Remember grim milestones?

[ArlJim78]

It's all the media could talk about before 2009, now not so much.

Thank God W Isn't President Anymore (http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/10/01/thank-god-w-isnt-president-anymore/) Walter Russell Mead
excerpt:




The news from Afghanistan is grim. With the latest round of deaths, we pass a milestone: 2,000 US combatants have died (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/us-military-deaths-in-afghanistan-hit-2000-after-11-years-of-war/2012/09/30/af9fd654-0ac9-11e2-9eea-333857f6a7bd_story.html) in what is now the longest war in American history. The milestone has been reached just as the surge in troops has come to an end without achieving the goals of pacifying the
country or even launching peace talks with the Taliban. Our Afghan “allies”
remain as corrupt and ineffectual as ever, with the added wrinkle that the most dangerous place in Afghanistan for US troops these days seems to be the neighborhood of US-armed and trained Afghan forces, who are shooting and blowing up their nominal allies faster than the Taliban can do it.

This is all bad news and very disturbing, but there is a crumb of comfort to
be had. Because these failures happened on President Obama’s watch, the
mainstream press isn’t particularly interested in relentless, non-stop scrutiny
of the unpleasant news. If George W. Bush were president now, and had ordered the surge and was responsible for the strategic decisions taken and not taken in Afghanistan over the last four years, the mainstream press would be rubbing our noses in his miserable failures and inexcusable blunders 24/7. The New York Times and the Washington Post would be treating us to pictures of every fallen soldier. The PBS Newshour would feature nightly post-mortems on “America’s failed strategies in the Afghan War” and every arm-chair strategist in America would be filling the op-ed pages with the brilliant 20/20 hindsight ideas that our pathetic, clueless, failed president was too dumb and too cocky to have had.


so where are all the "Obama lied" liberals? he told us a surge was needed and look at the results. something like 70% of the war casualties have come under his watch and we've acheived nothing. Of course when your closest advisors are on The View, Beyonce, Pimp with a limp, and David Letterman what can you expect.

[PaceAdvantage]

Of course, there is much truth in what you quoted. But we're looked at as racist, nutty partisans for even bringing it up...what really should be looked at are the "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" Obama supporters and the media which enables them...

[NJ Stinks]

Here's the reason why. Iraq was the wrong war. Afghanistan was the right war.

I'll let you figure out who lied.

Pretty simple stuff.

[bigmack]

Here's the reason why. Iraq was the wrong war. Afghanistan was the right war.

I'll let you figure out who lied.

Pretty simple stuff.
If it's so simple how is it you STILL don't get the video that PA has posted repeatedly?

[johnhannibalsmith]

This is, more than anything, just what I don't understand about Obama lovers. They gobbled up the "Bush Regime", oppressive society, civil liberty destroyer mantra and now just simply ignore that not only did he do nothing to deviate from all that rhetoric he used to enchant the voters, but he made most of it a whole lot worse. But he does talk more nicely and puts less emphasis on war and stuff, so I guess that means it doesn't happen if we just ignore it happening.

[lsbets]

he told us a surge was needed and look at the results.

The results are we blew it. Afghanistan is hopelessly lost and we need to get out of there now. There is zero chance that we can fix it now. The one guy in the world who has proven that he can run a counter insurgency (and did so very successfully in Iraq) was viewed as a potential rival in the White House and was promoted to a very quiet job, very far from Afghanistan. We might have blown it anyway, but Obama's insecurity removed the best man from the job and greatly decreased our chances of success. A leader is secure enough to have the best people in the jobs and give them credit for doing the job. A real leader is not scared of having subordinates emerge as rivals in the future. Obama is a disgrace.

[ElKabong]

What Lsbets said.

[Tom]

It is obvious to that once reporting the deaths was no longer a political tool, the MSM stopped. This is the state our country is in with a worthless press reporting only what benefits their political agenda and lying when
they have to.

Not one more American life, not one more American dollar, wasted on these animals. Obama has succeeded in snatching defeat fro the jaws of victory.

And some morons are applauding his foreign policy.
Some people celebrate their stupidity...some of them post here.

[bigmack]

Obama is a disgrace.
I reserve the right to deduce you're saying that as a result of BO being half-Black, until you convince me otherwise.

You're being watched.

What do you have to say about them apples?

[NJ Stinks]

This is, more than anything, just what I don't understand about Obama lovers. They gobbled up the "Bush Regime", oppressive society, civil liberty destroyer mantra and now just simply ignore that not only did he do nothing to deviate from all that rhetoric he used to enchant the voters, but he made most of it a whole lot worse. But he does talk more nicely and puts less emphasis on war and stuff, so I guess that means it doesn't happen if we just ignore it happening.

