Comments on: The blogosphere schools Barack Obama in asymmetric warfare

By: PresBO extends proud tradition of presidential gaffes « Poet at the edge

PresBO extends proud tradition of presidential gaffes « Poet at the edge — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 09:07:35 +0000

[...] in perhaps the most seriously troubling set of gaffes of them all, Obama told a Portland crowd over the weekend that Iran doesn’t “pose a serious [...]

By: Lifeofthemind

Lifeofthemind — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 04:18:07 +0000

Obama’s policy can be described as Complacency Pacifism. It is similar to the policy of the British Exchequer (their Treasury) after the First World War. It was policy to write defense budgets under the assumption that there would be no serious threat within a 10 year period. That argument got by in 1930 when everyone was broke and weak. It was cheap and popular with bean counters. Of course they didn’t change it until after 1936 by which time it was a little late to react to the real world growing threat.

Shoving problems off into the future when they will become someone else’s problem is a natural policy for the party of the permanent bureaucracy. If and when things blow up you just form a commission of inquiry, like after 9-11, to muddy the waters. They show the same inability to take action on defense issues as they do on energy. On the other hand a non-issue like long term environmental change can serve as a wedge to grow the government and regulate choices. That they have plenty of time and energy for.

By: Michelle Malkin » The next MSM brouhaha: McCain’s joke about cigarette exports to Iran

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:41:07 +0000

[...] Compare the disproportionate attention McCain’s remark will receive vs. Obama’s truly bone-headed and dangerous ignorance about asymmetric warfare and the Iran threat. [...]

By: Michelle Malkin » D’OH-bama’s mortgage industry mess

Michelle Malkin » D’OH-bama’s mortgage industry mess — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:47:57 +0000

[...] are only so many gaffes, missteps, mistakes, flubs, and self-delusional statements one can make before serial naivete becomes endemic stupidity. Obama has reached the point of no [...]

By: Just a speech? - Page 15 - TanToday - Helping Salon Owners, One At A Time, Since 2000!

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:25:49 +0000

[...] Just a speech? And in perhaps the most seriously troubling set of gaffes of them all, Obama told a Portland crowd over the weekend that Iran doesn’t “pose a [...]

By: yohannbiimu

yohannbiimu — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:10:24 +0000

Barack Obama is an imbecile. I don’t care where he went to school and what grades they gave him, he’s a moron. Anyone with an ounce of brain matter could destroy this “presidential candidate” in any form of debate, and for him to be where he is displays more the state of American politics right now that the true mettle of Obama.

To say that he’s “a lightweight” would suggest that something is there to WEIGH. It’s absolutely TERRIFYING to imagine this man holding the highest office on the planet. The mere thought of this blank disc running the executive office of the United States is inconceivable.

By: Target Rich Environment » Blog Archive » Democrat of the Week: Saturday Morning Roundup

Sat, 24 May 2008 13:59:53 +0000

[...] give equal time, Barack Obama was not without his barely-reported weekly gaffe (link). [...]

By: zyzzyg

zyzzyg — Wed, 21 May 2008 23:27:45 +0000

This discussion is far more embarrassing to Pres Bush than it is for Sen Obama. There is nuance to Sen Obama’s statements. Iran (and, for that matter, Iraq) does not threaten our freedoms. There is no way Iran (or Iraq) could come to our soil and take away my rifles, tear down my house of worship, or shut down our press. Yes, they can do damage and as Sen Obama said, and Sen McCain agrees, Iran should not be allowed to get nuclear weapons.

Where it is embarrassing for Pres Bush is that he has not been nuanced, but inconsistent. ‘With us or against us.’ Yeah, right. We have known about Hamas, Hezbollah and the PLO well before Al Qaeda was on the scene. We have known where they are based and who supports them. Why haven’t we gone after them? Good grief, 16 of the 9/11 highjackers were Saudi Arabian and what did Pres Bush do? He didn’t stop, or restrain, Saudi Arabians from entering the US on student visas as he did with other Arab/Muslim countries.

Yes, take Sen Obama to task. Get him to explain in more detail what he means. What purpose does it serve to assign motive and meaning to his statements when he can be asked.

By: bilgerat

bilgerat — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:54:30 +0000

Thank you, emjem, to you and your husband for your patriotism and sacrifice for our country.

Just ignore the ungrateful, unwashed, and uninformed masses when they spew their hatred of our fine soldiers.

There are many more of us who appreciate what your husband and your family is doing than those who do not.

By: Jim M.

Jim M. — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:49:57 +0000

Let’s also not forget that Japan was also a “tiny” country.

Obama accuses McCain as being lost in the past, but it is Obama who continues to believe the world operates according to cold war rules.

Iran is not the USSR. A country ruled by a theocracy that has as part of its governing philosophy the concept that martrydom is an open door to paradise is much different to deal with than a secular country with a decided atheistic bent. One is perfectly willing to accept a retailiatory attack while the other is frozen to inaction by the concept of mutual assured destruction.

http://dtom.blogtownhall.com/2008/05/20/the_obama_two_step.thtml

In addition, dealing with a country with thousands of nuclear weapons in much different that dealing with a country or group with one or two. It is the rougue state with one nuclear weapon that is more likely to use in then the country with many.

