Panther Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Geaorge Orwell was right in the controlled totaliatarian future WAR will be PEACE and FREEDOM will be SLAVERY what more can one say? I hate to be a moralist I know that tpye of thinking dosen't apply to the modern world with any succes but dam. I don't feel hatred for the man Im not that naive but ponder this question, if Barack Obama was a good and decent man at heart why would he wan't to be president Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Panther Posted December 13, 2009 Author Share Posted December 13, 2009 "agreed, nobody told me there would be days like these" john lennon speaking to me from the otherside Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigshoulders Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 "The more people invest in war, the more vindication they seek from it. This is the logic of escalation, the path we have now chosen in Afghanistan. LBJ understood this, and he was broken by it." link Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 With every escalation of troops and money hemorrhaging out of this country I think of Osama Bid Laden's 2004 video release to Al-Jazeera: Bin Laden bragged at the time that al Qaeda has found it “easy for us to provoke and bait this administration. All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations.” “And it all shows that the real loser is you,” Bin Laden said. “It is the American people and their economy.” Bin Laden said of President Bush that “the darkness of black gold blurred his vision and insight, and he gave priority to private interests over the public interests of America.” The average citizen can never be certain of the true motivation of a government's actions. Is there a credible nuclear threat? Had Bush's war stayed here, there would have at least been some logic to it. Time was of the essence and unless other facts have come to light, THAT OPPORTUNITY HAS PASSED. Government's main job seems to be obfuscation these days. It matters not who the figurehead is. Washington DC is a vortex. Peace Prize my ass. Your mind's a machineIt's deadly and dullIt's never been still and its will Has never been free Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 A big part of the reason Obama gained popularity was his stand against war. Obama keeps disappointing me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 A big part of the reason Obama gained popularity was his stand against war. Obama keeps disappointing me. He did say he was against the war, but never, ever during his campaigning did he say even once that he would withdraw troops immediately or that getting out of this mess would be easy. Not once (though I will happily be corrected if I'm wrong). A lot of his supporters hoped that would happen, but I don't think he ever made that promise. He's really in a tight spot. He can't withdraw every troop there immediately without leaving the place in a hell of a clusterfuck, and he can't fix it without sending more troops. Well, he can't fix it all, let's be honest, and I'm pretty sure he's the one who's going to end up with the Saigon moment in all of this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 A big part of the reason Obama gained popularity was his stand against war. Obama keeps disappointing me.The Iraq war. not Afganistan...see below.... He did say he was against the war, but never, ever during his campaigning did he say even once that he would withdraw troops immediately or that getting out of this mess would be easy. Not once (though I will happily be corrected if I'm wrong). A lot of his supporters hoped that would happen, but I don't think he ever made that promise. He's really in a tight spot. He can't withdraw every troop there immediately without leaving the place in a hell of a clusterfuck, and he can't fix it without sending more troops. Well, he can't fix it all, let's be honest, and I'm pretty sure he's the one who's going to end up with the Saigon moment in all of this.Hoped was about it. This is all very sad really. I still support Barack, but he is in a very tight spot; this is a lose/lose situation. If he pulls out he loses alot of folks and if he stays he loses a bunch too. Having invested this much into this conflict, it is like LBJ all over again. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 A big part of the reason Obama gained popularity was his stand against war. Obama keeps disappointing me.To be accurate, he never said he was against "war" in general. He was opposed to the war in Iraq, as he thought it was unnecessary in the first place, but he consistently said that the war in Afghanistan was where our focus should have remained all along. I'm not thrilled with the plans to escalate the war, but it comes as no surprise to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 He did say he was against the war, but never, ever during his campaigning did he say even once that he would withdraw troops immediately or that getting out of this mess would be easy. Not once (though I will happily be corrected if I'm wrong). A lot of his supporters hoped that would happen, but I don't think he ever made that promise. He's really in a tight spot. He can't withdraw every troop there immediately without leaving the place in a hell of a clusterfuck, and he can't fix it without sending more troops. Well, he can't fix it all, let's be honest, and