Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: headhuntersix on July 19, 2008, 04:48:56 PM
-
While serving as an Army infantry platoon leader in Iraq, it was my duty to earn the trust of my men — but also to learn to trust my men. Senator Obama, evidently, has not yet discovered that a commander-in-chief has a similar dual obligation. In a recent Army Times interview, he said he had to “earn the trust of the men and women of the military,” but he has yet to show that he trusts the judgment and first-hand knowledge of the generals, commanders, and soldiers on the ground. If anything, he’s gone out of his way to refute what those in the know say. If he wants his fast-approaching trip to the Middle East to be effective, this will need to change.
Commanders and troops, including our top commander, Gen. David Petraeus, have long been reporting that the surge is working, that we must protect and expand on our fragile-yet-reversible gains, and that Iraq is the central front in the War on Terror. And yet how many times has the junior Senator from Illinois called Iraq a “failed mission” or a “civil war”? He claims Iraq “is or never was” the central War on Terror front.
He’s also told us that “we are less safe and less secure” because of our presence in Iraq. To the contrary, we have not been attacked since 9/11. There will be a stable and freely elected government in the heart of the Middle East who are allies in the Global War on Terror. These facts can no longer be denied — it is inarguable that we are safer and more secure for liberating Iraq. With over 300 people advising Obama on foreign policy and national security issues, one would think that he’d have gotten the word already.
But we shouldn’t be surprised — after all, this is an election year. It is easy, almost trendy, to make these statements. But the American people are far from ignorant, and they want to bring our troops home with a win under their belts. We all have seen the tremendous success of the surge and know that a strategic victory is close at hand. Americans also realize that we must stay on offense against terror.
Unfortunately, the former “community organizer” has adopted the reckless national-security advice of George Soros and Moveon.org in order to win his party’s nomination. Senator Obama continually speaks about the lack of judgment of those supporting victory in Iraq, yet he’s continually demonstrated his lack of judgment on the most obvious — denouncing the surge not a month after it started, insisting on timelines for withdrawal before meeting with commanders on the ground, announcing a willingness to meet with dictators and despots unconditionally.
Senator Obama deserves applause for embarking on a first trip to Afghanistan and a long-overdue trip to Iraq, but it is this soldier’s hope for the senator to put politics aside and see for himself the undeniable progress that General Petraeus’ new counter-insurgency strategy has yielded.
Senator Obama should sit down one-on-one with our battle-hardened field commanders; men like generals Petraeus and Odierno, and ask them for advice. If he does so, he will be confronted with a stark choice, perhaps the most pivotal of his career: siding with our commanders on the ground, or continuing to side with George Soros and Moveon.org.
— Captain Joel Arends served with the Army’s 1st Cavalry Division in Iraq
-
While serving as an Army infantry platoon leader in Iraq, it was my duty to earn the trust of my men — but also to learn to trust my men. Senator Obama, evidently, has not yet discovered that a commander-in-chief has a similar dual obligation. In a recent Army Times interview, he said he had to “earn the trust of the men and women of the military,” but he has yet to show that he trusts the judgment and first-hand knowledge of the generals, commanders, and soldiers on the ground. If anything, he’s gone out of his way to refute what those in the know say. If he wants his fast-approaching trip to the Middle East to be effective, this will need to change.
I started reading this, and thought it best to ask you to post references. Where exactly did you steal that article from?
I ask only because even though it says 'Obama' I wonder if perhaps the original author was not instead referring to Bush. I recall many reports of military personnel vehemently upset that Bush was not following the advise of the Generals in charge of the war. this has led to many a resignation.
So please post the links to the pages from which you plagiarized that article.
thanks. :)
-
He’s also told us that “we are less safe and less secure” because of our presence in Iraq. To the contrary, we have not been attacked since 9/11.
That's the same flawed logic that conspiracy theorists use to show 9/11 was a inside job.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA HAHAHAHAHAH
Those 2 sentences alone shows this article is written for mental midgets.
