• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama and Priorities.

Redress said:
Actually, you are. You have yet to show that Obama is not taking Afghanistan seriously. You have one small and mostly irrelevant example about his communications with one person in the military chain of command, combine it with totally unrelated events that have taken maybe 1 % of Obama's time, and use that to suggest that Obama is neglecting Afghanistan.

You are looking seriously foolish.
Click to expand...




And you, ma'am are looking like an obama apparachik, towing the line like a good comrade should. How is the Kool-aid mrs. jones?


our brothers and sisters are waiting to hear if we are pulling out and using drones or continuing the fight.


Obama just wants to do a few more interviews and take the press and accolades for an already fixed olympics. They can wait.... :roll:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
He said he is waiting to see if Obama wants to send more troops or pull out and use drones....


if its the latter as they say he favors, he is putting the olympics over our brothers and sisters in harms way......



This my friend, is abhorrent.
Click to expand...

If he chooses the later(which is far from certain), it will have exactly nothing to do with the Olympics. Realize also that there is a lot of information to take into account, and not making a snap decision is probably a good thing. Also realize that just because he is the force commander there, does not mean he is right in his analysis, and I suspect Obama is getting at least some contrasting views from the Pentagon(and again, this is good and healthy).

Personally, I conditionally favor sending more troops at this time, but with a time limit on when results need to be seen. If it starts to appear that the political results desired from Afghanistan are not achievable in a reasonable near time frame, then it might be time to pull out and use airstrikes and drones and cruise missiles as appropriate, with our troops out of harms way. I emphasize that this is strictly my personal opinion, and I admittedly have incomplete knowledge of the situation over there.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
And you, ma'am are looking like an obama apparachik, towing the line like a good comrade should. How is the Kool-aid mrs. jones?


our brothers and sisters are waiting to hear if we are pulling out and using drones or continuing the fight.


Obama just wants to do a few more interviews and take the press and accolades for an already fixed olympics. They can wait.... :roll:
Click to expand...

The Olympics and interviews are almost certainly not affecting how long it takes to make a decision. Since you are a "bitch about anything Obama might do" type(which is just like those who think Obama does no wrong, you both drink the koolaid...I am thankful I have shown my willingness to both bitch and defend as appropriate), you would just bitch he made a snap decision if he had already decided, and then bitch again if the decision turns out to look wrong.
 
Redress said:
The Olympics and interviews are almost certainly not affecting how long it takes to make a decision. Since you are a "bitch about anything Obama might do" type(which is just like those who think Obama does no wrong, you both drink the koolaid...I am thankful I have shown my willingness to both bitch and defend as appropriate), you would just bitch he made a snap decision if he had already decided, and then bitch again if the decision turns out to look wrong.
Click to expand...




this is patently false. And to suggest I am not concerned about troops and am using them as fodder to attack obama is highly insulting, you know me better than that.


I have defended obama on numerous occasions.


This is not one of them, when troops are dying while he fiddles on Leno I get pissed.


How long does he need to make a decision?


it took him 12 hours to condemn the teen beating in chi town.



he is an indecisive buffoon, even democrats are getting pissed at him over his pansy no stance on healthcare indecisivness....
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
this is patently false. And to suggest I am not concerned about troops and am using them as fodder to attack obama is highly insulting, you know me better than that.


I have defended obama on numerous occasions.


This is not one of them, when troops are dying while he fiddles on Leno I get pissed.


How long does he need to make a decision?


it took him 12 hours to condemn the teen beating in chi town.



he is an indecisive buffoon, even democrats are getting pissed at him over his pansy no stance on healthcare indecisivness....
Click to expand...

I never suggested you where not concerned about the troops, nor would I. I think you are using this issue, but that is not the same thing as not being concerned with the troops. I think both you and I are concerned about our soldiers and veterans, but I think you are using(or misconstruing) this issue for your partisan reasons.

Now, explain to me how appearing on Leno is slowing down his ability to make a decision, which could(maybe) be waiting on analysis from the pentagon. Realize that McChrystal's troop request was submitted to the Pentagon ys ago, and it appears that Obama's military advisers are split on the topic. General Casey(the army chief of staff) is reportedly not sure or against the plan.