I'm pretty sure he's the one who's going to end up with the Saigon moment in all of this. He did say immediately and gave a timeline on Iraq. Of course it won't be easy, but change isn't easy, but it is what he promised. He gave the impression that he was different and really was against war. I guess he just like the rest of them when it comes to it, but he is definitely the best politican I ever saw. It's sad but the damage is done and more fighting will just make things worse. Maybe its human nature to kill each other off to have some sort of population control. http://security.nationaljournal.com/2008/12/obama-withdrawal-from-iraq-how-fast.php Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 is all very sad really. I still support Barack, but he is in a very tight spot; this is a lose/lose situation. If he pulls out he loses alot of folks and if he stays he loses a bunch too.LouieB Yeah, poor Obama. He might lose votes either way. Come on, LouieB. That's not what is sad about this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 He did say immediately and gave a timeline on Iraq. Of course it won't be easy, but change isn't easy, but it is what he promised. He gave the impression that he was different and really was against war. I guess he just like the rest of them when it comes to it, but he is definitely the best politican I ever saw. Did you honestly believe his timeline on Iraq? I'm sorry, but believing a timeline established about one year prior to when it would begin to be implemented, provided to you by someone who isn't even in office and doesn't have all of the security clearance to fully examine the issues, seems a bit shortsighted. I appreciated the timeline as evidence that he'd given it some thought, but you can't possibly believe that something like that will even be relevant by the time a candidate takes office. To me, those kinds of things are the campaign-equivalent of a standardized test writing sample. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Did you honestly believe his timeline on Iraq? I'm sorry, but believing a timeline established about one year prior to when it would begin to be implemented, provided to you by someone who isn't even in office and doesn't have all of the security clearance to fully examine the issues, seems a bit shortsighted. So, he outright lied, but because it was obvious to you at the time, you are willing to ignore it? Jeez, this thread is depressing the hell out of me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 So, he outright lied, but because it was obvious to you at the time, you are willing to ignore it? Jeez, this thread is depressing the hell out of me. No, I'm saying I never take those statements to be truths anyway. No educated voter can possibly look at any first-time candidate's timeline for anything and consider it to be an accurate representation of what the future will hold. Hell, I doubt I'd hold it against a sitting president if one of his timelines didn't hold up; wars, like, change and stuff - anyone who can present me with an accurate 13-month timeline is more likely to be named Miss Cleo than Mr. President. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Would it be morally responsible to, having gone into both Iraq and Afghanistan and blowing the shit out of the place, including whatever governmental structure was there at the time, leave without having at least a modicum of stability in its place? Is that really what Obama proposed in 2008? Is that really something people should support? In this case especially, Obama is just trying to manage a situation left him by the biggest menagerie of boobs, morons and villains in U.S. political history - the administration of George W. Bush. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 He did say immediately and gave a timeline on Iraq. Of course it won't be easy, but change isn't easy, but it is what he promised. He gave the impression that he was different and really was against war. again, if that's the impression you got then you weren't really listening carefully to what he actually said. I just did a quick search and came up with this article from last summer, right in the midst of the pres. campaign: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/obama.iraq/index.html Pointing to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's recent call for a timetable, Obama said "now is the time for a responsible redeployment of our combat troops that pushes Iraq's leaders toward a political solution, rebuilds our military, and refocuses on Afghanistan and our broader security interests." Obama said he planned to remove combat brigades from Iraq by the summer of 2010. He also said he would send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan. ... He said his strategy rests on five goals: "ending the war in Iraq responsibly, finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states, achieving true energy security and rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century." so you're right about his promised timeline for Iraq withdrawal not being met, and that's a legit beef. But to think that he was opposed to all war is just inaccurate - he consistently talked about finishing the fight, etc. in Afghanistan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 so you're right about his promised timeline for Iraq withdrawal not being met, and that's a legit