Text of the speech here.
And now I turn my attention to a phone call from Iraq.
God help me, I agree with Dennis Kucinich when he explained to Bill the Buffoon O'Reilly that liberal and conservative mean nothing as regards this issue.
Dull, very dull! In summation, "I'd like to announce tonight we're going to begin the surge before we end it!"
The faces on some of the cadets and oldtimers were priceless. The Candy Man wants it both ways, but most of all he wants ALL THAT MONEY we use to fight these wars so we can do some NATION BUILDING (income redistribution) here at home. Be afraid America, be very afraid!
No use of the word "victory" and one use of "Muslim" in reference to the forging of "a new beginning between America and the Muslim World – one that recognizes our mutual interest in breaking a cycle of conflict" - a cycle of conflict that began when the muslim pirates of the Barbary Coast declared war on the US in 1801... though the declaration was just a formalization of a practice that had begun hundreds of years prior.
I hope the muslims are as interested in breaking their cycle of conflict as our, um, (cough, cough) Commander in Chief.
Oh, jeez, The Distributist. Are we going to have to start paying the Moslem pirates protection money again? I thought those days were over!
The commentary from Chris Matthews: "I didn't see alot of warmth in that crowd out there...the president...went to the enemy camp tonight..."
Subject: Tell Obama "No More War", join us in DC on Dec. 12
From: "Williams for Governor Campaign"
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009
Tell President Obama "No more Wars"
Join us at the Rally in DC on Dec. 12
Hello Friends and Supporters,
President Obama has just announced he will be sending another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. That's 30,000 more American men and women ripped from their communities and families, and placed in harm's way, to fight a war that history proves cannot be won.
We cannot sit back and allow this escalation to occur.
Next week, I will travel with other Mainers to Washington DC where I will stand with 2008 Green Party Presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney, activist blogger and author David Swanson, and many others in a Stop the Escalation Rally in Lafayette Park. This rally, organized by End US Wars, will take place from 11 am to 4 pm. on Saturday, Dec. 12, 2009. For more information go to http://www.enduswars.org or contact organizer Laurie Dobson, 207-604-8988, email@example.com
Many of us will be traveling to DC by bus, leaving from Portland at 8:30 p.m. Friday night, Dec. 11. I urge you to join us.
As I said yesterday in a statement issued by the Green Party of the U.S.:
This escalation is what Obama's fabled bi-partisanship gets us -- more of the same.
What we need is partisanship, with a strong Green Party presence in this country, since we are the only party that was against the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan from day one.
Please consider joining us on this bus trip and attending the rally. We need to get as many Mainers as possible to attend. It is so important that we show this administration that we are not going be be any easier on it than we were on the Bush administration, because the fact of the matter is that they are acting no differently.
Following is the information about the bus that will be leaving from Portland on Friday night, December 11. Please join me and others who are working to stop this escalation.
Obama's need to appease is going to tear him apart.
Americans are far less approving of President Obama's handling of the situation in Afghanistan than they have been in recent months, with 35% currently approving, down from 49% in September and 56% in July.
I certainly hope that it does not shock you that Matthews considers the Americans who lay their very lives on the line for his right to agree with the Administration free speech "the enemy."
It doesn't suprise me at all, Michelle. I didn't think that level of idiocy needed further comment.
I do agree with Matthews on one thing, the emotion in that room was pure hostility, but noone in that room was going to cry out "You Lie!". Troops don't take to being belittled and talked down to, especially with the continual high nose act The One was pulling. I read a comment somewhere that the teleprompters were set too high up, I disagree, that IS The One's attitude toward the military, as Matthew's stated.
Looks like his strongest support is for his energy policy.
Uh... what IS his energy policy?
Obama's energy policy is to blame any problems that may arise from energy shortages (because we stopped looking for new practical sources of energy a long time ago) on Big Oil and on the American people for their selfishness at wanting air conditioning, cars not made out of tinfoil, and a better life for their children and grandchildren. Oh, yes, and for causing (nonexistant) global warming. And "carbon pollution", as nonsensical a notion that is.
Excerpt of a letter on National Review Online from a 1990 West Point graduate who comments on Chris Matthews' absolutely bizarre comment about West Point being the "enemy camp."
