Obama Appeases Tea-baggers But Upsets Leftists
As far as what we learned that we hadn't learned before on this last speech Obama gave a couple days ago regarding the troop increase in the Afghanistan war (if you missed this news item I question if you are alive—i don't see that I have to provide a million links to prove it occurred), let's put things into perspective a bit. Let's not immediately accuse Obama of being Bush-like. We still don't know if the Taliban will be defeated, but finally at least the enemy has a face. I mean, if Bush knew he had to go after the Taliban, and went after Saddam, and obviously Cheney didn't object too much, and Cheney is the one telling Obama what to do now, to hurry up and escalate this war, or else. What does that tell us about the Iraq War? Was Bush just stupid to not go for the actual enemy? I'm not understanding how they explain away Bush's idiocy in this. It's not a 'strategic' mistake, it's blatant psychotic behavior bordering on insanity, if it is true that Bush just happily let the enemy live and went after someone not related to the 9-11 events. Now Obama is simply going to go after the real enemy, using just the most basic logic of ''someone committed an act of aggression so I will now respond to that and not go after something unrelated.'' It's no longer the Bush doctrine of : ''I will pre-empt this unrelated person over here, seeing as he is Arab any way (and we hate Arabs—[bush is saying this, not me, 'theoretically']) and has a thuggish reputation and let the next President go after the real aggressor who attacked us on 9-11 (we'll have Cheney put pressure on him via the News Media, we'll use Fox News, I guess...)''. The Nobel Peace prize goes to Obama because he got the enemy right. He did not pre-empt some 'imaginary' future attack by a granted, evil guy (no one is arguing Saddam wasn't evil just that he didn't attack us). Obama's simply avenging us for 9-11. That is legit, but the Bush doctrine of pre-emption isn't. So now we know that as long as the Taliban exist as an entity, then we have not defeated the real enemy who attacked us on 9-11. It took Obama to come in and set it all straight and fix what Bush broke, and make America the Moral Leader that it purports to be. Finally our actions will match our words, and not be the actions of a madman.
Email this page
War in Afghanistan is for US drug smuggling
Submitted on December 5th, 2009 by Brenda Norrellbrendanorrell@gmail.com
Sorry, but your argument ignores the whole baseline of the war in Afghanistan. The US is involved in drug smuggling and has found a fertile ground for its drug supply. Further, US wars continue because the youths are considered "expendables." Their blood waters the US economy and corporate profiteers. No slick politician can change the facts.
that's intentional
Submitted on December 6th, 2009 by Dennes LongoriaIt was not meant as a thorough investigative piece. Just a comment on a speech Obama gave. Mostly done in sarcasm, as well. I'm opposed to all war, if you read my other pieces.
It's not only drugs
Submitted on December 7th, 2009 by Don Henry Ford Jr.GOD. Their god, anyway. Gold, oil, drugs.
And obama works for the same people bush did.
9-11 was a one time event
Submitted on December 7th, 2009 by Dennes LongoriaI don't understand at what point we are properly 'avenged' for 9-11 but that's the reason Obama gave for going after the Taliban. When I said he was getting his orders from Cheney that was not exactly a vote of confidence on my part. Their god you say... There is only one God theoretically, right? All manifestations are variations upon the same concept...