-
That's the same flawed logic that conspiracy theorists use to show 9/11 was a inside job.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA HAHAHAHAHAH
Those 2 sentences alone shows this article is written for mental midgets.
Which quite possibly explains why he chose it in the 1st place. ;D
I'd like to point out that what it claims as Obama's assessment, also happens to be the conclusion of the NIE.
it seems Obama is aware of something thatthe National Intellegence Estimate is also aware of, ...but the neotaints haven't quite grasped yet. oh well {sigh}
-
That's the same flawed logic that conspiracy theorists use to show 9/11 was a inside job.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA HAHAHAHAHAH
Those 2 sentences alone shows this article is written for mental midgets.
So since you have access to CIA material and other secure documents, can you tell us why this statement is flawed?
-
So since you have access to CIA material and other secure documents, can you tell us why this statement is flawed?
As obvious as that is, if you can't see it, i don't see the point.
Do you realize there's a white substance that been found to have been digested with in the last year by 95% of people who have heart attacks?
They found this same substance has been eaten at least 1 day a week by 80% of the people who have heart attacks?
::)
Seriously, I'm not that surprised you can't see it.
Kill or be killed.
-
Sounds like a conspiracy theory.
-
Sounds like a conspiracy theory.
::)
unbelievable.
You can't even get with the example. wow.
Have a sandwich and maybe after wards you'll figure it out.
-
"Trust we can believe in"
Where did you learn your English? Mexico?
-
::)
unbelievable.
You can't even get with the example. wow.
Have a sandwich and maybe after wards you'll figure it out.
I don't eat sandwiches, only when bulking.
-
I don't eat sandwiches, only when bulking.
Then your chance for a heart attack is significantly less if you subscribe to the "flawed cheesy sucker logic" those 2 sentences int he article demonstrate.
-
Senator Obama should sit down one-on-one with our battle-hardened field commanders; men like generals Petraeus and Odierno, and ask them for advice. If he does so, he will be confronted with a stark choice, perhaps the most pivotal of his career: siding with our commanders on the ground, or continuing to side with George Soros and Moveon.org.
::)
-
::)
As if some people have already decided Obama will not consult with his Generals if elected president.
Some people are just stupid.
-
I started reading this, and thought it best to ask you to post references. Where exactly did you steal that article from?
I ask only because even though it says 'Obama' I wonder if perhaps the original author was not instead referring to Bush. I recall many reports of military personnel vehemently upset that Bush was not following the advise of the Generals in charge of the war. this has led to many a resignation.
So please post the links to the pages from which you plagiarized that article.
thanks. :)
Your on a politics board, this no place for clueless libs. The "hair", "make up" and "nails" board is in the womens section.
-
Your on a politics board, this no place for clueless libs. The "hair", "make up" and "nails" board is in the womens section.
Too bad we don't have a "dumb fucks" board for you....
-
As if some people have already decided Obama will not consult with his Generals if elected president.
Some people are just stupid.
I think the point is he put the cart before the horse. Consult with the people in the know, then announce military strategy, not the other way around.
-
Your on a politics board, this no place for clueless libs. The "hair", "make up" and "nails" board is in the womens section.
What a shallow hateful attack.....
Mr. Hate is back!
-
Too bad we don't have a "dumb fucks" board for you....
Thats not very nice coming from a peaceloving liberal.
-
What a shallow hateful attack.....
Mr. Hate is back!
Hi Ozmo.
-
I think the point is he put the cart before the horse. Consult with the people in the know, then announce military strategy, not the other way around.
That may be the point of the article, but it uses flawed logic that appeals to the stupidest of people replacing common sense with skewed beliefs.
Aside form that: These are campaign statements from Obama. so what? It's kind of stupid to split hairs.
Have you started teaching your kids spanish yet? ;)
-
Hi Ozmo.
Hey Coach.
-
That may be the point of the article, but it uses flawed logic that appeals to the stupidest of people replacing common sense with skewed beliefs.
Aside form that: These are campaign statements from Obama. so what? It's kind of stupid to split hairs.