GWB started the war in Afghanistan in 2001.
GWB started the war in Iraq in 2003.

Obama withdrew from Iraq in 2011.
Obama is withdrawing from Afghanistan in 2014.

I wish Obama would withdraw from Afghanistan now too. But the elephant in the room is that GWB started the wars and Obama is ending them. You can't change that fact by claiming Obama made Bush's mistakes worse.

Obama is cleaning up GWB's messes. Again.

[DJofSD]

What was the name of the women that was camped outside of Bush's ranch, protesting the war? Where is she now?

[elysiantraveller]

GWB started the war in Afghanistan in 2001.
GWB started the war in Iraq in 2003.

Obama withdrew from Iraq in 2011.
Obama is withdrawing from Afghanistan in 2014.

I wish Obama would withdraw from Afghanistan now too. But the elephant in the room is that GWB started the wars and Obama is ending them. You can't change that fact by claiming Obama made Bush's mistakes worse.

Obama is cleaning up GWB's messes. Again.

Give me one clear example of Obama going against the Bush Doctrine... just one...

We've had this discussion during the neo-con convo...

[elysiantraveller]

This is, more than anything, just what I don't understand about Obama lovers. They gobbled up the "Bush Regime", oppressive society, civil liberty destroyer mantra and now just simply ignore that not only did he do nothing to deviate from all that rhetoric he used to enchant the voters, but he made most of it a whole lot worse. But he does talk more nicely and puts less emphasis on war and stuff, so I guess that means it doesn't happen if we just ignore it happening.

Denial is a powerful thing... Obama is Bush 2.0 on foreign policy.

[NJ Stinks]

Give me one clear example of Obama going against the Bush Doctrine... just one...

We've had this discussion during the neo-con convo...

Was Bush going to reform healthcare?

Didn't Bush want to privatize Social Security?

Was Bush going to bail out the auto industry?

There's three off the top of my head. If the American public believes Obama is GWB II, Obama loses in November.

[elysiantraveller]

Was Bush going to reform healthcare?

Didn't Bush want to privatize Social Security?

Was Bush going to bail out the auto industry?

There's three off the top of my head. If the American public believes Obama is GWB II, Obama loses in November.

ugh...

:bang:

...nevermind...

[NJ Stinks]

Denial is a powerful thing... Obama is Bush 2.0 on foreign policy.

I missed the foreign policy post.

If you think Obama would have taken us to war with Iraq, I think you are wrong.

Is that a big enough foreign policy for you?

[elysiantraveller]

I missed the foreign policy post.

If you think Obama would have taken us to war with Iraq, I think you are wrong.

Is that a big enough foreign policy for you?

No because its not an answer... no matter how you try to twist it.

I am asking you to cite a clear example of where Obama has deviated from the Bush Doctrine...

I have no idea if Obama would have pursued war with Iraq... What I do know is that he hasn't deviated our foreign policy one iota.

I await the example.

[johnhannibalsmith]

ugh...

:bang:

...nevermind...

Laf... that's why I just passed on the argument.

[Tom]

See Post #8.......

[NJ Stinks]

No because its not an answer... no matter how you try to twist it.

I am asking you to cite a clear example of where Obama has deviated from the Bush Doctrine...

I have no idea if Obama would have pursued war with Iraq... What I do know is that he hasn't deviated our foreign policy one iota.

I await the example.

Twisting it? That's a good one. Read the link attached. It clearly explains that Obama was against the biggest Bush foreign policy doctrine of them all.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2006/11/obama_flexes_an/

[ArlJim78]

No because its not an answer... no matter how you try to twist it.

I am asking you to cite a clear example of where Obama has deviated from the Bush Doctrine...

I have no idea if Obama would have pursued war with Iraq... What I do know is that he hasn't deviated our foreign policy one iota.

I await the example.
not one iota? you think Bush would have demanded Mubarak step down, or went to war in Libya to topple the Colonel? or distanced ourselves from Israel, or ordered a war surge in Afghanistan?
What about backing down on missile defense to appease Russia, or unilaterally moving to disarm our nuclear stockpile while setting a goal of zero for ourselves?
I think there has been more than an iota of difference.

[elysiantraveller]

Twisting it? That's a good one. Read the link attached. It clearly explains that Obama was against the biggest Bush foreign policy doctrine of them all.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2006/11/obama_flexes_an/

I don't care what Obama "the candidate" said. I care about what Obama "the President" has DONE.

One example of how his foreign policy has changed course from the Bush Doctrine...

