Wednesday, December 02, 2009
President Barack Obama December 1st Speech
Well I watched a number of West Point cadets look like they were dosing off during Obama's speech last night, but about the speech - amazing - for a man who promised change I am watching the same policies being followed by him as previous administrations have followed. From print more money - to dumping the devalued money into fool bail outs that just make corporate executives richer - to increasing troop build up. I frankly was expecting a lot more from him. Now to kick off the Christmas season we are sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan.
From the associated press; Declaring “our security is at stake,” President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan on Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force he inherited but promising an impatient public to begin withdrawal in 18 months. ...will cost $30 billion for the first year alone
He said it was not Vietnam all over again
First, there are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam. They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we are better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. Yet this argument depends upon a false reading of history. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action.
Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now – and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance – would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.
but we have been in Afghanistan eight years, and each year more US troops are sent in. Can you remember Vietnam in which each years whichever President that was in office would issue a message to the effect that the war was turning in our favor and now we were winning? Maybe if we just increase border security and stop illegals and foreign students from entering our country we would be better off than supporting Afghanistan and the rest of the world. Maybe if we came down strong on users of dope in any quantity it would stop the market for the drug traffic into the United States and in turn stop financing the Taliban whose main source of money is from drugs sold in the United States.
The full text of the speech is located here.
From the associated press; Declaring “our security is at stake,” President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan on Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force he inherited but promising an impatient public to begin withdrawal in 18 months. ...will cost $30 billion for the first year alone
He said it was not Vietnam all over again
First, there are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam. They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we are better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. Yet this argument depends upon a false reading of history. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action.
Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now – and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance – would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.
but we have been in Afghanistan eight years, and each year more US troops are sent in. Can you remember Vietnam in which each years whichever President that was in office would issue a message to the effect that the war was turning in our favor and now we were winning? Maybe if we just increase border security and stop illegals and foreign students from entering our country we would be better off than supporting Afghanistan and the rest of the world. Maybe if we came down strong on users of dope in any quantity it would stop the market for the drug traffic into the United States and in turn stop financing the Taliban whose main source of money is from drugs sold in the United States.
The full text of the speech is located here.
# posted by Howard @ 4:53 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Only need to look to Russian history to see that they were not successful in Afghanistan. Nor will we be. Lives and money wasted. Newsweek is predicting the fall of the US empire. I suspect we are perilously close.
# posted by 
: 8:49 AM
: 8:49 AM
What we have here is a classic case of American ethno-centricism. Afghanistan is not a nation that is likely to embrace an idea as historically foreign to them as democracy any time soon (And when I say "any time soon" I am speaking in terms of the next one-thousand years - give or take a few centuries). How can a country be expected to enter the twenty-first century when that same country has yet to experience all of the modern wonders of the nineteenth? This is a really bad idea.
"And it's - ONE! TWO! THREE! - What are we fighting for?"
Country Joe and the Fish
Well, hey there! Come to think of it, that's a damned good question when you get right down to it: Just what the heck are we fighting for? Let us examine the possibilities, shall we?
American interests? It can't be that! Given the fact that Afghanistan's only export seems to be opium, and taking into consideration our fabulously successful war on drugs....Nah! It couldn't be that!
Freedom and democracy? Tee! Hee! Hee! I'm sorry, I was just kidding! The Afghan people are now living under the rule of a "leader" who is now in power because he stole the recent election. Hamid Karzai is many things - you'll get no argument from me there! - Thomas Jefferson he ain't. Trust me on that. Let this be etched in stone: Any country that views its women as inferior beings not worthy of basic human rights is a country not worth one drop of anyone's blood. NEXT....
Aiding a developing nation? In order for a country to be classified "developing", a bit of "development" should at least be moderately apparent. Afghanistan is stuck in the fifth century and seems intent on remaining there.
What are we fighting for?
Let me rephrase that: What are the children of the poor and working classes fighting for? Between you and me, I've only known one person in combat in the last seven years. I don't know him anymore. He was killed when a roadside bomb was detonated in front of the vehicle in which he was a passenger. His name was Irving Medina. He was twenty-two.
What was Irving Medina fighting for?
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"And it's - ONE! TWO! THREE! - What are we fighting for?"
Country Joe and the Fish
Well, hey there! Come to think of it, that's a damned good question when you get right down to it: Just what the heck are we fighting for? Let us examine the possibilities, shall we?
American interests? It can't be that! Given the fact that Afghanistan's only export seems to be opium, and taking into consideration our fabulously successful war on drugs....Nah! It couldn't be that!
Freedom and democracy? Tee! Hee! Hee! I'm sorry, I was just kidding! The Afghan people are now living under the rule of a "leader" who is now in power because he stole the recent election. Hamid Karzai is many things - you'll get no argument from me there! - Thomas Jefferson he ain't. Trust me on that. Let this be etched in stone: Any country that views its women as inferior beings not worthy of basic human rights is a country not worth one drop of anyone's blood. NEXT....
Aiding a developing nation? In order for a country to be classified "developing", a bit of "development" should at least be moderately apparent. Afghanistan is stuck in the fifth century and seems intent on remaining there.
What are we fighting for?
Let me rephrase that: What are the children of the poor and working classes fighting for? Between you and me, I've only known one person in combat in the last seven years. I don't know him anymore. He was killed when a roadside bomb was detonated in front of the vehicle in which he was a passenger. His name was Irving Medina. He was twenty-two.
What was Irving Medina fighting for?
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Obama the Muslim is building the prophetic army that shall be used against its own people, as written in Revelation and the Book of Daniel.
Oil is the poison of the global crack dealer.
Islam is their religion.
Death and deception of the Christ believer is their ultimate mission.
Be not deceived.
Jesus IS the Only Answer!!!
Post a Comment
Oil is the poison of the global crack dealer.
Islam is their religion.
Death and deception of the Christ believer is their ultimate mission.
Be not deceived.
Jesus IS the Only Answer!!!
<< Home