West Point may be the only place in America where President Obama can simultaneously trash George W. Bushand announce an increase in troop levels in Afghanistan and not be booed from the right or the left.
I kept wondering why Obama went to West Point to give this speech instead of Congress. The answer finally came out...
The academy commanders did their best to ensure that Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama's speech would be well-received. Just minutes before the president took the stage inside Eisenhower Hall, the gathered cadets were asked to respond "enthusiastically" to the speech. But it didn't help: The soldiers' reception was cool.
If he had that speech at a joint session of Congress, he would have been booed on both sides. Can't having the Fool actually look like a fool.
Dear heavens! Can you imagine what the audience would have looked like had they not been asked to respond enthusiastically?
I believe that West Point was actually being used as a backdrop. Where Ronald Reagan was known as "The Great Communicator," Obama shall always be, in my mind, "The Great Prop Master."
Watching the One's speech and the reaction of the captive audience to it reminded me of the old line about driving down a country lane and finding a turtle on a fence post. No one's sure what he's doing and damned if he knows what to do next.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 2, 2009
Libertarians opposed to new war plans for Afghanistan
WASHINGTON - The Libertarian Party (LP) today expressed its opposition to the Afghanistan war plans announced by President Barack Obama last night.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, said, "Rush Limbaugh should buy Obama a nice cigar. The liberal president has done exactly what the conservative leader wanted: escalate the war."
William Redpath, Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), commented, "This is further evidence that the differences between Republicans and Democrats are, at most, rhetorical. This president, whose votes made him the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, has just announced an escalation of a foreign war. His campaign promise of 'Change' now sounds a lot more hollow."
Redpath continued, "Some congressional Democrats may make a rhetorical show of opposing Obama's decision, but that is all it will be. Obama is guaranteed to get the additional troops and funding that he wants."
Redpath continued, "Instead, Congress should re-assert its authority in matters of war, by passing legislation that terminates the president's authorization to make war in Afghanistan, and that calls for an orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. If the president vetoes it, Congress should override the veto."
In September 2008, the LNC adopted a resolution calling for a military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Benedict commented further, "One problem with the president's strategy is that it demonstrates a hyperinflated fear of terrorists. When we act worried and threatened, we make the terrorists feel like they're having their intended effect, which encourages them to keep doing what they're doing."
Redpath continued, "According to the Cato Institute, 'the U.S. military's counterinsurgency doctrine says that stabilizing a country the size of Afghanistan would require far more troops than the most wild-eyed hawk has proposed: about 600,000 troops.' President Obama is proposing to put a total of about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, which won't come close to accomplishing anything."
Redpath concluded, "The president's speech was surprisingly content-free. The speech was nearly all platitudes, which is typical for politicians, particularly presidents. Will someone please restore substance to American political discourse?"
For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP executive director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.
The LP is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.
Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee
* DECEMBER 2, 2009
Obama Bets Big on Troop Surge
Extra 30,000 U.S. Soldiers for 18 Months; Republicans Say Timetable Poses Risk
By PETER SPIEGEL, JONATHAN WEISMAN and YOCHI J. DREAZEN
WEST POINT, N.Y. -- Such a firm date for troop drawdowns was unexpected. Administration officials hope that will pressure Kabul to reform its notoriously corrupt government. At the same time, it allows the White House to begin bringing soldiers home ahead of the 2012 elections.
...Obama appeared to be trying to thread a middle path...trying to limit U.S. involvement.
[Afghan commander] Gen. McChrystal...hadn't proposed a deadline for withdrawals.
I have spoken to several active duty servicemen and women, and none are happy about this plan. Most are totally baffled. And none feel very confident with the safety factor.
A cadet uses his time productively at West Point while Obama drones on....
Obama the Omnipotent. Bush had no strategy for 8 years , but Obama is going to win the war in 18 months by giving his self appointed general 3/4 of the troops he asked for and telling the enemy when we will leave . He'll win by saying "we win" and then we'll come home. And there is no similarity to Vietnam! Watch and see if there will be a slaughter of U,S. supporters after we leave just like Nam and Cambodia that the press will quickly dismiss if it is covered at all.Hopefully the cando spirit of our great fighting men and women can still turn things around despite Obama's lack of strategy.
Is it even remotely possible that the people who have waited over a thousand years to get to a position of strength to once again move toward world domination might be willing to wait another 18 months to take over a country?