Not hair splitting at all. It's like Commander in Chief 101.
-
Not hair splitting at all. It's like Commander in Chief 101.
Yeah, if he was president already.
But these are campaign statements. Not presidential actions. So dissecting is kind of silly.
Teach your kids spanish yet? ;D
-
Your on a politics board, this no place for clueless libs. The "hair", "make up" and "nails" board is in the womens section.
Maybe you ought to check it out? I think it's fair to assume you know very little about "hair", "make up" or "nails", and I know that anatomically, you're not much of a woman, but hey... you couldn't possibly be any more ill-equipped to participate on that board than you've already demonstrated yourself to be on this one. GO FOR IT! :D
-
Yeah, if he was president already.
But these are campaign statements. Not presidential actions. So dissecting is kind of silly.
Teach your kids spanish yet? ;D
They're not just campaign statements. They are categorical statements about what he will do as Commander in Chief. He's making these statements in an attempt to get people to make him Commander in Chief. I think it's silly not to point out and focus on the fact he was been announcing military strategy without talking to the military.
My kids know a little Spanish, but Obama can go suck an egg. :)
-
They're not just campaign statements. They are categorical statements about what he will do as Commander in Chief. He's making these statements in an attempt to get people to make him Commander in Chief. I think it's silly not to point out and focus on the fact he was been announcing military strategy without talking to the military.
What he does when's he's commander and chief and what he says to get there are 2 different things.
Aside from that, the spanish thing was unbelievable.
-
What he does when's he's commander and chief and what he says to get there are 2 different things.
Aside from that, the spanish thing was unbelievable.
I can't believe you're saying this Ozmo. Does it matter to you what Obama says about military objectives?
-
I can't believe you're saying this Ozmo. Does it matter to you what Obama says about military objectives?
I know the difference between statements designed to get you to agree with a POV or to pander to a POV vs. statements of intent. (That's one of the things that killed BUSH #1 when he said: "Read my lips.....No new taxes")
Example:
McCain sings "Bomb Bomb" Iran. He was pandering, not expressing intent.
Obama is no idiot. However, people who read pulp crap like that and not see it for what it is are. And it appeals to them. Just like raising the Capital gains tax to 28% to "make it fair" appeals to people who earn less than 30K a year and have no net worth. they have no concept of how the economy is spurred and how lower taxes creates jobs and helps the small businessman.
Has Obama said he will not consult with his generals before he makes military decisions? No.
It's all fluff and bull dookie.
-
I know the difference between statements designed to get you to agree with a POV or to pander to a POV vs. statements of intent. (That's one of the things that killed BUSH #1 when he said: "Read my lips.....No new taxes")
Example:
McCain sings "Bomb Bomb" Iran. He was pandering, not expressing intent.
Obama is no idiot. However, people who read pulp crap like that and not see it for what it is are. And it appeals to them. Just like raising the Capital gains tax to 28% to "make it fair" appeals to people who earn less than 30K a year and have no net worth. they have no concept of how the economy is spurred and how lower taxes creates jobs and helps the small businessman.
Has Obama said he will not consult with his generals before he makes military decisions? No.
It's all fluff and bull dookie.
I understand what you're saying. One of the main reasons Bush Sr. lost my vote was breaking the "read my lips" pledge. On the other hand, I don't consider Obama's comments fluff, etc. He has based a large part of his campaign on ending the war. He said he will do this by withdrawing 1 to 2 brigades a month after he takes office. He made those comments without consulting the military. That may not bother you, but I think it's flat out irresponsible. I don't want someone like that in charge of the military.
-
I understand what you're saying. One of the main reasons Bush Sr. lost my vote was breaking the "read my lips" pledge. On the other hand, I don't consider Obama's comments fluff, etc. He has based a large part of his campaign on ending the war. He said he will do this by withdrawing 1 to 2 brigades a month after he takes office. He made those comments without consulting the military. That may not bother you, but I think it's flat out irresponsible. I don't want someone like that in charge of the military.
