TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Without Bush, who really cares?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Without Bush, who really cares?

post #1 of 12
9/29/09 at 1:27pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/po...-62427012.html

Quote:
So far this month, 38 American troops have been killed in Afghanistan. For all of 2009, the number is 220 -- more than any other single year and more than died in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 combined.
In NINE months more of our military has died in Afghanistan than in the first four years of the war.

And Barack will not send reinforcements, because it may hurt him politically with his fan base. Pathetic
Reply
post #2 of 12
9/29/09 at 5:54pm
This is very interesting. We were just talking about it the other day.

I don't see any outrage over these deaths by the public or the media. Back when President Bush was in office, there were constant protests about the war deaths in Iraq. Now it's just...shrug, uh huh, yeah, okay. What exactly is the difference?
Reply
post #3 of 12
9/29/09 at 6:10pm
Just another nail in the coffin of the already dead and buried corpse of "Media Impartiality."
Reply
post #4 of 12
10/5/09 at 10:14am
Thread Starter 
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6860616.ece


Quote:
Worst losses for a year as Taleban storm Nato outpost

Eight American soldiers and two Afghan policemen were killed, with many injured. It was the worst attack on Nato forces in 14 months, and one of the deadliest battles of the eight-year war. The insurgents seized at least 20 Afghan policemen whose fate last night remained unclear.

The attack came at a crucial juncture in the war, with President Obama soon to decide whether to accept a request by General Stanley McChrystal, commander of the 100,000-strong US and Nato force in Afghanistan, for 40,000 extra troops, or to reduce the counter-insurgency operation against the Taleban and focus on al-Qaeda.
While Barack is fiddling around with the Olympics and who knows what else, our guys are dying by the dozen.
Reply
post #5 of 12
10/5/09 at 1:03pm
Another point. Remember Cindy Sheehan? Seemed like she was in the news daily protesting President Bush and the war. You know what, she's still out there and she's still protesting. Oddly, you don't see anything about her anymore. At least, I don't.

This is a bit dated, but has some interesting comments.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...53628177.html#

Quote:
After receiving the email, I asked Sheehan to give me a call, so I could verify that the note in fact came from her. She did, and we discussed her plans to protest next week in Martha's Vineyard, where President Obama will be vacationing. "I think people are starting to wake up to the fact that even if they supported Obama, he doesn't represent much change," Sheehan said. "There are people still out here who oppose the war and Obama's policies, but it seems like the big organizations with the big lists aren't here."


I asked Sheehan about the fact that the press seems to have lost interest in her and her cause. "It's strange to me that you mention it," she said. "I haven't stopped working. I've been protesting every time I can, and it's not covered. But the one time I did get a lot of coverage was when I protested in front of George Bush's house in Dallas in June. I don't know what to make of it. Is the press having a honeymoon with Obama? I know the Left is."
Reply
post #6 of 12
10/5/09 at 5:17pm
I heard about the casualties from that attack and the first person I thought of was one of my best friends who is currently over there with the Marines. He leaves Afghanistan in eight days. Thanks to Facebook I get to communicate with him at least a couple times a week. He said General McChrsytal is an "idiot". I'd share more but this isn't the thread for it.
Reply
post #7 of 12
10/6/09 at 1:31am
fish or cut bait. You cannot leave our men and women over there with insufficient back up. It is a slap in the face to every family who has a loved one putting their lives on the line for us. But what do you expect from a "community organizer". He is so out of his league. Either send in more troops to get this done, or get out all together.
Reply
post #8 of 12
10/6/09 at 8:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
While Barack is fiddling around with the Olympics and who knows what else, our guys are dying by the dozen.
I heard a local guy talking to our local late-night radio host last night from Afghanistan. He was in this fire fight, and he said it was a real surprise. It was a wonder there weren't more killed; he said the Taliban had 700 fighters. The helicopters and A-10's were late getting in.
Reply
post #9 of 12
10/6/09 at 1:18pm
Thread Starter 
Now, I understand that when campaigning for POTUS, people make promises that they find difficult to keep once they take office. But Barack, during the campaign, made Afghanistan a HUGE deal, he was emphatic that he would make sure we won in Afghanistan and captured Osama Bin Laden, no matter what. "Whatever it takes", he said. And he has increased troop strenght there since taking office, it just hasn't been enough.
Reply
post #10 of 12
10/9/09 at 8:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Now, I understand that when campaigning for POTUS, people make promises that they find difficult to keep once they take office. But Barack, during the campaign, made Afghanistan a HUGE deal, he was emphatic that he would make sure we won in Afghanistan and captured Osama Bin Laden, no matter what. "Whatever it takes", he said. And he has increased troop strenght there since taking office, it just hasn't been enough.
Maybe the Brits & the Russians could have told us a thing or two, about trying to conquer Afghanistan....
Reply
post #11 of 12
10/12/09 at 1:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsknowme View Post
Maybe the Brits & the Russians could have told us a thing or two, about trying to conquer Afghanistan....
The U.S. knows all about it; they did their damndest to make sure the Soviets were immersed in Afghanistan's Civil War in the 80's.

The really sad part about Afghanistan is the amount of blood that was on the U.S.'s hands with regards to the region, even before this latest incursion. The unfortunate irony is that in establishing Afghanistan (via the Mujahideen) as a bludgeoning stick against the Soviets, the U.S. has a lot to do with its current destabilization. All because of an ideological dispute - The Cold War - that well once had us all flag-waving nationalists, in retrospect has become murky in definition.

Now, so much of that U.S. blood is its own. A very sad tale that maybe never had to be told, if the U.S. had perhaps taken any interest in the region after the Soviet War, instead of it lying in ruins. Not the greatest P.R. move.

EDIT: My point I suppose, is that although right now this issue is about Obama, and for the past 8 years it's been about Bush, it's one of those issues where there's a lot more than meets the eye; and trying to better a situation decades after you've established your legacy with it is a hell of a tough task.
Reply
post #12 of 12
10/12/09 at 6:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsknowme View Post
Maybe the Brits & the Russians could have told us a thing or two, about trying to conquer Afghanistan....
Are we trying to conquer Afghanistan?

The Mongols came the closest to truly conquering what has been known since 1747 as Afghanistan. Even Alexander the Great never completely conquered the region.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Without Bush, who really cares?