You can't name one significant shift in our policy under Obama... thats my point...

Since you're googling try googling the question I asked you...

[bigmack]

I am asking you to cite a clear example of where Obama has deviated from the Bush Doctrine...
Looks like you have two fronts going on. Not an enviable situation.

[elysiantraveller]

not one iota? you think Bush would have demanded Mubarak step down, YES or went to war in Libya to topple the Colonel? YES or distanced ourselves from Israel, HAVE WE? or ordered a war surge in Afghanistan? YES What about backing down on missile defense to appease Russia, WHERE? or unilaterally moving to disarm our nuclear stockpile while setting a goal of zero for ourselves? WRONG I think there has been more than an iota of difference.

Keep listening to Rush. I hear he spreads truth...

[elysiantraveller]

Looks like you have two fronts going on. Not an enviable situation.

Not really these are Rush talking points... Rush is an idiot.

Foreign aid to Israel is at a all time high. We have employed Missile Defense throughout Europe, the Pacific Rim, and the Middle East.

As far as troop surges (Bush invented them), and toppling regimes... I think its pretty safe to say the previous Administration was a fan of those. ;)

The point I am trying to make with NJ is to find a clear disconnect between the two administrations... there really isn't one.

Go ahead and try if you want to as well...

[bigmack]

Go ahead and try if you want to as well...
I trust you'll be able to rattle this off without reference, unlike 101% of the public, INCLUDING SarahP, but could you 'thumbnail sketch' The Bush Doctrine for me?

I suspect you'll hold the front with NJ (what a surprise) but find fortification on the AJim front, problematic.

[elysiantraveller]

I trust you'll be able to rattle this off without reference, unlike 101% of the public, INCLUDING SarahP, but could you 'thumbnail sketch' The Bush Doctrine for me?

I suspect you'll hold the front with NJ (what a surprise) but find fortification on the AJim front, problematic.

A foreign policy aimed at keeping America safe by aggressively pursuing non-state actors wherever they may be while at the same time spreading Democracy throughout the world by using overt and covert force to topple unfriendly regimes.

In a nutshell.

[delayjf]

Iraq was the wrong war.

Hinesight is 20 / 20. But you might recall that Congress approved the resolution to go to war in Iraq. And that Dems like Pelosi etc also made claims that Saddam has WMD.

I would like to point out that perhaps we didn't find stock piles of WMD in Iraq, we did motivate Libya to give up their stockpiles, given the situation in the mideast today - Thank God.

[bigmack]

spreading Democracy throughout the world by using overt and covert force to topple unfriendly regimes.
2009–2010 Iranian election protests.

You're saying Bush would NOT have handled that situation differently than B.O.?

[ElKabong]

Twisting it? That's a good one. Read the link attached. It clearly explains that Obama was against the biggest Bush foreign policy doctrine of them all.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2006/11/obama_flexes_an/

trying to be honest here, NJ. I can't really buy into "Obama wouldn't have attacked Iraq", when he stated he was going to close down Getmo "right now". Obviously Obama changed his mind with info available to him after taking the oath. Why would anyone believe Iraq would be different for him?

Everybody's an all Pro QB on Monday morning. Obama moreso than you or America would like to admit

[elysiantraveller]

2009–2010 Iranian election protests.

You're saying Bush would NOT have handled that situation differently than B.O.?

No, there were election protests during his administration, in 2005, as well.

[PaceAdvantage]

Give me one clear example of Obama going against the Bush Doctrine... just one...

We've had this discussion during the neo-con convo...Hey look...NJ Stinks is just like Sarah Palin...neither knows what the Bush Doctrine is...

Hey NJ...can I call you a dope? After all, you just done a Palin... :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

I don't care what Obama "the candidate" said. I care about what Obama "the President" has DONE.

One example of how his foreign policy has changed course from the Bush Doctrine...

You can't name one significant shift in our policy under Obama... thats my point...

Since you're googling try googling the question I asked you...

You said Obama is just like Bush when it comes to foreign policy. I pointed out Obama never would have went to war with Iraq in the first place. That Obama just cleaned up Bush's Iraq foreign policy blunder and eventually withdrew our troops. You come back and claim that's irrelevant. Like Obama was just following Bush's policy in Iraq because Obama is just like Bush.

And you say I'm hard to talk to.

And PA, if Obama never would have invaded in the first place, that is going against the Bush Doctrine when it comes to Iraq.

[lsbets]

That Obama just cleaned up Bush's Iraq foreign policy blunder and eventually withdrew our troops. You come back and claim that's irrelevant. Like Obama was just following Bush's policy in Iraq because Obama is just like Bush.


