Afghan training grounds,” “they attacked us,” “wiping them out will make us safe.” Really, for chunks of this it could have been Bush and his platitudes. There was no evidence of EVALUATING the reasons put forth by the military; instead, he just swallowed them whole, even if he only gave them 2/3 of what they wanted.
And the last portion of the speech — where he tried to throw in some sops to suggest that he “gets it” about the pain here at home — that was just feeble. Anyone with half a brainknows that pouring money down this war rathole both doesn’t HELP with any of the needs here, and HURTS by diverting funds.
Obama cannot be so stupid that he doesn’t know this, so his attempting to slide around it makes him all the more despicable.
Nope. I have never been so puzzled by any prez. He may have plans but I can’t find them.
Thanks for your reply, and as others have said glad to see you here at FDL. Welcome, for sure.
Yeah, I’m boiled over, have been since Nixon.
*G*
I slept for a decade or so, despite the fact I lived under the Governorship of Reagan before he went on the wreck the nation. It’s all been downhill since him, domestically speaking, for the masses.
I advocate bodies in the streets, but, with or without that, this system is unsustainable and will collapse at some point soon anyways.
If the masses don’t get work and sustainable wages and some semblance of a future for their upward mobility from lower to middle to upper class then there’s gonna be bodies in the streets one way or another.
Whether it’s for protest or bread and soup lines I’m not sure yet . . . ;-)
GWOT … one mighty blank check for US and its crony countries (Israel, primarily) to pillage, rape, destroy everywhere on the planet.
Power and competition patriarchy once again trounces humanist partnership and cooperation leadership style. No paradigm shift to humanism on Obama’s watch. Maybe some fringe stuff. But, status quo of toxicity protected with the promise that right wingnuts will get their licks in coming up to worsen the worsening nightmare. Dear God.
That’s cuz it’s not a blowjob, which IS a no no on MSM . .
Absolutely the gospel about that pipeline,for sure.
And,did you hear, the warlocks on Wall Street are manning themselves with arms in anticipation of the serfs(Us) revolting?
I saw it over at Democratic Underground earlier today.
Play music, go camping at festivals, play with potted herbs and my 2 x 12 back forty.
Annoy blogs.
Look for work.
*G*
How ya doin . . .
Obviously, Afganistan has problems. We have to heal that sore. I support the president because I want him and the US to succeed. That place over there was the real sore from the beginning and there is lots to be healed. This is a better start than any that I can think of. I support our troops, as I have before and I do now. (I wasn’t in the yellow ribbon society that donated .000005% of their money to the troops). I want the president to succeed. Of course we could go the nihilistic route.
Do you recall Cheney/Halliburton being booted out of that Afghan pipeline deal in ’98 or so?
THAT was the reason for going into Afghan, not to get OBL.
Not bad, good fishing on the gulf coast last week.
Birthers, deathers and pipeliners ……………..on and on it goes
Welcome indeed, we hope you’ll be a regular.
Jerome A Paris lays out the pipleline issue for all the interested boys and girls
i remember the Taliban visited TOM DELAY
The word you’re looking for is immoral. One doesn’t send men and women to their death to “protect one’s right flank.”
Please don’t underestimate the denial, laziness, moral imbecility, authoritarian followingness, narcissism, stupidity … fill in the blank, of the American people.
Al Queda was formed and attacked USA because OBL fell out of favor with the CIA, was no longer needed as a Freedom Fighter and he fell out of favor with Saudi Royalty (of which he was/is a member).
So he set up shop in Afghan post USSR and plotted revenge on USA. The Al Queda were primarily Saudi’s.
Just sayin . . . .
If you have policy disagreements, by all means, discuss. Attacking other commenters for their opinions, and without substance, is frowned upon…
Yes! Wasn’t there frustration by BIG OIL not to get rights in Iraq, too. Look at them now. Wow. What ferocious and evil will.
Hugh, and Maui . . . good reads.
Perhaps he just can’t sell the bag of shit he’s got. He might WANT to force change, but can’t, cuz he’d be dead fast.
Gotta be humbling to want to do something and not be able to . . . IF he wants to make change. I still think he does, but he’s been absorbed by the Borg.
Either way, he’s not that useful to us, anymore. Is he. We just need to play him as we can and work for what we can get as we go along. Change is always slow, unless precipitated by crisis or mother nature.
*G*
Ya know, puzzled is a good way to look at this. I think that’s what I am, is puzzled.
I’m going with the ‘he wanted to bring change but got Borged’ theory, for now.
unless they deserve it!
Yes, Raven. He also lied about Tillman…
_ you and your bs about AQ.
WELL, that’s as good of a quick big pic summary as I could bring to words.
We got Borged, again.
Define succeed.
Define healed.
Specifically.
Thanks.
March on Washington 20 March 2010
See now, fishing is something I’d LIKE to get into, but never have, and can’t now due to lack of funds.
I LOVE the taste of fresh caught, be it salt water or fresh water!
Eat well, hoss!!!