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 20:17:00 -0500
From: Vice President Joe Biden
Last night, President Obama laid out his plan to defend our national interest by refocusing our efforts on three clear goals: defeating al Qaeda, stabilizing Pakistan, and breaking the Taliban's momentum in Afghanistan.
To achieve these goals, the President has authorized the rapid deployment of 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan, with a firm commitment to begin bringing our troops home in 2011.
It's a clean break from the failed Afghanistan policy of the Bush administration, and a new, focused strategy that can succeed.
Please take a moment to watch the President's address to the nation and read more about his plan.
Our new strategy ends the era of blank checks for Afghanistan's leaders, facilitates a responsible transition to Afghan security forces, and begins bringing our troops home in 2011.
Please take a moment to listen to President Obama outline his plan -- and pass this along to anyone you know who wants to learn more:
Vice President Joe Biden
Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
Bill Ayers is "appalled and alarmed" about Mr. Obama's escalation of the war and setting benchmarks.
* REVIEW & OUTLOOK
* DECEMBER 2, 2009
The Afghan Escalation
Now the President needs a political surge to rally public support.
One of the media's least accurate tropes is that, with the President's speech last night, Afghanistan is now "Obama's war." No, it isn't. Nations go to war, not merely Administrations...
We support...Obama's decision...notwithstanding our concerns about [his] determination and his party[‘s] to see it through. Now that he's committed, so is the country... [N]ations should never start (much less escalate) wars they don't intend to win.
Whoa! Not so fast. President Karzai and Secretary Gates agree that Obama's "plan" doesn't allow enough time.
"For a number of years, maybe for another 15 to 20 years, Afghanistan will not be able to sustain a force of that capability and nature with its own resources," Mr. Karzai said...Speaking with President Karzai at a news conference, Secretary Gates indicated he was not surprised by that statement, but hopes it will not take that long.
"President Karzai says ambitious plans for a large, modern Afghan army are simply more than the country can afford for a long time. " the quote before Michelle's
Why does Obama/McCain think that the US can afford it?
Yes it will take a long expensive effort to convince kill 50% of the population so the other 50% are secure in their civil war. A waste of 20 billion in the new surge and more lives on both sides, another expensive effort in the eventual demise of empire.
We are able to close down Brunswick Naval Base but can't close a base overseas to save our soul, why is that? Because obviously that is where the security? is ?
Presenter: Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates December 11, 2009
Secretary Gates Conducts Town Hall Meeting at Forward Operating Base Warrior, Kirkuk, Iraq
Q Mr. Secretary. I apologize. Staff Sergeant Gomez, Expeditionary, Logistics Readiness.
My question is, as far as ideally, how long do we want to stay in Afghanistan? And realistically how long will we stay in Afghanistan, do you believe, sir?
SEC. GATES: Well, I suspect I speak for most people, both in the service and most Americans, in saying we don't want to be there one day longer than we have to be. And I was at pains to make clear to them when I was in Kabul that, you know, we have no desire to be an occupying force.
We're the first -- we and our partners, international partners, are the first foreign military forces in the whole history of Afghanistan to be there on behalf of the Afghans, instead of trying to conquer them.
I think that we -- I think we face several years in Afghanistan. I think General McChrystal is pretty confident that with the additional forces he's being given that he will be able to reverse the momentum of the Taliban, prevent them from occupying territory and degrade their capabilities, within the next 18 months or so.
That's not the end of the fight. But it certainly will change the way it looks. And I -- that -- the gradual -- the drawdown that we will have after July of 2011 will be -- will be a gradual one. It will be conditions-based. Just as we turned over provinces here in Iraq to provincial Iraqi control, we'll do the same thing in Afghanistan, district by district, province by province.
But I think, you know, we're going to be there not just for the next 18 months, but beyond, for some period of time, I think, until we can degrade the Taliban far enough that an enhanced Afghan security force can handle those guys while we then retire as we have here to, first, tactical and then strategic overwatch, and also focus our efforts on trying to put an end to al Qaeda.
So it's going to be a while, and it's going to be a tough fight, particularly in the next -- in the next 12 to 18 months. And frankly I think it will look a lot like the surge here in the first six or eight months. And the first six or eight months of 2007 were pretty tough here. But then I think in the longer term it's going to get a lot better.