To those of you who think Obama is an anti-war zealot like you. I would like to submit a wake up call!
In Afghanistan today, Obama had this to say about bringing our troops home as you have demonstrated and insisted since the beginning of the primary campaign.
"Obama is a good person," said Abdul Basir, 40, a former army officer. "During his campaign I heard he was saying that if I become president I will withdraw the U.S. troops from Iraq and bring them to Afghanistan and I will attack on the terror center on other side of border (in Pakistan). It is very important and I appreciated that."
Surprise, the empty suit either betrayed you now that he has your primary vote, to capture the average American who believes we should finish the job before we leave Iraq, I remind you we are still in South Korea after over 50 years to honor a commitment!
In the presidential campaign against Republican rival John McCain, Obama has argued that the war in Afghanistan deserves more attention as well as troops. McCain has criticized Obama for his lack of time in the region. Obama is expected to stop in Iraq at some point during his tour.He then said this:
"I look forward to seeing what the situation on the ground is," Obama told a pair of reporters who accompanied him to his departure from Andrews Air Force Base on Thursday. "I want to, obviously, talk to the commanders and get a sense both in Afghanistan and in Baghdad of, you know, what the most, their biggest concerns are, and I want to thank our troops for the heroic work that they've been doing."
You would think that he would apologize to the troops for his lack of support until now when he needs to change his image for the "normal" American who doesn't live on either Coast or is a left wing zealot!
Tell me how you can equate obama with a "peacenik" when he says this kind of gobbly-gook! Obama advocates ending the U.S. combat role in Iraq by withdrawing troops at the rate of one to two combat brigades a month. But he supports increasing the military commitment to Afghanistan, where the Taliban has been resurgent and Osama bin laden is believed to be hiding."This is a war that we have to win," he said. "I will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, and use this commitment to seek greater contributions — with fewer restrictions — from NATO allies.
"I will focus on training Afghan security forces and supporting an Afghan judiciary, with more resources and incentives for American officers who perform these missions."
It would appear his purpose in the previous statement was to deprecate President Bush and his opponent John McCain, but at the same time he reveals his duplicitous nature on the WAR issue.His opposition to the war in Iraq,and his call for an end to the U.S. combat role, helped him overcome his rivals in the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination. Now he is singing a different tune!
Posts
3 comments:
Taking the war to Pakistan is perhaps the most foolish thing America can do. Obama is not the first to suggest it, and we already have sufficient evidence of the potentially negative repercussions of such an action. On January 13, 2006, the United States launched a missile strike on the village of Damadola, Pakistan. Rather than kill the targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s deputy leader, the strike instead slaughtered 17 locals. This only served to further weaken the Musharraf government and further destabilize the entire area. In a nuclear state like Pakistan, this was not only unfortunate, it was outright stupid. Pakistan has 160 million people, the support of China, and a nuclear arsenal.
I predict that America’s military action in the Middle East will enter the canons of history alongside Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Holocaust, in kind if not in degree. The Bush administration’s war on terror marks the age in which America has again crossed a line that many argue should never be crossed. Call it preemption, preventive war, the war on terror, or whatever you like; there is a sense that we have again unleashed a force that, like a boom-a-rang, at some point has to come back to us. The Bush administration argues that American military intervention in the Middle East is purely in self-defense. Others argue that it is pure aggression. The consensus is equally as torn over its impact on international terrorism. Is America truly deterring future terrorists with its actions? Or is it, in fact, aiding the recruitment of more terrorists?
The last thing the United States should do at this point and time is to violate yet another state’s sovereignty. Beyond being wrong, it just isn't very smart. We all agree that slavery in this country was wrong; as was the decimation of the Native American populations. We all agree that the Holocaust and several other acts of genocide in the twentieth century were wrong. So when will we finally admit that American military intervention in the Middle East is wrong as well?
HIROSHIMA SAVED MILLIONS OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS LIVES, AND WERE IN HECK DID YOU FIND ANY CONNECTION TO THE HOLOCAUST BY THE USA?
The exclamation point at the end of the death wish is that now there is yet another
candidate for the office of president of the United States who has in an extraordinary way
done everything possible to breathe life into all of the barbaric elements of the death
wish. He and his party make no apologies for their support of abortion, partial-birth
abortion, and even infanticide. It’s hard to believe that we have degenerated to the point
that we’ll murder a helpless baby should it escape the violence of an abortion and be born
alive. Can a Catholic vote for such persons? We are told, “yes” for a “proportionate
reason.” What, I might ask, is the proportionate reason so weighty as to excuse
supporting those responsible for what is tantamount to genocide?
The judges and politicians that support such barbaric practices are truly guilty of
genocide: genocide—the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, racial,
religious, national, or social group. “What is the group so targeted?” you might ask. The
group is unwanted, unborn children--tens of millions of them.
The Supreme Court justices that gave us Roe v. Wade will have to plead temporary
insanity in the court of history. There will be no defense in the highest Court that is the
judgment seat of almighty God if they do not repent of the incalculable evil they have
wrought.
Post a Comment