Comments on: Obama’s Afghanistan waffle

By: Patronedheart

Patronedheart — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:22:24 +0000

On September 22nd, 2009 at 6:00 pm, zyzzyg said:
Nope. It is not about troop levels. It is about executing and following through on the correct strategy. A strategy that will work. A strategy that is not neglected for seven years. A strategy that you remain committed to and tweak when necessary. A strategy that does not rely on double dealing allies like Musharraf.

Yeah, zyg. I’ll go ahead and hold my breath and wait for victory as Odumbo plans out his brilliant stragety in Afghanastan.

By: USMCgramma

USMCgramma — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:48:40 +0000

This poor excuse for a human being/president needs to spend a week in Marine (or any other military boot camp)… maybe he would make up his mind. SSgt Dan knew the government was not friendly to the military when he enlisted, but this has escalated into pure insanity. The blood of our men is already on OBs hands.

By: Republicanvet

Republicanvet — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 03:56:35 +0000

According to McClatchy, military officers close to General McChrystal said he is prepared to resign if he isn’t given sufficient resources (read “troops”) to implement a change of direction in Afghanistan…

This tells me McChrystal was told his request for troops would be punted until after the health care crapola was passed.

Must keep the leftist nutballs on the reservation if he wants his Marxist bill passed.

I also wonder if Obama is trying to punt it because it doesn’t square with his “evil Americans do evil things to Muslims and I apologize” speech in Cairo.

Sending more troops would suggest he didn’t mean anything he said in his speech.

By: prendad

prendad — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 03:51:55 +0000

On September 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 pm, ssnark said:
I’m glad this is one CinC I will never have to salute.

Me too!
And thanks to you too rocketman!
Rick Prendergast

By: floridaobserver

floridaobserver — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:44:43 +0000

I’ll have to search for the speech President Bush gave in which he said this was going to be a different kind of war and it would last a very long time. I believe the majority of Americans understand this. It is not a war against nations, it is a war against an ideology. War is dangerous and it is messy. Those of us who understand the enemy, well, we “get it”. Turn the troops loose and let them do what they are trained to do. Let the generals lead and make the world a safer place.

By: ssnark

ssnark — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 23:37:32 +0000

There are many of us, myself included who retired rather than serve with anyone who believes that you can get a bully to stop beating on you and taking your stuff if you apologize profusely enough. Only an effete elitist who went to a pricey private school might believe this to be true. It was obvious he didn’t understand why Afghanistan was a holding action and Iraq was where we could ‘kick Al Qaeda and Jihadi butt’. The simple explanation is that amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics. Afghanistan is a landlocked country that can only be supplied by an airbridge. It takes about everything the USAF can muster to keep the 68,000 or so currently in-country supplied. Raising that number will put a strain on their cargo aircraft and is an expensive proposition in terms of fuel. It was far easier to have Jihadis by the score infiltrating from Iran, Syria and elsewhere to Iraq where they could be detected, identified and destroyed by troops with good internal lines of supply and seaports that allowed bulk cargo to land fairly inexpensively.
I would bet that if McChrystal can’t get the troops he needs and the cooperation of the State Department, Commerce Department, Agriculture Department and several other departments in the Executive branch of government he won’t be able to create the security nor the political and economic changes necessary to succeed in counter-insurgency warfare. I’ll also be willing to bet my life that while he is waiting for Mr. Obama to make up his mind one way or another. Men and women in our and our allies armed services will pay the price in blood. But at the same time I get the feeling Mr. Obama unlike his predecessor doesn’t care one whit.

I’m glad this is one CinC I will never have to salute.

By: zyzzyg

zyzzyg — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:00:59 +0000

On September 22nd, 2009 at 11:05 am, WarEagle82 said: #810521

In his next post, zyzzyg will explain why George W. Bush is responsible for Napoleon’s loss at Waterloo in 1815.

Nope. Wrong again.

Let’s see. Clinton guts the Army with his “peace dividend” and it Bush’s fault we don’t have enough troops to send to Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time.

If that is your analysis, you are wrong again. We had enough troops to do both. The unfortunately reality is that our efforts in Afghanistan, as I said earlier, was mis-managed and under resourced.