It takes a few seconds to hear about a teen murdered and know how to react. It takes a bit longer for some one(with no military experience) to absorb, analyze and reach a credible decision on what to do with a war.
 
Redress said:
It takes a bit longer for some one(with no military experience) to absorb, analyze and reach a credible decision on what to do with a war.
Click to expand...

You would figure this decision making process would begin by talking to your commander in the field more than once in 70 days. Especially after you sent him there to succeed with your mission that you're now losing more troops than any other time in the conflict.
 
Charles Martel said:
You would figure this decision making process would begin by talking to your commander in the field more than once in 70 days. Especially after you sent him there to succeed with your mission that you're now losing more troops than any other time in the conflict.
Click to expand...

Why? Why is this focus on his talking to one person, when he has litelally dozens to advice him, and who are above this person in the chain of command? It could just be that Obama is using the chain of comand, letting McChrystal's reports come up the chain, which his superiors commenting on them, and adding interpretation.
 
Rev did you really need to make two topics about this? Now I was just doing a little bit of playing the rev argument and went back through your posts relating to afghanistan. When the last administration left afghanistan high and dry and generals were calling for more troops they were virtually ignored if not fired or replaced. I didn't see much complaint from the righties on this. Back then it was he's the president and decider but now 1 general comes out while his boss disagrees and the right is now saying hey Obama is ignoring his generals. Just seems a bit hollow to me and fake.
 
Redress said:
It takes a bit longer for some one(with no military experience) to absorb, analyze and reach a credible decision on what to do with a war.
Click to expand...

It's exactly that kind of leadership that will lose Afghanistan for good.
 
Strucky said:
It's exactly that kind of leadership that will lose Afghanistan for good.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that trying to make reasoned decisions with lots of input is harmful to the war in Afghanistan.
 
Redress said:
I don't believe that trying to make reasoned decisions with lots of input is harmful to the war in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Yeah,he's getting alot of input he doesnt understand and is incapable of making the kind decisions necessary for decisive action.
 
Strucky said:
Yeah,he's getting alot of input he doesnt understand and is incapable of making the kind decisions necessary for decisive action.
Click to expand...

He does not have to understand all of it, he has people who do that for him and present him with advice. No one can understand all the issues a president has to face. Hell, I am a veteran and I do not understand all the issues going on in Afghanistan. I do know that Obama's military advisors are split on the issue of more troops, with the head of the army leaning towards being against more troops.
 
other said:
I certainly don't expect him to make military strategy decisions--he's not qualified, but he's needed to push congress to both fund and provide for more troops where necessary. Direct talks with commanders are valuable.
Click to expand...

While that is indeed true, and as we saw, administrations not even remotely qualified that have gotten in the way totally screwed things up, I have a hard time accepting the notion that quantity supersedes quality as many people here would like us to believe. Furthermore, last I checked, the white house is not one man.

The notion that 500 pointless meetings are better then a handful of meaningful ones defies logic and reason.

If the partisan hacks had a real grasp on reality, they'd be arguing that the meeting Obama had was worthless. But given my time here, that's an incredibly large if.
 
Strucky said:
The Iraq war was won before Obama even took office.
Click to expand...

Aww, look, another virtually illiterate person here! Did your reply in any way address what I wrote? No. Did it add anything of value? No. Was it meaningful? No.

you call rising violence in Afghanistan 10 hours of Obama doing something right?
Click to expand...

By such logic, Bush was failing after few meetings with his generals that later turned the war around.
 
obvious Child said:
Aww, look, another virtually illiterate person here!
Click to expand...

I served in Iraq....I'm more literate on the subject than most.


Did your reply in any way address what I wrote?
Click to expand...

And yet you still responded.

Did it add anything of value?
Click to expand...


And yet you still responded.

Was it meaningful?
Click to expand...

And yet.....you still responded.



By such logic, Bush was failing after few meetings with his generals that later turned the war around.
Click to expand...

Bush was failing,but not because he did'nt talk with his generals....He and many of his generals failed to realize the nature of Partisan warfare and how to fight it.This costed us dearly when we did decide to fight it properly.
 