I see what you are saying and it does seem irresponsible.
But when you consider that a large part of Americans are tired of war that statement is appealing.
People who support Obama will see the statement partially as an "intent" to get our troops out of there even though it may not be logistically possible it may not matter to them if it ends up taking twice as long.
While McCain supporters will see it as irresponsible and naive not to consult the JCS and others before he makes statements like that.
A statement like that is sure to get fire from the opposition, but if you want to win a presidency you can't make too many vanilla statements. You can't be afraid to rile some people up.
-
I see what you are saying and it does seem irresponsible.
But when you consider that a large part of Americans are tired of war that statement is appealing.
People who support Obama will see the statement partially as an "intent" to get our troops out of there even though it may not be logistically possible it may not matter to them if it ends up taking twice as long.
While McCain supporters will see it as irresponsible and naive not to consult the JCS and others before he makes statements like that.
A statement like that is sure to get fire from the opposition, but if you want to win a presidency you can't make too many vanilla statements. You can't be afraid to rile some people up.
Agree.
-
9/11 was a inside job.
Duh.
-
Jag, Vets for Freedom...not douchbags for appeasement..or fags for surrender. Or foreign worthless libs for whining and socialism.
-
not douchbags for appeasement..
Please show Bush a little more respect.
He HAD to give a million barrels of oil to North Korea. They have WMD.
He HAD to send his #3 man to a table with Iran. They fired missiles.
It's not 'appeasement'. It's simply giving in.
-
Duh.
Interesting this was brought up. Using "flawed logic" so to speak, how could they pull of the greatest hoax in history in 9/11 but not be able to make usre there was WMD's in Iraq?
;D
-
Interesting this was brought up. Using "flawed logic" so to speak, how could they pull of the greatest hoax in history in 9/11 but not be able to make usre there was WMD's in Iraq?
;D
The majority of people polled don't believe the official story.
"Pulled it off" would mean that people don't find out. If you kill your wife, and after 2 weeks the police investigation leads to your arrest, you didn't "pull it off". You just didn't get found out right away. The fact that the majority of americans (and worldwide) polled believe it was an inside job show that part of the act, deception, only worked for a short time. Did it get the war in afghanistan for caspian oil starter? Sure did. bush was bragging about our success with caspian oil reserves in his Tuesday press conference. post-911 invasion led to our bases setting up camp on those ;)
Some believe that as world govts discovered the truth about 911 (didn't take long), they were very observant about WMD. Anything faked would have likely been discredited, causing a bigger smoking gun than no smoking gun.
-
The majority of people polled don't believe the official story.
"Pulled it off" would mean that people don't find out. If you kill your wife, and after 2 weeks the police investigation leads to your arrest, you didn't "pull it off". You just didn't get found out right away. The fact that the majority of americans (and worldwide) polled believe it was an inside job show that part of the act, deception, only worked for a short time. Did it get the war in afghanistan for caspian oil starter? Sure did. bush was bragging about our success with caspian oil reserves in his Tuesday press conference. post-911 invasion led to our bases setting up camp on those ;)
Some believe that as world govts discovered the truth about 911 (didn't take long), they were very observant about WMD. Anything faked would have likely been discredited, causing a bigger smoking gun than no smoking gun.
What people believe? People believed the world was flat at one point. People are stupid as a whole.
That's not what this is about. This is about the question of whether a group in our government is smart and skilled enough to pull off the greatest hoax in history but not being able to put WMD's in Iraq.
That destroys any 9/11 inside job crap.
;D
-
Duh.
::)
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
-
::)
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
making fun like that used to fly.
Until all the military folks came forward in the last year, demanding an investigation.
They know their shit, and they know that speaking about 911 costs them advancement in the military.
however, they do feel very strongly that it was allowed to happen, and that many things we were told happened that day, could not have.
I don't trust CTers making youtube videos. When military personnel join hundreds of scientists and physicists, and they all agree there are lies in the official story, well, it kinda makes me want a second investigation.