View Full Version : Barack Obama's administration 'divided' over Afghan war
Barack Obama's administration 'divided' over Afghan war
Woodward's new book - "Obama's Wars"
Ya' know, I don't really like his books but once again wonder if the press would beat the drum harder if Obama was a white Republican.
",,,Among the main points of the book that have emerged are:
* Afghanistan adviser Lt Gen Douglas Lute and Mr Holbrooke appear dubious about US strategy
* President Obama rejected a Pentagon request for 40,000 extra troops
* His main concern is portrayed as reducing US troop numbers
* A withdrawal timetable was set because the president could not "lose the whole Democratic Party"
* Former national intelligence director Admiral Dennis Blair fought with both the White House chief-of-staff and counter-terrorism adviser.........."
Policy via public opinion who would have guessed? Security, CIA op's
Woodward reveals their conflicts through detailed accounts of two dozen closed-door secret strategy sessions and nearly 40 private conversations between Obama and Cabinet officers, key aides and intelligence officials.
greenberetTFS
09-22-2010, 07:45
Ya' know, I don't really like his books but once again wonder if the press would beat the drum harder if Obama was a white Republican./quote/Pete
I don't think there's any doubt that they would,no doubt at all............:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
It should be reassuring that this administration had a long debate on the strategy for Afghanistan / Pakistan, it would be if the strategy was sound and the conviction of the commander evident.
Unfortunately, I get the feeleing that some adults and realists were heard and tolerated. And the CinC made a decision trying to please everyone (including many inexperienced and idealistic people on his staff) without having the conviction experience or character to do the right thing for our country and then lead and explain his decision clearly to the people.
I suspect Mr. Woodward has given us a glimpse of our "manager in training" with a trusted staff composed mainly of inexperienced academics and / or intelectual idealogues, coming face to face with reality and professionals that must advise him and only think of our countries best interests.
Yes......, elections have consequences. When electing a president, only leaders need apply, It helps also if they have a wide field of successful friends, as they will likely fill some of the 400+ jobs supporting the executive.
We seem to have gotten a mix of party hacks, professionals, patriots and anti-patriots in this administration. IMHO
Utah Bob
09-22-2010, 21:33
It took less time for Roosevelt and Churchill to come up with a viable plan to fight a global conflict involving millions of troops. :rolleyes:
It took less time for Roosevelt and Churchill to come up with a viable plan to fight a global conflict involving millions of troops. :rolleyes:
I guess when the wolf is at the door, you have no options.
It wasn't until Hitler starting droping bombs on England that most started to care. 9/11 is long ago, and most have already forgotten,....(sad).
Radar Rider
09-22-2010, 22:12
I think that General McChrystal, operating under the ridiculousness of the present administration, intended to create the "controversy" from the Rolling Stone article.
Dozer523
09-23-2010, 06:45
I think that General McChrystal . . . intended to create the "controversy" from the Rolling Stone article. Yeah and the relief and forced retirement was part of the plan too.
You want "motivation"? Here ya go.
"Rolling Stone
Wanna see my picture on the cover
Wanna buy five copies for my mother
Wanna see my smilin' face
On the cover of the Rolling Stone"
Worked pretty well, now we have Lady GaGa as the spokes-whatever for DADT2.
9/11 is long ago, and most have already forgotten,....(sad).
Well according to the president this country can absorb another 9/11. :rolleyes:
While he was campaigning, Afghanistan was "the good war" ... now it's all about elections and losing democrats.
What about the safety of our country?
Well according to the president this country can absorb another 9/11.
What about the safety of our country?
“The sound of the adhan is one of the prettiest sounds on earth at sunset.”
Islamic terrorists killing Americans = Meh.
Arizona enforcing immigration laws = Nazis walk in our midst.
Ace’s commentary was spot-on IMO:
A little context here. The Obama and the leftist media will attempt to spin this as merely descriptive, and as a tribute to America's resiliency. After all -- we did survive 9/11, didn't we? (Well, actually, 2996 of us did not survive 9/11, but apart from them, we survived.)
This is merely Obama talking up America's capacity to endure, they will say.
But it's not. This is a meme that has been circulating on the left for quite a while, usually secretly and among themselves only, but sometimes, ill-advisedly, being pushed out into public as a trial balloon.
The idea, of course, is that America overreacted to 9/11, and 50,000 people die every year in car crashes, and we don't freak out about that, do we? No, we accept these as acceptable losses in the bigger picture (that is, we want to drive places) and we take the exchange. We drive, some of us will die. Sound bargain.
That's the killer notion here -- the idea of bargain. Of what is being exchanged for these deaths. In the case of automobile collisions, well, sure, we have mobility and freedom. That's something.
But the left is pushing this idea that we can safely "absorb" many new 9/11's with an eye towards getting us to "accept" the greater bargain they fatuously offer -- peace, and a general wind-down of post-9/11 security "overreactions" like the FBI tracking Muslims suspected of terrorist ties. If only we didn't overreact to the occasional mass-murder, we could go about our business without war, without increased security measures, without "Islamophobia," without the rest of it.
The problem, you see, is primarily within us, those being targeted for murder. If only we understood that this was a good bargain in exchange for living in a multicultural country and global economy, then we could be good citizens of the world and not lash out so terribly and uselessly when some of the more aggressive proponents of multiculturalism blow up a few of our buildings.
They will spin this, but this is what Obama is getting at, what the left is constantly saying, but which leftist politicians are careful never to say publicly: for the good of relations with the Muslim world we're just going to have to be mature about mass murder.
http://minx.cc/?post=306000
:munchin
drymartini66
09-28-2010, 23:38
Barack Obama's administration 'divided' over Afghan war
Woodward's new book - "Obama's Wars"
Ya' know, I don't really like his books but once again wonder if the press would beat the drum harder if Obama was a white Republican.
",,,Among the main points of the book that have emerged are:
* Afghanistan adviser Lt Gen Douglas Lute and Mr Holbrooke appear dubious about US strategy
* President Obama rejected a Pentagon request for 40,000 extra troops
* His main concern is portrayed as reducing US troop numbers
* A withdrawal timetable was set because the president could not "lose the whole Democratic Party"
* Former national intelligence director Admiral Dennis Blair fought with both the White House chief-of-staff and counter-terrorism adviser.........."
I'm shocked, SHOCKED I say!:D