Wow . . . lemme see, just what was Tom Delay working for when that happened? I don’t recall any of this . . . I’m sure it was for big oil, had to be?
From The World Can’t Wait. Obama bombing.
The article is dated 7/7/2008. Where is your information about last April?
It’s not likely that in this global economy anyone is chomping at the bit to build a pipeline to India. The Russian and European market is more secure and has adequate pipelines that can be extended to Turkmenistan. And the most recent deal (I googled for April dates) for a pipeline has been between Turkmenistan and China, which would most likely run the territory controlled by the Northern Alliance, which is definitely not Taliban-held. Turkmenistan has been jockeying for a better deal than its current deal with Russia and Ukraine. And Turkmenistan’s estimate reserved are 546 million barrels.
All you need is a hook, a string, a pole and a bank to sit on. It’s not the catching; it’s the sitting. :)
*G*
Love that underscore function.
Nailing a 25 lb blackfin tuna will get your attention!
Heh, and I got a river a few blocks away.
Oh, out here there IS that license thang . . . ;-)
And make my stomach start to growl and ache for a hard wood fire!!!
I gotta go make dinner, folks . . . nice chattin witcha all . . . see ya Pups up above in a while.
*waves*
Recently, off the coast of Brazil, in the Tupi field, 5bn to 8bn barrels of light sweet crude has been discovered. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7086264.stm
It’s like $50 a year, Larue. You drink, laugh and talk…in that order.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1941220,00.html
Thanks for allowing me to vent. It helped relieve some of the pent-up pressure…
If anyone needs a laugh, here is a funny piece from the Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/obama_tells_nation_hes_going_out
Eli is upstairs-
A Good Day For Gay Marriage
Drink, laugh, pick, sang . . . the only talking is calling out the next song . . *G*
A few Pipelanistan linky’s I saved more recently:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KE14Ag02.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KE14Ag01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KE15Ag02.html
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/pipelines.htm
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/front.htm
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/afghan_pak_border_map.htm
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/front.htm
http://www.rferl.org/content/Article/1067535.html
http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2009/10/01/jumpin-jack-verdi-its-a-gas-gas-gas/
Whoops, I guess there’s a linky count threshhold? My bad mods . .
No problem. Fixed now.
OK, but you have have to pick and sing really well or you scare the fish off. To say nothing of your fishing buddies.
Al Qaeda stipulated these as the reasons for attacking the US: In reprisal for the mistreatment of Palestinians at the hands of the Jews with the collusion of the US; the desecration of its holy lands by the US presence there; and the US support for the corrupt rulers and subjugation of fellow Muslims at their hand.
This is the rationale for the attacks of course sustained by a religious belief that the US was a corrupting influence of the Muslim people and faith.
The point is that in the absence of this sort of real provocation and intrusion into the affairs of other countries the US would not be the target of these attacks. This is the usual order of things for the US to wreak havoc on other people. The difference this time is that the US was attacked in kind, this is what is unprecedented. But the threat willl not go away unless the provocation ceases.
I agree that it’s immoral.
I was just trying to articulate what Obama’s thinking is.
I think that more than the ordianry person who is pretty well atuned to fake promises, it is the supposed intelligentsia in the Media and government planners that swallow this sort of thing up.
They are convinced of the essential purity of purpose of the country and its mission to endow other countries with a sense of right and justice. They swallow this stuff whole. While of course decimating everything in its path as it pursues its noble mission.
Those are the public Al Queda talking points, I’ll grant that.
But it AIN’T what drove OBL to found and DRIVE Al Queda.
Just sayin . . . we didn’t invade Afghan for OBL any more than he attacked USA out of religious Islamic Purity.
Welcome to Carter Country, Barry. Bye, bye.
That’s some dumb shit to be parroting.
A pipeline to Iran makes more sense. It can go directly, without going through Afghanistan at all.
I didn’t see anything about TAPI in that article (I might have missed something), but it is a pipeline between Turkmenistan and India that makes no sense at all. A pipeline through through the Kavir and Lut deserts in Iran could have a terminal on the Arabian Sea at Chabahar that could permit export to anywhere in the subcontinent or Indian Ocean (including Australia).
The obvious is being noted all over the net, and probably, in some of the MSM.
Bush’s surge-pimping for Iraq, and Obama’s for Afghanistan, are interchangable.
What is at least, a little encouraging, is that there are 400-plus posts on this thread, nearly all of them disgusted, nauseated, or just plain pissed off, that our wonderful, progressive, preznint, before our very eyes, is completing the process of morphing into some hideous amalgam of Bush-Cheyney-Rumsfelt-Rice…with a dash of Lyndon Johnson and his ball-scratching foreign-policy acumen, thrown in for leavening.
What a horror story we’re watching.
