Obama NOT anti-war

[supercar]

He's even calling for European countries to ESCALATE:

'As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO's efforts.'

Barack Obama

August 1,2007

Source

[OilFight]

He's even calling for European countries to ESCALATE:

'As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO's efforts.'

Barack Obama

August 1,2007

Source

Yup, and he said the same thing during the presidential debate. It's no secret.

[ninjadude]

Of course, because Afganistan had something to do with 9/11 (unlike iraq) and that's where the terrorist are. He has said this repeatedly. Maybe Supercar should actually read some of Obamas positions before just believing fox news. Supercar can't claim he's really mad about this.

[Fluffybunny]

Geez, going after the guys that actually attacked us...what a novel idea...

you post this as if it were some surprise, it isnt.

[MasterPo]

Geez, going after the guys that actually attacked us...what a novel idea...

you post this as if it were some surprise, it isnt.

Yea!

Forget about the ones planning to attack us. That's too hard.

I lost my keys in the kitchen but the light is soo much better in the den for looking for them.

[Fluffybunny]

If it were only as simple as you think it is.

There are so many more factors in play than you seem to think.

All kinds of people that have never even been there, or set foot there seem to think that what fox news reports is the truth of the matter without knowing the full story. Can we walk out tomorrow? No. Do we need to be there 5 or 10 more years?(or 100 years) No. Is iraq able to take care of itself with minimal support from us? yep. Are we stirring the hornets nest by being there? yes.

Our resources would be better used if they were sent to Afghanistan (Where planning is done) and out of Iraq(where they are able to take care of themselves).

We could be out of there long ago...if it were not for the buffoons in charge making repeated bad decisions. Wasting hundreds of billions of dollars and causing thousands of deaths(and tens of thousands of permanent injuries) of our soldiers(and my friends and family members, people I served with)...

So perhaps Al-Maliki's "translation" of the US withdrawal timeline having more to do with our hometown politics rather than military need is something you should look into before making assumptions of who needs to be where...and when...

There is a lot more going on than you think.

[MasterPo]

If it were only as simple as you think it is.

There are so many more factors in play than you seem to think.

I think you have answered your own question.

This war is not a "simple" 1-to-1 cause/effect campaign. Not like the Nazis in Europe or Imperial Japan in the East. It's easy to figure out when it's a country declaring war on you directly. But when it's a group that is supported by a country (or two or three or more) behind closed doors that's a new animal for us.

What's more, as 9/11 proved you don't need invading arms, fleets of ships or squadrons of planes to attack and kill thousands of people. We are in a world where a handful - perhaps just 1 - can kill thousands, perhaps millions.

If that doesn't frighten the willies out of you I don't know what will. And that is why you can't treat terrorism like an episode of CSI!

[OilFight]

I think you have answered your own question.

This war is not a "simple" 1-to-1 cause/effect campaign. Not like the Nazis in Europe or Imperial Japan in the East. It's easy to figure out when it's a country declaring war on you directly. But when it's a group that is supported by a country (or two or three or more) behind closed doors that's a new animal for us.

What's more, as 9/11 proved you don't need invading arms, fleets of ships or squadrons of planes to attack and kill thousands of people. We are in a world where a handful - perhaps just 1 - can kill thousands, perhaps millions.

If that doesn't frighten the willies out of you I don't know what will. And that is why you can't treat terrorism like an episode of CSI!

hmm... I fail to see how that means staying in Iraq longer than needed is a good idea. Your argument seems to be that we have to do something, which is what both Obama and Mccain support... doing something, what we need to decide is which something is better.

[MasterPo]

hmm... I fail to see how that means staying in Iraq longer than needed is a good idea. Your argument seems to be that we have to do something, which is what both Obama and Mccain support... doing something, what we need to decide is which something is better.

WW2 ended 60 years ago and we're still in Germany and Japan.

[Fluffybunny]

I think you have answered your own question.

This war is not a "simple" 1-to-1 cause/effect campaign. Not like the Nazis in Europe or Imperial Japan in the East. It's easy to figure out when it's a country declaring war on you directly. But when it's a group that is supported by a country (or two or three or more) behind closed doors that's a new animal for us.

What's more, as 9/11 proved you don't need invading arms, fleets of ships or squadrons of planes to attack and kill thousands of people. We are in a world where a handful - perhaps just 1 - can kill thousands, perhaps millions.

If that doesn't frighten the willies out of you I don't know what will. And that is why you can't treat terrorism like an episode of CSI!

