[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I honestly feel like a sap for ever going into the military when I read crap like this. [/quote]
You and me both, brother.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
I know the far left conveniently closed their ears when Obama said he would pull out of Iraq and put more resources into Afghanistan, but I thought the far right would have noticed. Obama campaigned on putting more resources into Afghanistan. If you didn’t notice, well, that says more about you than anything else:
Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007
…
As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.
We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military – it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.
Try googling “Obama campaign Afghanistan.” It took me about 30 sec to find the above.
We need 2 more brigades for a war started 9 years ago? What are we, the Soviets? We need to give the Pashtuns $1 billion of our money in the middle of Great Depression II?
This empire thing is working the wrong way. In a normal empire, you’re supposed to tax the conquered people so that the people of the homeland make more money. So instead of discouraging poppy growth and giving them money, we should encourage poppy growth and TAKE their money (or at least part of it) - the money they get from the proceeds. We’ve got it completely ass-backwards.
But something tells me the check I’d receive in the mail wouldn’t be worth it. And I really don’t want Pashtuns moving here claiming some bogus “refugee status” because we’ve occupied their territory. Look at Britain and all the Pakistanis moving their now. We don’t need to move the Taliban into our backyards.
[/quote]
Nothing wrong with your beliefs. Unless you think Obama didn’t campaign on this; that’s just not the case. You may disagree with him regarding the ramp-up in Afghanistan, but he’s always said he would do so.
We could get it off the nearest asteroid easier than we could get it out of there. You know, there’s a reason the Pashtuns themselves haven’t exploited any of their own natural resources, and it has to do with the fact that Pashtuns act and think like Pashtuns. If we really wanted the Pashtuns’ stuff, we’d drop anthrax on the mountains to get rid of the troublesome mountain people. The valley people are passive.
Russia? You honestly think this is about Russia? Obama thinks a hell of a lot more about Kenya than he does Russia, if “Dream of My Father” yields any clues as to his thinking. Axelrod and Emmanuel have nothing but Israel on the brain, and there are a ton of Russia Jews in Israel who are extremely pro-Russian (as an aside: they’re the ones also responsible for Israel’s enormous sexual slavery industry).
From left: White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, President Barack Obama, and Foreign Policy Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Russia? You honestly think this is about Russia? [/quote]
Doesn’t really matter what I think. I don’t dictate foreign policy.
I honestly don’t devote much time to speculating what is on Obama’s mind, any more than I worried about what was on Howdy Doodie’s mind back in the day.
Buffalo Bob and Clarabelle, though… those were some scary motherfuckers.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I want to pull out of everywhere now. I wanted “change.” Where is it? Why are we still trying to civilize the Arabs and Pashtuns?
Discuss.[/quote]
I can’t remember Obama’s exact words about the troops in Iraq during the elections. But before the elections began it was pretty clear US troops wouldn’t be leaving Iraq unless wanting to leave Iraq worse than under Hussein.
It was clearly a promise he couldn’t keep, assuming he promised to have gotten the troops out by now.
The change you’ll find in America’s stance towards Iran. Whereas Bush was fairly eager to fight them, Obama apparently feels less so.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I know the far left conveniently closed their ears when Obama said he would pull out of Iraq and put more resources into Afghanistan, but I thought the far right would have noticed. Obama campaigned on putting more resources into Afghanistan. If you didn’t notice, well, that says more about you than anything else:
Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007
…
As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.
We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military – it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.
Try googling “Obama campaign Afghanistan.” It took me about 30 sec to find the above. [/quote]
Holy shit, I agree with you.
On all counts.
What’s more, I agree with Obama’s stance in this excerpt–non-military aid is part of the key.
I have to rethink my life now…
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Agreed. I have no idea how people are “surprised” by Obama’s stated actions. As to why they are not getting more airtime… I think part of it might be media bias, but I think a lot more has to do with the economy and healthcare.
[/quote]
Fuck. That’s two posts I agree with you on.
Although I would tend to put the emphasis more on media bias than economy and healthcare for several reasons…First, if any one has noticed the language many of the print outlets (NY Times comes to mind) is using with healthcare I think it presents a clear bias in favor of healthcare, and more importantly this carries over to other parts of their coverage. Second, and probably more importantly, the media found plenty of time to cover protesters of all kinds–but especially the ant-war types–while also harping on the economy and other issues when Bush was in office.
