Sunday, September 21, 2008

The "Humilation and Defeatist" Attitudes of O'bama and Biden

Do you really want this pacifist duo to run our country for the next 4 years? O'bama, who promised his pacifist/populist supporters that once elected he would "cut and run" from the Mideast as fast as he could? Biden, who said he supported the original invasion of Iraq but as late as 12 months ago said the "surge" would not work and we should have pulled out by now?

For you naysayers who still read me, sorry, but my first blog said this would not be a "feel good" blog site, I recommend you read the 9/20-21/08 issue of the the WSJ and the column "Why the Surge Worked" by Matthew Kaminsky, a member of the Journal's editorial board.

Mr. Kaminsky interviewed retired General Jack Keane, who helped formulate the strategy that was a change of mission and not just more troops and tells his story on Page A13.

Thanks to the ilk of O'bama and Biden, "this nation came within weeks or months of defeat in Iraq. These presidential candidates were fundamentally wrong. It is our presence that is helping the Iraqis move forward", says General Keane.

Of course the battle is not over and some our peacekeeping presence will be needed as "peacekeepers" were and are needed in other foreign countries over the past 70 years or more.

President Bush get the credit of pressing the surge action just as he has been a deciding factor of keeping foreign terrorists from any major destruction of our homeland since 9/11. Even then, this act of sheer terror was brewing for months and perhaps years under the Clinton Administration

The interview with national hero General Jack Keane is well worth the read for Republican, Democrat or other.

For those of you who would throw at me McCain's "hundred" years, even though it was a "figure of speech", he was telling it like is really has been for the last 70 years. Why didn't Clinton when in power, remove our troops from Japan, Germany, etc.? Why not? Because he knew better than to show signs of weakness to Russia, China and others with imperialistic ambitions. Same reason a Democrat Congress in power for 20 months hasn't demanded a complete withdrawal.

It wouldn't be a sane thing to do.


Knight in Dragonland said...

Obama is not planning to "cut and run" by any stretch of the imagination. The withdrawal from Iraq outlined by Obama would be staged, orderly and could always be adjusted according to the situation on the ground. His plan is in line with the will of the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government. They have expressed their will to see us gone in no uncertain terms. Are we liberators or imperial occupiers?

Also, you and many other conservatives fail to mention that Obama has plans to INCREASE our presence in Afghanistan, in line with a policy shift advocated by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and General David Petraeus. How does that fit into your "pacifist" cubby-hole?

Merle Widmer said...

O'bama has said so many things, changed his mind so many times and made so many promises as to what he will do as president that he comes off a a demagogue which I have rightly named him on more than one occassion.

Speaking in Ames, Iowa in February 2007, Obama said "I was against this war from the start; now my Iraq plan is a phased withdrawal of all military troops starting in May 2007 and ending in March 2008, allowing enough troops to keep training Iraqi forces". So we would be out of Iraq now, Iraq would be in Civil War and he doesn't mention Afghanastan untll recently.

Obama promised his pacifist followers that "immediate withdrawal from Iraq" was his major platform. This statement led to his early appeal to the pacifists. His second platform step was than taking from the "rich", he's now identifyed the rich in terms of income, and giving to the poor, many of those poor who are sex deviants, child abusers, thieves, drug dealers or just slackers, parolees, spreading the wealth to all, deserving or not.

Look it up. Also, he was TOTALLY oppossd to the surge.

His Afghanistan pose was johnny-come-lately after it was proposed by both military leaders and congresspeople.

When he "adjusted his position" as he does depending on whether or not he can discredit the administration, charm the uninformed, and paint McCain as "more of the same". Read up on McCain. He sure isn't perfect but he differs from Bush in the most important ways such as George's failure to veto one bill and Bush's too long support for Rumsfeld failed policies, yet supports Bush when McCain believes Bush is right.

We can expect a lot "adjustments" Obama will make, many to the deterent of this country.

Obama 130 times voted present in the Illinois Legislature and has little achievement in the U.S. Senate. This "shift-talker" as president? I can only pray more voters come to their senses.

Merle Widmer said...

Obama's Ames, Iowa speech can only be interpreted that he was talking as if he was president "right now', he would be out of Iraq in 10months - April 2007 to March, 2008.

Later, he changed that to 16 months after he was elected.