beef. Did the summer of 2010 whiz by me without my noticing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Did the summer of 2010 whiz by me without my noticing?no, but the plan has been adjusted now to have all combat forces out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 No, I'm saying I never take those statements to be truths anyway. No educated voter can possibly look at any first-time candidate's timeline for anything and consider it to be an accurate representation of what the future will hold. Don't you think Obama was just as aware of this when he proposed his timeline? And yet he proposed it anyway - as truth? And didn't he run on the platform of talking to us as adults? I dont feel like an adult right now. You can justify it however you'd like, but what you are saying is that Obama lied, but you knew it all along, so it's ok. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Don't you think Obama was just as aware of this when he proposed his timeline? And yet he proposed it anyway - as truth? And didn't he run on the platform of talking to us as adults? I dont feel like an adult right now. I've never cleaned up a gallon of spilt milk before. Let's say you spill a gallon of milk and I need to clean it up. Everyone in the kitchen asks me how long it will take, and I say, "Five minutes." I base this on what I know about the situation, even though I've never done it before. If it takes me ten minutes to clean up that gallon of milk, are you going to call me a liar? I don't need to say that there are a lot more unknowns regarding war than there are spilt milk. I'm sorry you feel had, but there are just too many unknowns to take a statement like that as anything more than a candidate's/president's best intentions. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 I don't need to say that there are a lot more unknowns regarding war than there are spilt milk. I'm sorry you feel had, but there are just too many unknowns to take a statement like that as anything more than a candidate's/president's best intentions. I dont buy it SpeedRacer. You knew, I knew, and he knew, that the situation was too complicated and that he couldn't just pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan. This was not some naive guy who, aww shucks, had the best of intentions and was wrong. This guy is the political genius of our lifetime. I don't feel had. I am just pissed off. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 I dont buy it SpeedRacer. You knew, I knew, and he knew, that the situation was too complicated and that he couldn't just pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan. This was not some naive guy who, aww shucks, had the best of intentions and was wrong. This guy is the political genius of our lifetime. I don't feel had. I am just pissed off. That doesn't mean he didn't really want that timeline to work. That doesn't mean he hasn't tried like hell to pull it off, in the face of a lot of obstacles. Do you know what effort he's made at meeting these timelines? Do you have information I don't, that shows what he has or hasn't done to meet his goals? I don't consider it lying when someone tells you what they intend to do for their part in a situation, most of which they can't control. That doesn't mean I expect that what they say will be the outcome, but I sure as hell don't feel angry if it doesn't happen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 again, if that's the impression you got then you weren't really listening carefully to what he actually said. I just did a quick search and came up with this article from last summer, right in the midst of the pres. campaign: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/obama.iraq/index.html so you're right about his promised timeline for Iraq withdrawal not being met, and that's a legit beef. But to think that he was opposed to all war is just inaccurate - he consistently talked about finishing the fight, etc. in Afghanistan. I do remember him talking about Afgan but didnt think it will grow to this. I thought he wanted to get out of Iraq because he knew how not to take things too far and that war in general wasn't good. I guess I was wrong and maybe he doesn't mind war at all. I want a War on War. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 That doesn't mean he didn't really want that timeline to work. That doesn't mean he hasn't tried like hell to pull it off, in the face of a lot of obstacles. Do you know what effort he's made at meeting these timelines? Do you have information I don't, that shows what he has or hasn't done to meet his goals? I don't consider it lying when someone tells you what they intend to do for their part in a situation, most of which they can't control. That doesn't mean I expect that what they say will be the outcome, but I sure as hell don't feel angry if it doesn't happen. You knew, and I knew. Which means he knew. Tis all I am saying. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 no, but the plan has been adjusted now to have all combat forces out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Out of Iraq and right into Afganistan along with thousands more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 He more or less guaranteed a build-up in Afghanistan during his campaign (unfortunately). That is not a flip-flop of any sort. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.