Then you should also be aware that for every innocent person that we kill, or is killed indirectly because of our actions, another terrorist(if not many many more) is born. There is a big difference fighting soldiers in the countryside as we are in Afghanistan, and what is going on in iraq.

There are many ways to stop a terrorist. not all of them require a 500 pound bomb, but many times people with no military experience think it does...There are many tools available to us.

[MasterPo]

Then you should also be aware that for every innocent person that we kill, or is killed indirectly because of our actions, another terrorist(if not many many more) is born. There is a big difference fighting soldiers in the countryside as we are in Afghanistan, and what is going on in iraq.

That's old and tright. We're making the terrorists. Yea, sure. That's right up there with: We deserved 9/11 and many more.

Do you loath yourself and America that much??

There are many ways to stop a terrorist. not all of them require a 500 pound bomb, but many times people with no military experience think it does...There are many tools available to us.

Sure. Everyone knows 9/11 was really a cry for help from the middle east. All they really want is schools and jobs and healthcare.

Talk about a leap of faith! That we can stop murderous maniacs with clean water, schools, and industry?!

[Fluffybunny]

That's old and tright. We're making the terrorists. Yea, sure. That's right up there with: We deserved 9/11 and many more.

Do you loath yourself and America that much??

Sure. Everyone knows 9/11 was really a cry for help from the middle east. All they really want is schools and jobs and healthcare.

Talk about a leap of faith! That we can stop murderous maniacs with clean water, schools, and industry?!

You are a funny guy. Clueless but funny. Have you ever been to Iraq?

I spent 8 years in the Army as a Medic and volunteered for combat duty in Iraq and Kuwait. Do you loath your country so much that you deny the truth? Are you so willing to keep believing your version of events at the cost of the soldiers lives that go fight for you? Dont feel bad, so many of your brethren are...

Unlike the fools at fox news(and the like) who have never seen a day of military service in their life, nor a day of combat, or the death of a friend or a loved one, I have sense enough to know the reality of the situation and do not deny the truth because it frustrates me. I have spent time in the region, which is more than most here can say. I have spent a lot of time with Iraqis on both sides of the equation and understand what they use to justify future attacks. It is painful and frustrating but true. if you do not believe be, ask the US Army, they will tell you in their latest field manual on counter insurgency operations. But hey, what do they know, they are just they Army right? I am sure they are self loathing too huh?

So my opinion is from firsthand experience of not only years in the Army dealing directly with those effected by war, but also coming directly from commanders in Iraq who I served with from their early days in basic training who I have been friends with since and stay in contact with regularly who are still there. I will take my experience and the experience of the people I served with who are on the ground in Iraq now over some schmuck on fox news who has an ulterior motive for saying what he says.

So you can take your clueless assumption of what I think about the country I served proudly and take a hike.

[OilFight]

WW2 ended 60 years ago and we're still in Germany and Japan.

uh huh, but we don't have a large force there like in Iraq. No matter who we get as our next president, we will still have some troops left in iraq - just like Germany and Japan. You keep bringing up non-issues and making it seem like Mccain supports them while Obama does not

[supercar]

Of course, because Afganistan had something to do with 9/11 (unlike iraq) and that's where the terrorist are. He has said this repeatedly. Maybe Supercar should actually read some of Obamas positions before just believing fox news.

Hello? The statement I posted is from Obama's web site. The link I posted goes to to Obama's web site. Maybe you should actually click on the links provided before making ill-informed statements.

Supercar can't claim he's really mad about this

More lies. Where did I say I was mad about anything? NOWHERE.

So my opinion is from firsthand experience of not only years in the Army dealing directly with those effected by war, but also coming directly from commanders in Iraq who I served with from their early days in basic training who I have been friends with since and stay in contact with regularly who are still there.

And here's a first hand account of troops in Iraq saying they feel betrayed by anti-war protestors:

Then you should also be aware that for every innocent person that we kill, or is killed indirectly because of our actions, another terrorist(if not many many more) is born

If the war in Iraq is creating thousands of new terrorists then why haven't there been thousands of new terror attacks on the United States?

You are a funny guy. Clueless but funny.

So 'anyone who disagrees with Fluffybunny' is clueless?

So you can take your clueless assumption of what I think about the country I served proudly and take a hike.

Calling people 'clueless' and telling them to 'take a hike' violates Forum Rules:

3f. Abusive behaviour: Do not be rude, insulting, offensive, snide, obnoxious or abusive towards other members.

If you can't follow the rules of a Forum you moderate,how can you expect anyone to believe what you have to say about Iraq?