The Second Coming of Jimmy Carter. Obama is just like Jimmy Carter – without the military background.

By: emjem24

emjem24 — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:10:09 +0000

When I see comments like Obummer’s, calipygian’s, and Independent Tom’s, it becomes pretty obvious that there is a fear of the military, even a resentment. There is a willingness by many Americans to say that the Iraq War was just a scam to further the “military industrial complex.” When I see comments like these, I wonder why the hell my husband is in the military fighting for your rights when all you sanctimonious nitwits can do is throw his service in his face. He and I have given up a lot, as have many other military families, for the ungratefulness now expressed.

Iran not a threat? Puleeze. Obummer is not a foreign or economic policy expert. He leaves that to his advisers. As long as he can insert hopeful, changeling dialogue, the world will be a beautiful, benificent, non-violent place.

If anything, I’ve seen what the country has turned into. It’s not been pretty. Both parties did their part to ensure it. However, to say that a terrorist-supporting country who wants nuclear, hegemonic supremecy in the Middle East is not a threat is sheer lunacy. I don’t get it.

I wish I was like Obummer, Independent Tom, and calipygian who’ve turned their backs on the military. My husband, like the military, is a chew toy that political parties and their ignorant American masses can haggle over. How much do we cut the military? How much further do we make their lives difficult? How much further do we discriminate against their spouses? What would the world think if we kept our military intact?

It’s become widely apparent, that with a few notable exceptions (the military, country supporting conservatives of this blog), I no longer recognize this country. Obummer and his acolytes won’t be content until they have their pound of military cutting, domestic entitlement expanding flesh. Is he what’s good for our country?

It’s really sad how low we’ve sunk and how the country has turned against its military. I weep for the country I once thought I knew and the overall, ignorant self-interest guiding Americans to push the country further into the toilet. America is dead… only the death knell of an Obummer presidency will truly signal her demise and that of the once great American military.

By: Send_Me

Send_Me — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:23:13 +0000

I hate the term “asymmetric warfare.” It’s nothing more than a “sexy” word used by conventional thinking people to describe a type of war that is thought different, yet really is not. All war is asymmetrical. Unless one wishes to lose, you have to consider the terrain (in terms of people, organizations, and the physical), composition and disposition of the enemy, time available, and perform a cost-benefit analysis of the target itself in terms of the accessibility of the target, how easily the enemy can recover, and the physical and psychological impact of an operation. These considerations, as are OCOKA, METT-TC, ASCOPE, and the principles of war, are all used during so-called “conventional” and “unconventional” warfare. As Solomon said, “There is nothing new under the sun.” You measure up your opponent then shoot for the weak points however you can.
It’s obvious that Obama sees warfare in terms of arithmetic, rather than an art and science. It’s ironic that this discussion revolves around Iran and the West. Leonidas had far fewer troops, whom the Iranian King, Xerxes, figured he could easily destroy with his 150,000-250,000 troops. History tells us the Persians won a Pyhrric victory. War is not that simple when you consider things such as, in the case of Thermopylae, terrain and the training of the enemy. For a more modern example, look at how the Afghans, with clandestine American aid, defeated a better trained, better equipped Soviet Army. Why? Better use of terrain, greater aid of the population in terms of logistics and intelligence, etc. How about Operation Restore Hope? Though we killed far more than they did, we left without victory. Why? How? It’s obvious Obama does not understand such things.
It’s amazing that a prospective leader of the free world would not understand such basic concepts of warfare.

By: secondsight

secondsight — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:56:12 +0000

The problem with Democrats is that when they screw up and need to call in the troops, they can never do so without a mass mobilization. I’d druther have a Republican war than a Democratic one.

But that’s all moot. Wait’ll our kids come back to a nation owned and run by the former illegals.

By: xblade

xblade — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:32:43 +0000

calipygian said:
Al-Qaeda spent half a million to attack us and we are in the process of burning through all the money that we could have spent to butress Medicare or rebuild our decrepit infrastructure, upwards of a trillion dollars, in response.What an amazing return on investment for Osama Bin Laden, who, for all of our money spent, still hasn’t been brought to justice.

Who is the laughingstock now?

Well, you are, for so may reasons. Hell, you still think this is a war against Osama bin Laden, for goodness sake.

We have an annual budget of over 3 trillion dollars, and you’re worried about the 80 billion annually we’re spending on the war, an expense that is actually covered under the Constitution, unlike Medicare and other entitlements lol?

By: R_V » Busy Tuesday blogroll roundup

R_V » Busy Tuesday blogroll roundup — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:14:58 +0000

Busy Tuesday blogroll roundup…

* Jumpmaster 82: Cost of War…Put Into Perspective
* Neal Boortz: Obama says “Leave My Wife Alone”
* Ace: MSM Tries Redefining Recession as Up to 1.5% Positive Growth
* Crush Liberalism: Americans Think Obama Will Lose Iraq War
* Say Anything: …