Unforgivable

[delldude]

Please forgive my double posting.

You do realize Swift Boat tossed this out the day of Obama's great speech for BS effect don't you?

President Obama unveils his new Afghanistan strategy today, and in the nick of time Senator John Kerry has arrived with a report claiming that none of this would be necessary if former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had only deployed more troops eight years ago. Yes, he really said more troops.

WSJ

 

[SparrowHawk]

The news(of late) has former Vice President Cheney "critiquing" President Obama over his announcement, made on national TV the other night, pertaining to his efforts to clean up the mess in Afganistan that HE himself(DC) is(today) responsible for.
This man has NO Shame, and his actions are Inexcusable !

Pardon me?? Has the Constitution been suspended?? Dick Cheney's Civil Liberties revoked?

Sorry you don't share or like his opinion? That's really tuff darts. Bear in mind that Dick Cheney fell asleep in more foreign policy meetings than Barrack Obama Lama Ding Dong has ever attended. Given this little tidbit I'd tend to place more weight on Dick Cheney's critique then I would on the current crop of neophytes.

I say this as someone who is strongly opposed to the ongoing foreign interventionist policies of US Administrations since WWII. If we as a nation feel we must continue on these excursions into other sovereign states affairs, then I want the best interventionists available on the job and they are NOT currently in power. This gang of idiots would have trouble organizing a one car funeral.

 

[Garfield1966]

Funny. You trust a man who took 5 deferments to get out if war he did not feel he had to fight and this same man said in 1994 that invading Iraq and deposing it leader and occupying it's land was a horrible idea. Perhaps if Cheney and W Bush kept their eye on the ball in Afghanistan instead of going after Iraq we would not be in the mess we are in. Unfortunately we will never no and we are now left to clean up the mess they left.

I assume that you wanted Obama to send all the troops that McChrystal wanted. How thin do you want to stretch the troop levels? Their tours are already being extended. They are already being told they cannot leave after their original tour is up. What happens when there is a real conflict that we need to attend to?

Afghanistan is a no win in my opinion. You can send 100,000 troops and they will still be fighting. They have been fighting for centuries and they will continue to do so. Our presence merely gives them an alternate target because they all hate us. When we leave in 2 years or 100 years they will continue to fight. The only choice we have in the matter is when.

I can understand you not trusting Obama. But you trust Cheney?

 

[KCFlyer]

Bear in mind that Dick Cheney fell asleep in more foreign policy meetings than Barrack Obama Lama Ding Dong has ever attended.

Perhaps we would have finished up in Afghanistan and never been in Iraq if he had maybe stayed awake in a few of those meetings.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Perhaps we would have finished up in Afghanistan and never been in Iraq if he had maybe stayed awake in a few of those meetings.

Perhaps we should avoid intervening in every pissant 3rd world squabble. Sell both sides weapons and let them kill each other and let God sort'em out.

The USA has no business being in Afghanistan or Iraq or any foreign conflict without a formal declaration of war voted on by Congress and signedby the President. Incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq are two examples of how the protections of out Constitution are being perverted by Republicans and Democrats minute by minute for personal gain.

 

[Garfield1966]

I can agree with that.

 

[joanne]

As can I.

 

[777 fixer]

Despite Everything our(and thousands of other familys) have/are enduring, to this day I've never thought President Bush was an evil calculating man, just woefully inexperienced for the job and easily manipulated by true selfish and calculating men.
Which brings me to former Vice President Cheney, Former Secretary of defense Rumsfeld, and general Tommy Franks.
These individuals should have been Indicted, for lying(to congress), and preparing for their trials for War Crimes in Afganistan and moreso for Iraq.

If you truly believe that Cheney, Rumsfeld and General Franks should be indicted for lying to Congress and go on trial for war crimes then GWB should as well. The reason is rather simple, it’s the president who signs off on sending US forces into combat. Not the Vice-President, Secretary of Defense or some General at the Pentagon. And the defense that he’s easily manipulated is a hollow one.

 

[joanne]

If you truly believe that Cheney, Rumsfeld and General Franks should be indicted for lying to Congress and go on trial for war crimes then GWB should as well. The reason is rather simple, it’s the president who signs off on sending US forces into combat. Not the Vice-President, Secretary of Defense or some General at the Pentagon. And the defense that he’s easily manipulated is a hollow one.

Yes, in reality your corect about former President Bush.
I(and countless others) honestly feel that President Bush was/is easily manipulated, but again, that is the unofficial version. The Official version is(as you point out) that he should be equally responsible.

A lot of people believe that there comes a "day" where they must account for their "decisions"(made collectively) !

 

[777 fixer]

Yes, in reality your corect about former President Bush.
I(and countless others) honestly feel that President Bush was/is easily manipulated, but again, that is the unofficial version. The Official version is(as you point out) that he should be equally responsible.

A lot of people believe that there comes a "day" where they must account for their "decisions"(made collectively) !

I know a lot of people think that he's easily manipulated but in all honesty one cannot know that unless they know the man personally. Not that it matters one way or another because as has already been stated it's his decsion in the end.

 

[The Man]

Why would Bush want to catch Bin Laden, when it diverted all the attention away from his miserable presidency. Without Bin Laden, he would have been a one term president Look at the personal freedoms Bush and Cheney got to revoke because of 9/11. Bush loves Bin Laden, got to finish daddy's job in Iraq because of him.

 

[delldude]

Why would Bush want to catch Bin Laden, when it diverted all the attention away from his miserable presidency. Without Bin Laden, he would have been a one term president Look at the personal freedoms Bush and Cheney got to revoke because of 9/11. Bush loves Bin Laden, got to finish daddy's job in Iraq because of him.

How's that change thing working out,Pal?

You Da Man............ 🙄

 

[The Man]

8 years of Bush, 8 months of Obama. I think I'll give the O man a liitle more time to correct 8 years of George's mess.

 

[delldude]

8 years of Bush, 8 months of Obama. I think I'll give the O man a liitle more time to correct 8 years of George's mess.

Yeah...what the hell....he sure seems to use a lot of Bush policy....................

12 months Pal......funny.....I thought You da Man........ :blink:

 

[southwind]

8 years of Bush, 8 months of Obama. I think I'll give the O man a liitle more time to correct 8 years of George's mess.

Give the "O" man 8 years and you won't recognize the U.S.A.

More like the U.S.S.A.

Not too worried though ! At the rate he and his posse are trying to screw over the American Citizen, he'll get booted after 4 years !