I must be really stupid- can someone 'splain this to me?

T

tobnpr

New Member
Nov 12, 2006
3,246
New Port Richey, Florida
Boat Info
1988 300 DA
Engines
tw 350's w/ Alphas
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/11/envoy-objects-afghan-troop-increase/

Obama has stated clearly that he believes the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity.

So why does it matter WHAT government is in place in Afghanistan?? If we don't like the government, are we suddenly going to decide "never mind"- the war isn't necessary after all-and leave Afghanistan?

IF we need to be there to control/eliminate the terrorists, we need to do what we need to do, and not give a shi* who's running the country.
 
tobnpr said:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/11/envoy-objects-afghan-troop-increase/

Obama has stated clearly that he believes the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity.

So why does it matter WHAT government is in place in Afghanistan?? If we don't like the government, are we suddenly going to decide "never mind"- the war isn't necessary after all-and leave Afghanistan?

IF we need to be there to control/eliminate the terrorists, we need to do what we need to do, and not give a shi* who's running the country.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see your problem. You are trying to think it through rationally. Get rid of the logic and put some emotion into the mix, then you'll understand.:thumbsup:
 
tobnpr said:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/11/envoy-objects-afghan-troop-increase/

Obama has stated clearly that he believes the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity.

So why does it matter WHAT government is in place in Afghanistan?? If we don't like the government, are we suddenly going to decide "never mind"- the war isn't necessary after all-and leave Afghanistan?

IF we need to be there to control/eliminate the terrorists, we need to do what we need to do, and not give a shi* who's running the country.
Click to expand...
You want us to be there forever? quote from Fox article: The evolving U.S. policy, already remapped early in Obama's tenure, increasingly acknowledges that the insurgency can be blunted but not defeated outright by force. Somebody has to be able to step up when we had enough and after 9yrs I think we're to that point.
 
We should stay as long as necessary to protect the interests of the United States. Wars are not to be fought for convenience, popularity, or only if success is guarunteed. They should be fought only when necessary. And if they are necessary, cost is not a factor.

I think there was an incident or something like that around September of 2001 that led us to believe we should engage in the Middle East.
 
This is the empty suit on display, basically a " present" vote.
 
I wasn't trying to get us in a discussion over whether the war is justified or not; I was only clarifying that Obama has stated that it IS...

So going forward from his own conclusion, if it's necessary to protect our interests- what difference does it make what government is in place? Having a functional and capable government in Afghanistan could certainly make the mission less complicated and provide a greater chance for success, but I don't see how the absence of that would change the fundamental reason (ostensibly) for being there in the first place.

I can't help but postulate that he's still dithering- and doing his best impersonation of Ahmedinijad- just keep dragging out "decisions" indefinitely so as not to make a decision at all. He's damned if he does (by the libs who oppose the war and feel we should get out, now) and damned if he doesn't (by moderate Dems and most Republicans who agree it is a front in the war on terrorism).

So, he does nothing...
 
Last edited:
He changed his mind. Move on said it's time to move on...
 
I remember another president that struggled with the definition of "is" .


-VtSeaRay
 
Why would anyone expect him to do any more than when he was a Senator from Illinois, he did nothing, oh I forgot he helped get the Motor Voter bill passed so Illegal’s could vote and fought to get a bill passed so that any baby that survived a Abortion it would be legal to stick it in a closet until it died.

http://www.clearspring.com/widgets/4974d21ab04fa9e2?p=4a2dc91496290829
 
This should give you some idea where Obams stands on the wars!

Obama Appoints Muslim to High-level Position

Date: 2009-09-30, 1:20AM
Obama Appoints Muslim to High-level Position in Department of Homeland Security

By Vincent Gioia | Published 09/20/2009 |

From Our Writers:
Purported non Muslim Barack Hussein Obama made a presidential appointment of Muslim Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Arif Alikhan for a top job at the federal Department of Homeland Security. In his new job, Arif Alikhan will be Assistant Secretary for the Office of Policy Development at the Department of Homeland Security. Alikhan has been Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles--in charge of public safety for the city.
Why Muslim Alikhan at the Department of Homeland Security you might ask? DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said Alikhan’s “broad and impressive array of experience in national security, emergency preparedness, and counterterrorism will make him an asset”--yes, but on behalf of the U.S. or Muslims? I am not sure what she is talking about and she probably doesn’t know either. www.indiawest.com/readmore.aspx?id=1132&Sid=1
Alikhan says a big part of his job will be fostering communication between agencies. Alikhan, like Obama, also wants to help improve America’s image with Muslims around the world. He will now set policy on security at the highest levels of the federal government. But what policies has the new Assistant Secretary embraced?
During his years in Los Angeles, Alikhan was responsible for derailing the Police Department’s plan to monitor activities within the Los Angeles Muslim community, where numerous radical mosques and madrassas existed, and where some of the 9/11 hijackers had received support from local residents.
Alikhan is strongly anti-Israel; he has referred to the terrorist organization Hezbollah as a “liberation movement.” Hezbollah is on the U.S. official terrorist list while being an affiliate of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Alikhan also opposed President George W. Bush’s prosecution of the war on Islamic terror.
In 2007, Alikhan was instrumental in removing the Muslim terror tracking plan in Los Angeles. The Muslim '‘Mapping’' Plan of the Los Angeles Police Department is now “dead on arrival” according to Chief William Bratton. “It is over and not just put on the side,” said Chief Bratton in a meeting with the Muslim leadership of Southern California at that time. The meeting was moderated by Arif Alikhan.
Chief Bratton acknowledged the hurt and offense caused to Muslims and agreed to send a letter to the Muslim community announcing the official termination of the ‘'mapping’' plan.
A major reason for the termination of the '‘mapping’' plan was the Muslim community’s vociferous opposition and active civic engagement in making themselves heard beyond Los Angeles. Muslim organizations demonstrated a strong unity of purpose and message on the issue of ‘'mapping’' that led to a position of strength for Muslims in the meeting. Those involved in the initial phases of this controversy were the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California http://www.shuracouncil.org/ and the Council on American-Islamic Relations http://www.cair.com/ , the Muslim Public Affairs arm.
Muslim Democrats welcomed Alikhan’s appointment at a banquet/fundraiser for the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California recently where the first speaker was Arif Alikhan, a devout Sunni and the son of Pakistani immigrants, www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,505573,00 .
Other speakers included Professor Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Task Force (AMT) who spoke about “the struggle of the Muslim Community against the pervasive atmosphere of Islamophobia and hatred in the aftermath of 9/11. It was a struggle against the tide--a very strong tide--to prevent Muslims in America from being marginalized and silenced.”
Professor Saeed issued five demands from Muslims to the Department of Justice. These demands included a cessation to the infiltration by spies of mosques and an end to the introduction of agents provocateur. In addition there was to be a cessation of attempts to undermine Muslim groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Un-indicted co-conspirator CAIR was thrilled at the appointment: www.us4arabs.com/content/view/1590/31/
Last week, Napolitano swore in Damascus-born Kareem Shora, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)’s national executive director, to a position on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, an outside-the-department group of national security experts that advises the Secretary. Shora is the first Arab rights advocate on the panel. Shora has with ties to terror backers www.creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/06another-jihad-nominee-atdept-of-homeland-security/
One may wonder how does an obscure (but Democrat) bureaucrat and devout Muslim come to the position of Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles--in charge of public safety for the city and now becomes Assistant Secretary to DHS under purported non Muslim Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,322
Messages
1,430,529
Members
61,179
Latest member
Dean 400
Back
Top