In other words, they had other pressing issues (similar to the present day HC bill, and they were certainly harping on the economy at many points), but they still found time to cover the protesters ad nauseum. It should be no different now.
George invades Iraq.
George fucks up Iraq.
Obama pulls out of Iraq overnight.
Iraq goes even further down the descent into hell, and at a much faster rate.
Obama gets blamed.
???
Profit!
except, bush basically handed obama a war that is more or less over and won in iraq.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
I know the far left conveniently closed their ears when Obama said he would pull out of Iraq and put more resources into Afghanistan, but I thought the far right would have noticed. Obama campaigned on putting more resources into Afghanistan. If you didn’t notice, well, that says more about you than anything else:
Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007
…
As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.
We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military – it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.
Try googling “Obama campaign Afghanistan.” It took me about 30 sec to find the above.
Holy shit, I agree with you.
On all counts.
What’s more, I agree with Obama’s stance in this excerpt–non-military aid is part of the key.
I have to rethink my life now…[/quote]
lol. Well, the more often you find yourself agreeing with me, the more often you’ll find yourself in the right. Keep studying econ and foreign affairs and you’ll agree with me more and more 
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
lol. Well, the more often you find yourself agreeing with me, the more often you’ll find yourself in the right. Keep studying econ and foreign affairs and you’ll agree with me more and more
[/quote]
Ok, now you are just blowing sunshine up your own ass.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I want to pull out of everywhere now. I wanted “change.” Where is it? Why are we still trying to civilize the Arabs and Pashtuns?
Discuss.[/quote]
No one man IS Caesar.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
It’s very simple. During your campaign, tell people what they want to hear to get elected. Once elected, do whatever the hell you want and pray the public stays stupid and quiet, and won’t question your motives or actions. [/quote]
Obama wasn’t elected, he was installed.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
lol. Well, the more often you find yourself agreeing with me, the more often you’ll find yourself in the right. Keep studying econ and foreign affairs and you’ll agree with me more and more
Ok, now you are just blowing sunshine up your own ass.
[/quote]
lol. How does one “blow sunshine”?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
George invades Iraq.
George fucks up Iraq.
Obama pulls out of Iraq overnight.
Iraq goes even further down the descent into hell, and at a much faster rate.
Obama gets blamed.
???
Profit![/quote]
Guy, I’m happy about the pull-out in Iraq. But I want a full pull-out - no more money given to the ARabs. We give them enough when we pump gas. I don’t want us taking all of the troops in Iraq and moving them to Afghanistan. That amounts to a shell game, in my mind.
[quote]beachguy498 wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
It’s very simple. During your campaign, tell people what they want to hear to get elected. Once elected, do whatever the hell you want and pray the public stays stupid and quiet, and won’t question your motives or actions.
Obama wasn’t elected, he was installed.
[/quote]
by the gay central bankers?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Obama pulls out of Iraq overnight. [/quote]
What? Over 130,000 US soldiers are still there (not counting the private contractors).
In what world does that equal pulling out?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Obama pulls out of Iraq overnight.
What? Over 130,000 US soldiers are still there (not counting the private contractors).
In what world does that equal pulling out?[/quote]
In a world where “relocating to bases outside of the cities” is construed by a gullible populace as “pulling out.”
Rather like promising to pull out of a girl before you come, and pulling out, then at the last second sticking it in her butt and blowing your load. Technically, you have kept your promise, but she might not see it that way.
Bush-Obama-Hitler?! What’s Sheehan up to these days, anyways?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Obama pulls out of Iraq overnight.
What? Over 130,000 US soldiers are still there (not counting the private contractors).
In what world does that equal pulling out?[/quote]
We’ve pulled out of the cities and are getting ready to leave, once we’re sure the Iraqi security forces are up to the mark.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying though. We should pull out of EVERYWHERE, cause we’re so damnned broke! $$$
Unless the world funds our military to police the globe, we should stop. Between Obama, Congress, and all our overseas committments, we’re goat-fucking ourselves.