When did our efforts begin in Iraq? How much time passed between the start of our efforts in Afghanistan and the start of our efforts in Iraq? In that window of time did we achieve what we set out to do? Did we ever have the troop levels in Afghanistan that we have had in Iraq? What has been our position and the central threat our military has been concerned with? Was it the Soviet Union, North Korea and China? Or, was it Venezuela, Somalia and Afghanistan?

Nope. It is not about troop levels. It is about executing and following through on the correct strategy. A strategy that will work. A strategy that is not neglected for seven years. A strategy that you remain committed to and tweak when necessary. A strategy that does not rely on double dealing allies like Musharraf.

Obama won’t send the troops we have to Afghanistan and it is Bush’s fault.

Among the most ridiculous things I ever read. Why send more troops to continue a failed strategy? Get the stragtegy correct to achieve the goals that we have set for ourselves. And, those goals should not include nation building.

Do I see a common moronic thread running through the military analysis of zyzzyg?

No, you are drinking kool aid.

If the question can be asked of Pres Obama after nine months in office, why can’t the same question be asked of Pres Bush after seven years of managing our efforts in Afghanistan?

” . . . questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan . . . ”

Where was Pres Bush’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan?

Many questions in this non ‘Pres Bush caused Napolean to loose at Waterloo’ post.

Go ahead put the kool aid down then cut, paste and answer them one by one.

By: PunditKix

PunditKix — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:41:31 +0000

Michelle Malkin » Obama’s Afghanistan waffle – General McChrystal is prepared to resign if he isn’t given sufficient resources…

Thank you for submitting this cool story – Trackback from PunditKix…

By: CantCureStupid

CantCureStupid — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:45:09 +0000

God forgive me, but I absolutely loathe this joke of a President. Friends and fellow soldiers are going to die due to his cowardice and ineptitude. And 52% of the American electorate made it happen. I really wish the President would sack up and do the right thing, but I don’t believe he gives a damn about America’s fighting men and women or the sacrifices they make.

By: floridaobserver

floridaobserver — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:11:46 +0000

His behavior is treasonous. It’s his duty to protect the people and preserve the Constitution.
The ROE in Afghanistan makes me sick. My son is going over there in 2010. If we are still there. I told him with Obama as president, who knows what will happen in that time.

There have been so many deaths in Afghanistan since Obie took office and he shrugs? What kind of person is this?!

The terrorist plot in CO and NY this week that was foiled by the FBI should wake him up. What a fool. A dangerous, dangerous fool.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:58:57 +0000

Let’s see, Obama reversed what he said last April about Poland and what he said last March about Afghanistan. Not to mention all of the other lies, tall tales and reversals of himself in other areas.

Is there anything he hasn’t reversed or lied about? The only conviction he seems to have is his own self-worship.

By: spaceycakes

spaceycakes — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:09:38 +0000

Is an Afghani waffle made with leavening?

By: bjc

bjc — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:09:01 +0000

*I think P-BO is confused about the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy; I believe he’s thinking, “don’t ask me to provide support for our efforts in Afganistan, and I won’t tell the people I’m trying to destroy our country”; I think that’s about right.
* As I have said before about Afganistan, it’s either overwhelming force, or get out!; Our military deserves no less.

By: rocketman

rocketman — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:00:47 +0000

***
HI PRENDAD–good post–Thank you for your military service and for defending our country.
***
I used to be a DemocRAT–until being drafted into the U.S. Army and watching President Lyndon Johnston throw away lives and lose the Vietnam War. I had thought the Korean War was just a random failure before. Then I realized that this is what liberals and Democrats bring on.
***
Win Afghanistan–with all it takes–in a few months. Or get out and do selective high tech bombing and Predator assassination strikes on valid targets. No long term “nation building” in this failed state.
***
President Obama (PBUH) is just looking for a way to “sugarcoat” his exit “strategy”. He has no desire to win–Afghanistan is just a distraction to his plans to turn the U.S.A. into the United Socialist States of Amerika.
***
John Bibb
***

By: AlohaGuy

AlohaGuy — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:57:36 +0000

What kind of idiot President would miss an opportunity to ask Letterman what he should do?