What's next? Are you going to say 'drop it' or something similar to shut down discussion of a topic you don't happen to agree with?

Edited October 13, 2008 by supercar

[MasterPo]

uh huh, but we don't have a large force there like in Iraq. No matter who we get as our next president, we will still have some troops left in iraq - just like Germany and Japan. You keep bringing up non-issues and making it seem like Mccain supports them while Obama does not

We had a large military force in Germany and Japan for many years afterwards to rebuild those countries as well as make sure any surviving elements of the old governments didn't reconstitute.

[MasterPo]

uh huh, but we don't have a large force there like in Iraq. No matter who we get as our next president, we will still have some troops left in iraq - just like Germany and Japan. You keep bringing up non-issues and making it seem like Mccain supports them while Obama does not

We had a large military force in Germany and Japan for many years afterwards to rebuild those countries as well as make sure any surviving elements of the old governments didn't reconstitute.

[MasterPo]

So you can take your clueless assumption of what I think about the country I served proudly and take a hike.

Don't even think of trying to go there with me! Of anyone on these forums I have been the the #1 supporter and lover of America and the American way of life against all the others here rushing headlong with glee to toss her under the bus!! I have been the #1 support of the war on terror, the war in Iraq, and the Bush Doctrine here. No one else! So get off your high horse, the thin air is making your dizzy.

I can give you hundreds of examples of killing the opposition stops future attacks.

Can you show me just 1 example of how building schools or hospitals or industry has stopped an aggressor?

[danielost]

He's even calling for European countries to ESCALATE:

'As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO's efforts.'

Barack Obama

August 1,2007

Source

The democrats are not anti-war. They are anti-bush willing to lose the war to make the repubs. and Bush look bad. They may also be anti-american at least some of those office seem to be.

I would really like to know if we really want a man as president who has not shown up for work since he was hired(voted in). Yes he has been there a couple of times. But he has spent his first two years trying for the higher job and not doing his current one.

[danielost]

If it were only as simple as you think it is.

There are so many more factors in play than you seem to think.

All kinds of people that have never even been there, or set foot there seem to think that what fox news reports is the truth of the matter without knowing the full story. Can we walk out tomorrow? No. Do we need to be there 5 or 10 more years?(or 100 years) No. Is iraq able to take care of itself with minimal support from us? yep. Are we stirring the hornets nest by being there? yes.

Our resources would be better used if they were sent to Afghanistan (Where planning is done) and out of Iraq(where they are able to take care of themselves).

We could be out of there long ago...if it were not for the buffoons in charge making repeated bad decisions. Wasting hundreds of billions of dollars and causing thousands of deaths(and tens of thousands of permanent injuries) of our soldiers(and my friends and family members, people I served with)...

So perhaps Al-Maliki's "translation" of the US withdrawal timeline having more to do with our hometown politics rather than military need is something you should look into before making assumptions of who needs to be where...and when...

There is a lot more going on than you think.

I agree with the bold sentance.

[MasterPo]

I would really like to know if we really want a man as president who has not shown up for work since he was hired(voted in). Yes he has been there a couple of times. But he has spent his first two years trying for the higher job and not doing his current one.

But don't forget he has experience! All 140 days of it.

[supercar]

I agree with the bold sentance.

Buffoons making bad decisions?

Congress authorized the Iraq war.

Congress funds the military.

The billions of dollars spent in Iraq have been spent by the Congress,not the President.

George Bush has not spent one dime on the Iraq war.

[danielost]

Buffoons making bad decisions?

Congress authorized the Iraq war.

Congress funds the military.

The billions of dollars spent in Iraq have been spent by the Congress,not the President.

George Bush has not spent one dime on the Iraq war.

This is true. But Bush is the one who ordered us to return territory that we had taken so that the bad guys could move back in.

[MasterPo]

I agree with the bold sentance.

For the coming Holidays please get me a copy of "The Idiots Guide to Fighting Islamic Terrorists" and "Dummies Guide to Nation Building".

[MasterPo]

This is true. But Bush is the one who ordered us to return territory that we had taken so that the bad guys could move back in.

If anything, too much expectation was given the locals would jump at the chance to be self-governed and self-determined.

I guess when you've been ground under the heel of an oppressive madman for so long picking yourself up isn't as easy as it seems.

[danielost]

For the coming Holidays please get me a copy of "The Idiots Guide to Fighting Islamic Terrorists" and "Dummies Guide to Nation Building".

Bush hasn't written the Guides yet.