3 posts tagged “war”
President Obama gave a “long awaited” speech last night, a speech that cuts like a knife, and seems to separate the “men” from the “boys.”
(OK, it probably doesn’t separate “men” from “boys”, I just put that in there to sound tough.)
However, President Obama’s speech cuts like a knife through the political parties.
Liberal / Progressives
From Michael Moore writing an editorial that made a last- ditch effort to persuade Obama NOT to expand this war, to the Huffington Post declaring this a “War Reborn.” Liberals wanted us out of BOTH wars, and they are not happy about this build-up.
Progressives are happy that there is a time- line for leaving Afghanistan, BUT NOT THE BUILD UP. Some have even said that Obama is following Bush’s war policies. “Bush’s third term.” Some are asking where are all the “anti-war” protesters who showed up in numbers during Bush’s presidency.
(Yea, I would like to know that too..?? Where are the anti-war protesters?)
Conservative / Republicans
Are NOT happy about the time- line, and they may not be happy about the lower number of extra troops being sent, but they are happy that something is finally being done.
Conservatives are not happy with the mention of “war costs.” If you spend billions to bailout banks and car companies, what the hell is the difference?
If you are fighting a war, you fight to win. Who cares about the costs
Moderates / Indy’s / middle of the “political” road people
Many are happy that the US troops will get some help, and they have believed for awhile that we cannot stay in Afghanistan forever. Moderates, that I have listened to, seem happy about Obama’s speech last night.
More so, than any other issue that we currently have going, this issue cuts right down party lines and it separates the moderates.
You could almost gauge where you are on the political spectrum, by how you feel about President Obama’s Afghan plan.
I have felt for some time that President Obama was taking TOO LONG to make up his mind. “Either we fight to win: give the commanders what they need; or we get the hell out of Afghanistan. This ‘holding pattern’ that Obama put us in for months is killing young Americans.”
I may have been wrong with my opinion on the president, for taking too long.
General David Petraeus (who I admire and respect) defended President Obama, saying: “We needed this extra time to sharpen our plan, to place in Afghanistan the best possible effort to achieve our goals.”
If President Obama is truly listening to General Petraeus, then I owe Barack Obama an apology. For I have no doubt that General Petraeus has our military, and our country’s BEST interests in mind.
It is equally important that we remember that many liberals cut General Petraeus down before they even knew the man. (Remember; “General Petraeus, don’t betray us.” The NY Times ad put out by Move on.)
On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, General Petraeus was asked: “Is VP Cheney WRONG for saying that Obama was ‘dithering?”
Petraeus gracefully said: “I didn’t hear the Vice President’s comments, so I have no opinion.”
Here is a man who is not going to get involved in “left- right” politics. He didn’t start these wars. But he has a job to do. To win battles and keep America safe.
If I owe an apology to President Obama, then many on the left owe an apology to General Petraeus. He just defended your president.
General Petraeus is fine with the July 2011 date that was set, because: “This date of July 2011 is not the end of a process, but the beginning of a process of turning control and security over to the Afghan people.”
Petraeus also said: “We will begin to pull out of Afghanistan when conditions on the ground warrant this. July 2011 begins this process.”
The three major problems that I have had with the Afghanistan War have been answered with President Obama’s speech last night.
(One) Our troops will get the help that they need.
(Two) President Obama IS listening to his generals.
(Three) We will not pull out of Afghanistan unless the country is stable.
These are “baby steps”, folks.
President Obama took “baby steps” in our direction.
The alcoholic who is trying to stay sober, but falls off the wagon and gets piss drunk, shouldn’t be kicked to the curb. You dust him off, pat him on the back, and encourage him to keep trying to stay sober.
When a liberal has a moment of realism, you must also give him encouragement so that he might stay in the world of reality.
Let’s put it another way…
How would Reverend Wright feel about President Obama’s Afghan policy..??
How would Bill Ayers feel about Obama’s choice..??
We already know how the far left progressives feel about this choice.
President Obama went against everything that he once believed to make this choice.
He deserves a pat on the back.
I do not agree with everything that president Obama said. However, there is no doubt that this was a step in the RIGHT direction.
This gives me hope that we can STOP the “cap and trade” bill.
Could it be that there is still hope with the health care bill?
Maybe President Obama IS delivering “hope” to the people.
Albeit, NOT the people who thought that they would receive this HOPE.
Today, I am hopeful.
However, many on the left believe that Obama is digging a hole that he will never escape.
Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic
Happy New Year,
Even though we are changing our calenders to a NEW year, some old issues will follow us forward:
The thousand year war between the Jews and Muslims.
Iranian President Ahmadinejad wrote a note of congratulations to President Elect Barack Obama on his victory. This is the first of it's kind in over 30 years.
Did Obama write a note back to Ahmadinejad?
Or, has Obama been too busy picking his cabinet, creating government policy, and relaxing in Hawaii: to write back to the Iranian President?
Should Obama reply to the Iranian president, or should he remain quiet?
How will what Obama does next, effect the current conflict between Palestine and Israel?
In the Huffington Post- writer: Hooman Majd believes that Barack Obama SHOULD write a letter to Ahmadinejad and even takes the time to pen a letter that Obama could send to Iran. (LINK located below- WARNING- control your politically correct "gag" reflex. Take some Tums first.)
The point of this being:
If you figure that Iran has some "pull" over Hamas and Hezbohla, then you must conclude that Iran has some power over what is taking place between Hamas, the Palestinians, and Israel.
In fact, the Iranian President came out yesterday to offer a reward to anyone who is willing to blow themselves up, (and kill Israelis.)
Mr. Majd believes that any "solution" in the Middle East must include working with, or at least acknowledging Iran.
So what can Obama do for this Middle East conflict?
Some liberals believe that for the past 8 years, (The Bush Kingdom) we have NOT talked to Iran because they want to build a nuclear power plant. There are people who believe that Iran should be allowed to have nuclear power because everyone else does. (So it is unfair to punish Iran.)
The reality is that EVERYONE wants Iran to have a nuclear power plant. Matter of fact, France, Russia, the USA, and others want to help Iran build one.
The problem is, Iran doesn't want to be inspected.
Every country HAS TO BE inspected by the nuclear regulatory commission, before they can build nuclear power plants in their country. America is inspected. France is inspected. Even Russia allows inspections.
But Iran doesn't want inspections to take place.
That is the problem.
Why MUST nuclear power plants be inspected by a "worldly" organization? Because: if you build a faulty nuclear power plant and blow yourself up- the wind could blow the radioactive fallout into a neighboring country and kill millions.
Iran doesn't want inspections because they are paranoid that "we" (you and me) will STEAL their valuable secrets. (Or, Iran is working on a nuclear weapon.)
How will Obama deal with Iran and what, if anything, will stop this conflict between Israel and the Palestinians..??
Most people want to pick a point in time to prove who is right and who is wrong between Israel and the Palestinians.
Where do you want to start- to prove that YOU know who is right and who is wrong between the Palestinians and the Jews?
You could start with this current conflict- where almost 6 months of peace was violated by Hamas rockets raining down on Israel?
Or maybe you want to hold Israel responsible for the 6 Day War, in which Israel took control of more land. Did Israel even START the 6 Day War? (Or did they finish it?)
Maybe you want to start with the Suez Canal conflict? (Who started that one?)
Or maybe when The United Nations granted Israel the right to exist?
Maybe your starting point is when Jews began to move back to The Holy Land during the Aliyah periods?
How about starting at the Ottoman Empire when Arabs took control of much of the known world?
You could start at the Crusades when Christian and Jews battled for the region?
Could you use geology to prove who was in the Holy Land first? Some of the great Jewish Temples are buried under Arab buildings. (Would geology tell you who was there first?)
Where do you want to start, to prove that "your side" is right?
Or maybe so much time has gone by, that you cannot pick a starting point, to justify your beliefs?
Maybe we cannot use history to prove who is right and who is wrong in The Middle East?
Maybe we have to look at the next "cease fire" between Israel and the Palestinians and see who violates it first?
So when we do this; when we look at the last cease fire between Israel and the Palestinians, we can clearly see that Hamas began firing rockets into Israel.
So, it would be Hamas- who is protected by the Palestinians, who started this battle.
However, people want to say that Israel is using too much force. (I guess people want to see a trade of rockets between Israel and Hamas? Hamas fires a rocket, so Israel fires one back?)
People claim that Israel is targeting Mosques and killing innocent people. You remind these people that Hamas is hiding in these Mosques and using the Mosque to launch rockets
Some people claim that Hamas is so frustrated by Israel being "mean" to them, that they are lashing out. People tell me the rockets that Hamas is using do not have explosives in them. (Aaaahh- now there is a comfort; knowing that the 200 pound rocket falling on your house and killing everything in it's path will not explode.)
You carry on with this debate and the next thing that you know...
You are brought back into this "walk through history" on who started this conflict between the Jews and Arabs.
Maybe the answer is: no answer at all?
Maybe the best way to stop this Middle East conflict is to quit stopping it?
Maybe the best solution, is NO solution at all.
For my entire life, there has been a conflict between Arabs and the Jews. Can you imagine living in a country that you are always bracing for war? What kind of life is that for it's people?
Every American President, for the past 4 decades, has tried some solution. Nothing has worked.
The British tried for many years and found no solution. The UN has failed.
Maybe it is time to just let it happen..??
Maybe it is time for us to "mind our own business..??"
Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic
LINKS: To stories about today's topic:
LINK: Huffington Post- Majd writes a letter to Iran
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hooman-majd/dear-mahmoud_b_154238.html
LINK: Australia BANS topless beaches because Muslims don't like them
http://reportonarrakis.blogspot.com/2008/12/australian-mp-ban-topless-beaches-to.html
LINK: New Year called off because of Middle East fighting.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5423839.ece
LINK: Protesting Obama in Hawaii- (Why, he hasn't done anything yet?)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28436778/
LINK: Israel reject a cease fire
http://news.aol.com/?feature=232890
For those of you who believe that LOUD rock music is torture...
Those who believe that pouring a bucket of water on the enemy's head is evil...
If you believe that President Bush is a "War Criminal" for allowing LOUD rock music and water poured on terrorist's head, I got GREAT news for you..!!
We are now giving terrorists- DRUGS, instead.
Yes, you read that correctly.
The US military is now giving tribesman in Afghanistan DRUGS to make them talk and work with us.
This has got to be GREAT news to liberals and libertarians alike..!!
(Ok, maybe not all liberals.)
One of the cornerstones of liberalism and libertarianism is that if drugs were legal, we would have less crime and suffer less costs in fighting crime. (I will get into this in a moment.)
As the old saying goes:
"You attract more flies with sticky, gooey- cream filled donuts, then you do with an old sock that smells like vinegar."
Instead of placing female panties on the heads of the enemy, (which has been deemed "torture" by the left) we are now giving Afghan tribesman- Viagra.
It makes sense and this should please the democrats in America, who felt that loud rock music was torture.
Liberals are all about giving away free condoms, birth control pills, and Viagra.
So, this is GREAT news. We switch from waterboarding to Drugs.
Hence- no more "torture."
Even today (Sun Dec 28)- Arianna Huffington writes about torture during the Bush administration:
"...Bush and company didn't mean to illegally torture prisoners at Gitmo - they simply "forgot" torture was illegal. They didn't mean to trample civil rights - they simply "forgot" about the Constitution. They didn't gin up phony intel to hype us into war - they simply "forgot" that WMD had to be real..."
Ms. Huffington should be happy today, to find that the US government has switched to giving the enemy- drugs.
And it might work better:
Picture this: You are an Afghan farmer. You are tired from growing poppies all day, harvesting you heroin.
You come home and all 4 of your wives give you that glowing smile. You know, that little "wink" and nod that tells you that SEX is going to take place.
Maybe you can handle one, possibly two of your wives. (If the weather is just right). BUT ALL FOUR..??
Along comes the US military with a truck load of Viagra. (Just in the nick of time.)
Hey, what heroin growing, gun toting, Afghan rebel wouldn't want drugs..??
And best of all, this should satisfy the "Obama" crowd.
The left is all in favor of drugs.
Because we all know that if drugs were legal, we would have less crime.
Except...
If this were true...
Why would Amsterdam be shutting down some of it's marijuana coffee houses?
Amsterdam- the place most often cited by liberals as an example of a liberal society; where drugs are "cool" and sex is for sale. Where medical help is FREE, and you need not worry about a thing.
A paradise.
Except, that crime was getting out of hand because of all the drugs and uncontrolled behavior. So the government has to do something. They are shutting down some of the sex shops and drug "coffee shops."
What does this all have to do with our friendly, heroin growing Afghan farmer (with 4 horny wives)..??
We need intelligence to win these wars..!!
I do not care if we use Viagra, or pour a bucket of water on a guy's head, or we play loud rock music. We need information on our enemy.
How did we find out where Saddam was hiding..??
How were we able to locate the exact hole in the ground that Saddam was living in..??
You guessed it.
We politely told a fellow that he would DIE if he didn't reveal where Saddam was. (And guess what?) He told us. And the guy didn't die because we do not torture people. We just scare them a little. (With loud rock music, water on the head, and now Viagra.)
War is hell.
We need to be united to win these wars.
No one ever won a war by dying for his country.
You win a war by making the other dumb bastard die for his (country.) Gen. Patton.
Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic
LINKS: To stories related to today's topic-
LINK: Going into life- STONED
http://news.aol.com/article/amsterdam-to-shut-some-sex-pot-shops/269838
LINK: Afghan gets HARD intelligence
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/26/redefining-hard-intelligence/
LINK: Ms. Huffington is "huffing" this news
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/sunday-roundup_b_153643.html