Redress said:
He does not have to understand all of it, he has people who do that for him and present him with advice. No one can understand all the issues a president has to face. Hell, I am a veteran and I do not understand all the issues going on in Afghanistan. I do know that Obama's military advisors are split on the issue of more troops, with the head of the army leaning towards being against more troops.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly why I say he incapable of decisive action.The man doesnt know what he's doing and needs others advice.The big problem though is that theres too many opinions flying his way and no concensus for him to build on.
 
PogueMoran said:
Rev did you really need to make two topics about this? Now I was just doing a little bit of playing the rev argument and went back through your posts relating to afghanistan. When the last administration left afghanistan high and dry and generals were calling for more troops they were virtually ignored if not fired or replaced. I didn't see much complaint from the righties on this. Back then it was he's the president and decider but now 1 general comes out while his boss disagrees and the right is now saying hey Obama is ignoring his generals. Just seems a bit hollow to me and fake.
Click to expand...



Please link my posts regarding Afghanistan. I always thought Bush should have finished A-stan before starting Iraq.


Your dishonest strawman has failed.

Perhaps you can concentrate on this president for once?
 
obvious Child said:
While that is indeed true, and as we saw, administrations not even remotely qualified that have gotten in the way totally screwed things up, I have a hard time accepting the notion that quantity supersedes quality as many people here would like us to believe. Furthermore, last I checked, the white house is not one man.

The notion that 500 pointless meetings are better then a handful of meaningful ones defies logic and reason.

If the partisan hacks had a real grasp on reality, they'd be arguing that the meeting Obama had was worthless. But given my time here, that's an incredibly large if.
Click to expand...




Once again the generic insults at specific posters starts with you. :roll:



I fully don't expect you to understand Morale, and how the CiC's actions affects said, what with you never serving and all. But in actuality, you are right the meetings are a waste of time and are just demonstrating that Obama is failing the troops in A-stan, and it is more important for you to slink around calling me a "partisan hack" than to actually think about how Obama's inaction affects the troops.
 
Strucky said:
Thats exactly why I say he incapable of decisive action.The man doesnt know what he's doing and needs others advice.The big problem though is that theres too many opinions flying his way and no concensus for him to build on.
Click to expand...

Every single president has and needs advisers. It is impossible to be an expert in every area a president has to make decisions on. That is not a problem, that is just the nature of the job.

The second half of your paragraph there is dead on. There is a real set of disagreements on what is the right course of action for Afghanistan, and not rushing to action that could be mistaken is a strength, not a weakness.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I fully don't expect you to understand Morale, and how the CiC's actions affects said, what with you never serving and all. But in actuality, you are right the meetings are a waste of time and are just demonstrating that Obama is failing the troops in A-stan, and it is more important for you to slink around calling me a "partisan hack" than to actually think about how Obama's inaction affects the troops.
Click to expand...

I think it is time to pull a trick from the right's playbook that you are reminding me of. This is actual arguments used against me by righties in Iraq.

You know, you people being critical of how the president is handling the operation over there, well the troops can see it, and it kills morale. The enemy also sees it and takes hope from you bitching about the president. Why do you hate our troops and America so?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Please link my posts regarding Afghanistan. I always thought Bush should have finished A-stan before starting Iraq.


Your dishonest strawman has failed.

Perhaps you can concentrate on this president for once?
Click to expand...
Nothing dishonest about it just pointing out your dishonest hackery creating multiple topics to bitch about how the president can multitask. How can one post nonexistent links to topics you never created bitching about your comrades dying in afghanistan while bush focused on iraq and ignored generals who wanted a greater focus on afghanistan
 
Redress said:
I think it is time to pull a trick from the right's playbook that you are reminding me of. This is actual arguments used against me by righties in Iraq.

You know, you people being critical of how the president is handling the operation over there, well the troops can see it, and it kills morale. The enemy also sees it and takes hope from you bitching about the president. Why do you hate our troops and America so?
Click to expand...




I don't believe I ever held the opposite opinion. Please stop attributing arguments to me I never made.
 
PogueMoran said:
Nothing dishonest about it just pointing out your dishonest hackery creating multiple topics to bitch about how the president can multitask. How can one post nonexistent links to topics you never created bitching about your comrades dying in afghanistan while bush focused on iraq and ignored generals who wanted a greater focus on afghanistan
Click to expand...



You are being dishonest. I am tired of your derailing, your constant lies and off topic whining. Please stay on the topic or go find someone else to have a tantrum over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom