Or better yet, the President should ask the troops what to do.
They’re the ones risking their necks every day. Those w/ multiple deployments would also be useful opinion-wise.
The public indecision is emboldening our enemies, not to mention what it does to the moral of our military.
To suggest that he is waiting to sort out the political environment in Afghanistan, before making a decision, is patently stupid, as the Taliban might make the decision for him, and just take over, and no more elections, no political problems.
Generals don’t make policy. The President does.
Do YOU know what our real objective in Afghanistan is?
Al Qaeda isn’t there anymore. If Khazi hadn’t tried to rig the election the mission would be clearer.
As it is, I don’t want to support a massively corrupt regime, do you? Particularly not with 68,000 American lives.
After the mission is determined, THEN it’s time to listen to how the generals want to implement it.
“Generals don’t make policy. The President does. ”
Where have you been the last year or so?
The president mapped out the mission during election campaign, and refined it into an official policy in March, when he replaced the General in charge, and asked for his recommendations for accomplishing the new policy objectives.
What is before him is not a policy review but rather a military strategy of how to accomplish the policy.
Obamascares - we would not be in this mess if Bush and Cheney had not lied us into a war in Iraq. We would be done in Afghanistan by now …. talk about stupid … talk about a WASTE of human treasure …. tak about a WASTE of money!!!!
The commander-in-chief defines the mission, then the generals advise on how best to carry it out. This is not a difficult idea to grasp, folks. What’s underway now is an attempt to consider and re-define the mission, which is very appropriate after 8 years of war.
If you fault the President for not defining the mission quickly enough, so so, don’t say he’s ignoring the generals on the ground, because he isn’t. Also, McChrystal is the general on the ground, but his recommendations have to go up through the military’s chain of command, as is always the case with every other war with every other president.
You Obama critics would be far more credible if you would be more factual and not create such exaggerated falsehoods willy nilly.
nope, don’t agree petergrt. that’s not accurate. He continued existing policy so his people could assess. They bring back assessment and that can affect the definition of the mission. You’re drinking the Kool-Aid.
peter, just a couple of thoughts based on your exchange with spicecake. You wrote:
Al-Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, from where they attacked us.After we went to Iraq to demilitarize and affect a regime change, Al-Qaeda went to Iraq and waged war, for Iraq.Al-Qaeda is not much of a factor in Iraq.
We’ll leave out the fact that while the terrorists may have trained in Afghanistan, they actually attacked from within the US. But I don’t see where you are actually disagreeing with spicecake who ultimately said we wasted time and opportunity, not to mention lives, by affecting regime change in Iraq when al Qaeda was not a factor there. Iraq contributed nothing to shutting down al Qaeda and therefore was not beneficial to us.
As to where al Qaeda is (and by that I suspect you really mean bin Laden since the loose organization has elements scattered around the world), I’d guess Pakistan, but do you suggest invading Pakistan?
we screwed our military with ‘affirmative action’ not that McCain would have done any better…itswhat happens when you have no viable alternatives…that may be where we are now.
Magnaut sneers : ”we screwed our military with ‘affirmative action’”
Ah, this is the Magnaut I know and hold in contempt! I thought he had put some thought into a comment re Fox News a few minutes back elsewhere but he’s back to his usual self here.
Keep on trolling. If the military were given free reign they would immediately take control of one of the most despised and corrupted 3rd World countries on this planet: the US of A.
Lock up all those unemployed, disgruntled Mericans in FEMA camps and let them dig trenches.
Travel to exotic lands, meet new people, and kill them. THAT is the military job, and mind-set, which is exactly why our Constitution says the military will serve the civil and civilian government. Obama is listening to the generals, as in Joint Chiefs and field experienced people, not just one “anointed one”, and working out some pretty good solutions to a very difficult situation.
When Shinseki was ignored, we got in deep trouble, which we’re still trying to dig out of. We are moving away from the “shoot, aim, ready” direction, and while it may not be instantly perfect, it’s better than what we had.
And a real key is getting out of countries WE invaded, and not doing it again, for yes, oil and or profit.
As I read the comments on this and other cartoons my question, from an Australians perspective, is extremity of view. It seems the ability for reasoned debate is not part of your culture. Invective, diatribe, attack and hyperbole seem to be the style of discussion. It reflects poorly on your culture and is bewildering to an outsider.
“…along with of course contempt for religion in general and Christianity in particular.”
This in probably the only developed nation where something like “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all” is droned by countless schoolboys and schoolgirls time and again.
Right. If there is one Western country where education seeks to ingrain religion in its children. it’s the US.
“Right. If there is one Western country where education seeks to ingrain religion in its children. it’s the US. ”
Absolutely correct.
US public schools are indeed indoctrinating its pupils to:
Church of Men Made Global Worming, oops, it was recently changed to CLIMATE CHANGE;
Church of America the Bad;
Church of Anticapitalism;
Church of Unisex;
and a bunch of other dogmas.
What’s amazing is that after decades of such ever increasing indoctrination, there are any Republicans / conservatives that emerge from such an onslaught.
I guess they must be really dumb, not having absorbed the demagogy.
I appreciate the sarcastic response, Peter, I just don’t agree with it.
“Church of America the Bad;”
I think this “faith” is vastly overrated in importance. There are some who don’t believe in America the Doubleplusgood, sure, but even most of those unhappy with the current situation in America often want to return to a period of “proper American values.”
“Church of Anticapitalism”
It must be doing a pretty poor job then. The US is one of the Western countries capitalism has been challenged the least, imo - both in theory and in people’s actual lives. Make it “the Church of Anticommunism” and you will be closer to the truth.
“Church of Climate Change”
This here is a bit tricky. The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that there is a man-made impact on climate. Science classes are supposed to teach what the consensus in science is, imo. As long as kids are given all the facts, no matter on which side of the political debate they lie, I’m ok with it.
NorthCarolinian over 14 years ago
Or better yet, the President should ask the troops what to do. They’re the ones risking their necks every day. Those w/ multiple deployments would also be useful opinion-wise.
petergrt over 14 years ago
The public indecision is emboldening our enemies, not to mention what it does to the moral of our military.
To suggest that he is waiting to sort out the political environment in Afghanistan, before making a decision, is patently stupid, as the Taliban might make the decision for him, and just take over, and no more elections, no political problems.
Norton99 over 14 years ago
Generals don’t make policy. The President does. Do YOU know what our real objective in Afghanistan is? Al Qaeda isn’t there anymore. If Khazi hadn’t tried to rig the election the mission would be clearer. As it is, I don’t want to support a massively corrupt regime, do you? Particularly not with 68,000 American lives. After the mission is determined, THEN it’s time to listen to how the generals want to implement it.
petergrt over 14 years ago
“Generals don’t make policy. The President does. ”
Where have you been the last year or so?
The president mapped out the mission during election campaign, and refined it into an official policy in March, when he replaced the General in charge, and asked for his recommendations for accomplishing the new policy objectives.
What is before him is not a policy review but rather a military strategy of how to accomplish the policy.
JoyceBV65 over 14 years ago
BO is inexperienced. They man never ran a town, how can he be expected to run a country?
Too many people in this country voted STUPID.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Doreen Rice Premium Member over 14 years ago
Obamascares - we would not be in this mess if Bush and Cheney had not lied us into a war in Iraq. We would be done in Afghanistan by now …. talk about stupid … talk about a WASTE of human treasure …. tak about a WASTE of money!!!!
Bush=Stooooooopid
petergrt over 14 years ago
spicecakes69:
Hey you, the uber-intellectual: maybe you can answer the following simple chronological list of events, and a question:
Al-Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, from where they attacked us.
After we went to Iraq to demilitarize and affect a regime change, Al-Qaeda went to Iraq and waged war, for Iraq.
Al-Qaeda is not much of a factor in Iraq.
Al-Qaeda doesn’t seem to be in Afghanistan either.
So what the hell happened to Al-Qaeda?
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
The commander-in-chief defines the mission, then the generals advise on how best to carry it out. This is not a difficult idea to grasp, folks. What’s underway now is an attempt to consider and re-define the mission, which is very appropriate after 8 years of war.
If you fault the President for not defining the mission quickly enough, so so, don’t say he’s ignoring the generals on the ground, because he isn’t. Also, McChrystal is the general on the ground, but his recommendations have to go up through the military’s chain of command, as is always the case with every other war with every other president.
You Obama critics would be far more credible if you would be more factual and not create such exaggerated falsehoods willy nilly.
petergrt over 14 years ago
believecommonsense:
It is you who doesn’t have the facts straight.
The President established the new policy and objectives in March of this year.
What’s going on now is waffling about his own policy and strategy.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
nope, don’t agree petergrt. that’s not accurate. He continued existing policy so his people could assess. They bring back assessment and that can affect the definition of the mission. You’re drinking the Kool-Aid.
petergrt over 14 years ago
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/27/1868557.aspx
cdward over 14 years ago
peter, just a couple of thoughts based on your exchange with spicecake. You wrote:
Al-Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, from where they attacked us. After we went to Iraq to demilitarize and affect a regime change, Al-Qaeda went to Iraq and waged war, for Iraq. Al-Qaeda is not much of a factor in Iraq.
We’ll leave out the fact that while the terrorists may have trained in Afghanistan, they actually attacked from within the US. But I don’t see where you are actually disagreeing with spicecake who ultimately said we wasted time and opportunity, not to mention lives, by affecting regime change in Iraq when al Qaeda was not a factor there. Iraq contributed nothing to shutting down al Qaeda and therefore was not beneficial to us.
As to where al Qaeda is (and by that I suspect you really mean bin Laden since the loose organization has elements scattered around the world), I’d guess Pakistan, but do you suggest invading Pakistan?
petergrt over 14 years ago
” … by affecting regime change in Iraq when al Qaeda was not a factor there. Iraq contributed nothing to shutting down al Qaeda …”
” … Al-Qaeda went to Iraq and waged war, for Iraq.
Al-Qaeda is not much of a factor in Iraq.”
Why do you think al-Qaeda went to Iraq?
Magnaut over 14 years ago
National Intelligence Estimate Nov 2008
ZERO
we screwed our military with ‘affirmative action’ not that McCain would have done any better…itswhat happens when you have no viable alternatives…that may be where we are now.
OmqR-IV.0 over 14 years ago
Magnaut sneers : ”we screwed our military with ‘affirmative action’” Ah, this is the Magnaut I know and hold in contempt! I thought he had put some thought into a comment re Fox News a few minutes back elsewhere but he’s back to his usual self here.
d_legendary1 over 14 years ago
68,000 reasons to bring those guys home.
johndh123 over 14 years ago
BCS Is ‘exaggerated falsehoods’ an oxymoron of sorts? ~winks~
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
john123, yes, it probably is. (you can tell I don’t edit or proof my posts on this site) ;oD
deadheadzan over 14 years ago
Viva la Military Dictatorship!
audieholland over 14 years ago
NeoconMan:
Keep on trolling. If the military were given free reign they would immediately take control of one of the most despised and corrupted 3rd World countries on this planet: the US of A.
Lock up all those unemployed, disgruntled Mericans in FEMA camps and let them dig trenches.
Dtroutma over 14 years ago
Travel to exotic lands, meet new people, and kill them. THAT is the military job, and mind-set, which is exactly why our Constitution says the military will serve the civil and civilian government. Obama is listening to the generals, as in Joint Chiefs and field experienced people, not just one “anointed one”, and working out some pretty good solutions to a very difficult situation.
When Shinseki was ignored, we got in deep trouble, which we’re still trying to dig out of. We are moving away from the “shoot, aim, ready” direction, and while it may not be instantly perfect, it’s better than what we had.
And a real key is getting out of countries WE invaded, and not doing it again, for yes, oil and or profit.
ColinJames over 14 years ago
As I read the comments on this and other cartoons my question, from an Australians perspective, is extremity of view. It seems the ability for reasoned debate is not part of your culture. Invective, diatribe, attack and hyperbole seem to be the style of discussion. It reflects poorly on your culture and is bewildering to an outsider.
petergrt over 14 years ago
We’ll send 0mama down-under to apologize, so that you’ll think better of our culture.
Seriously though, America is in the midst of a major ‘culture war’.
0bama, far from being a ‘uniter’ has caused polarization of unprecedented proportions, and thus opinions and the resultant rhetoric run strong.
4uk4ata over 14 years ago
“…along with of course contempt for religion in general and Christianity in particular.”
This in probably the only developed nation where something like “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all” is droned by countless schoolboys and schoolgirls time and again.
Right. If there is one Western country where education seeks to ingrain religion in its children. it’s the US.
petergrt over 14 years ago
“Right. If there is one Western country where education seeks to ingrain religion in its children. it’s the US. ”
You must be talking about madrasahs.
petergrt over 14 years ago
“Right. If there is one Western country where education seeks to ingrain religion in its children. it’s the US. ”
Absolutely correct.
US public schools are indeed indoctrinating its pupils to:
Church of Men Made Global Worming, oops, it was recently changed to CLIMATE CHANGE;
Church of America the Bad;
Church of Anticapitalism;
Church of Unisex;
and a bunch of other dogmas.
What’s amazing is that after decades of such ever increasing indoctrination, there are any Republicans / conservatives that emerge from such an onslaught. I guess they must be really dumb, not having absorbed the demagogy.
kennethcwarren64 over 14 years ago
Scott – I know you deny it, but I still think you laugh a lot – you do get people pissed off.
4uk4ata over 14 years ago
I appreciate the sarcastic response, Peter, I just don’t agree with it.
“Church of America the Bad;”
I think this “faith” is vastly overrated in importance. There are some who don’t believe in America the Doubleplusgood, sure, but even most of those unhappy with the current situation in America often want to return to a period of “proper American values.”
“Church of Anticapitalism”
It must be doing a pretty poor job then. The US is one of the Western countries capitalism has been challenged the least, imo - both in theory and in people’s actual lives. Make it “the Church of Anticommunism” and you will be closer to the truth.
“Church of Climate Change”
This here is a bit tricky. The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that there is a man-made impact on climate. Science classes are supposed to teach what the consensus in science is, imo. As long as kids are given all the facts, no matter on which side of the political debate they lie, I’m ok with it.