The voters had had enough of that in 2008, and I have all ideas that they won’t like it any better in 2012. And with every passing day, it’s more enticing to me to help them express that dislike.
re: Dirksen-
He was Minority Leader while LBJ was president, so, he could have easily taken Johnson to task for his admittedly cardboard speechmaking. Another LBJ reference-of which there will be many in the coming months. Lets hope Obama can get some domestic battles won. At least LBJ had that…
Maybe Obama should’ve read more about Johnson and less about Lincoln.
Can we rewind and switch the ticket? Jeebus.
Gosh, coming in late, after having not watched the speech, but having read 400+ comments.
What’s wrong with y’all? As far as I can tell, no one has noted that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Hoss!!! *waves*
Sorry I missed ya!
Good to have you out in public, ‘specially on THIS issue!
Keep it coming!
At this rate The Committee will make him give it back.
There is no way we are going to be out of there in 18 months. Obama knows he cant deliver on this but the man cant stop lying. As far fetched as this may sound he may end up being a worse president than Bush.
U funny.
One thing about the Soviets taking control of eastern European nations. Those countries represented the path that the Nazis took to invading Russia. The Soviets were convinced that by controlling the nations btw it and Germany and its other historic rivals the chances of being invaded again were reduced.
Not that what occurred in those countries should be condoned. Romania is still suffering PTSD from what Ceaucescu inflicted on it.
I’m glad I didn’t watch this last night. My blood pressure would have gone through the roof.
Obama being in is all about eviscerating Social Security and weakening Medicare in addition to continuing the defense industry’s gravy train and the continued profits to the FIRE sector.
It’s like Clinton being in to push through the agenda that Bush Sr. couldn’t get done, GATT, NAFTA, WTO, and the end of welfare in preparation for the end of bankruptcy protection for working class people in preparation for Third World living conditions for all but the super wealthy in preparation for the complete destruction of the American Dream for the baby boomers. We did our part by working and consuming, god knows we can consume some shit! And in return we will find it difficult to retire with decent health care and a secure future.
Welcome to Thunderdome.
Because it’s easier for the black guy to kill entitlement programs than it would have been for HRC or any Republican.
He went after the oil and then the natural gas pipeline.
Obama seems to use these occasions to address those least likely to be critical or objective about a belligerent foreign policy. Very Shrub-like. And then he salutes people in military uniform. Very Reagan.
Obama is rapidly hurling towards the attainment of biggest disappointment in the history of the country.
OK [edited by mod] point out the error.
Answer me one question as well, [edited by mod] do you consider yourself to be included in that group of Americans Obama was talking about that is noble and pure of heart and peace loving? Are you a paragon of virtue that wants nothing so much as to see the world live in peace and to follow our lead by not interfering in other countries affairs?
Are you one of those that was innocently attacked without any provocation? Do you believe that Al Qaeda woke up one day and decided to blow up New York because it had nothing better to do?
If so you are not only a deluded simpleton, but are just the sort of person that should suit up and join the peace brigade in Afghanistan and build the schools and bridges, while bullets are whistleing in the air.
The US is only 1 of 3 countries not a signatory to bannining landmines among 180 countries in the world. It won’t sign a ban on the use of chemical weapons. It uses white phosphorus to suck O2 out the air and suffocate innocent civilians while they are awake, it uses plutonium tipped weaponry causing mutations in new borns. It overthrows regimes and plota against duly elected governments to this very day. It will not disclose where it has laid landmines while people lose their limbs in SE Asia, to this very day.
Try to fit all this in with your virtouous beliefs. [edited by mod]
The error lies with your parents.
Someone had an obligation to educate you.
Just a friendly reminder: Debate is encouraged, but please refrain from personal insults directed at other commenters.
Thanks
The rationale being espoused by Obama and others in defense of the Afghan campaign is that the Taliban and AQ are injurious to Afghanistan and a threat to our safety, respectively. And for that reason we must set things right by military force.
Unstated is the following. While it is unquestionably true that AQ will shoot any American on sight the converse is also the case. The point is that when the US states that AQ is a threat to the US that statement is incomplete.
The complete stement is that while they are a threat to our safety they view us in precisely the same way. They see their plots against the US as being in self defense with justification, in my view.
People don’t act in arbitrary ways and as we are told repeatedly they act in their own interest. But if that is the case then we need to account for the fact that our adversary has a legitimate right to act in their interest as well. That is only fair.
Oh so it’s like Healthcare reform then. We elect Democrats and Democrats force the Republicans to do things the Republican way. It’s good to be the majority!
Cngratulations on a terrific fefense of your views, you obviously highly educated guy you. You have won me over by your penetrating counter examples and rebuttals.
The work of a truly gifted theoretician.
There’s nothing to win over.
Go and learn.
ValleyGirl @ 405:
“No one has noted Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize.”
I know that’s snark, and pretty good snark, but I’ll answer straight, anyhoo:
That little gifty was a dog-biscuit given to what the committee, and most of the world, hoped would prove to be a somewhat intelligent and decent Golden Retriever.
Now that the recipient pooch stands revealed as a hybrid Irish-Setter-For-Stupid/slash Rottweiller-for-dangerous, I expect they’d like to have it back. :o)