Obama was just following Bush's timeline for withdrawal from Iraq. The plan was in place before Obama was elected. He didn't change it, and in this case he didn't **** Iraq up like he did Afghanistan.

[elysiantraveller]

You said Obama is just like Bush when it comes to foreign policy. I pointed out Obama never would have went to war with Iraq in the first place. That Obama just cleaned up Bush's Iraq foreign policy blunder and eventually withdrew our troops. You come back and claim that's irrelevant. Like Obama was just following Bush's policy in Iraq because Obama is just like Bush.

And you say I'm hard to talk to.

And PA, if Obama never would have invaded in the first place, that is going against the Bush Doctrine when it comes to Iraq.

This is such a cop out. I ask you to elaborate to me the difference between the two and you offer conjecture. Wouldas, couldas, and shouldas. I'm making the point they are the exact same and challenging you to come up with evidence they aren't based on Obama's past 4 years in office. The best you have is if he was President a DECADE ago he "would have" (there it is) been against the war? :lol:

4 years in office and thats your best example? Christ man, I rest my case.

[ArlJim78]

Keep listening to Rush. I hear he spreads truth...
haha, absolutely nuts on all accounts.
you baffle me because there are times you come across as knowledgeable, then other times way off the wall. you could not be more wrong on all accounts on this one. I suppose Bush was also planning a Muslim outreach and a new approach to Muslim countries, a Cairo speech as well as overtures to the Muslim brotherhood and the "moderate" taliban, apology tours and bowing to world leaders. yep that was all pretty much an extention of the Bush years.:lol:

Christ, Obama sent a letter via secret channels to Iran telling them that we would not back Israel taking military action against them! I suppose that was also part of the Bush doctrine too.

[bigmack]

Hey look...NJ Stinks is just like Sarah Palin...neither knows what the Bush Doctrine is...

Hey NJ...can I call you a dope? After all, you just done a Palin...
Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minuto, there.

That's looks my material.

Don't be disrespectin' me & my peeps. :ThmbDown:

[elysiantraveller]

haha, absolutely nuts on all accounts.
you baffle me because there are times you come across as knowledgeable, then other times way off the wall. you could not be more wrong on all accounts on this one. I suppose Bush was also planning a Muslim outreach and a new approach to Muslim countries, a Cairo speech as well as overtures to the Muslim brotherhood and the "moderate" taliban, apology tours and bowing to world leaders. yep that was all pretty much an extention of the Bush years.:lol:

Christ, Obama sent a letter via secret channels to Iran telling them that we would not back Israel taking military action against them! I suppose that was also part of the Bush doctrine too.

I'm tired and can hash this stuff out with you in the morning if you would like. The fact is these claims of Obama being overly "pro-Islam" is backed by very little in the way of policy. They are merely talking points by right wing heads to bash the president and very little else. You don't like Obama so they resonate with you but 43 said alot of exact same stuff...

Bush Islam Quotes (http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/ramadan/islam.html)

The policies of this Administration are a continuation of the previous one... the truth hurts... and it should to both you and NJ...

[ElKabong]

You said Obama is just like Bush when it comes to foreign policy. I pointed out Obama never would have went to war with Iraq in the first place. .

Like closing Guantanamo Bay? You know, it represented everything America didn't stand for....or something like that.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination in large part because he distanced himself far more effectively from George W. Bush’s approach to the war on terror. While Clinton was voting to authorize the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Obama was giving anti-war speeches.

Clinton also voted for the Patriot Act while Obama was talking about the erosion of personal freedoms. “[W]e don’t like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states,” the future president said at the National Democratic Convention in 2004.

Once in office, however, Obama reconciled himself with many Bush stances on foreign policy and civil liberties. Judging from the 2012 Democratic platform, the rest of the party has followed suit.

In 2008, Democrats opposed indefinite detention of terror suspects. “We will not ship away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, or detain without trial or charge prisoners who can and should be brought to justice for their crimes, or maintain a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law,” they declared in their platform.

Four years later, the Obama administration continues to detain some terrorism suspects indefinitely while shipping others off to foreign countries with harsher conditions under a practice known as proxy detention.

President Obama signed into law a National Defense Authorization Act containing a provision that civil libertarians in both parties fear will lead to the indefinite detention of American citizens charged with but not convicted of terrorist acts.

This year’s Democratic platform is silent on detention practices and softened the party’s unequivocal language about closing Guantanamo Bay.

“We will close the detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, the location of so many of the worst constitutional abuses in recent years,” has turned into “we are substantially reducing the population at Guantanamo Bay without adding to it.”

Obama has also made extrajudicial killings a critical component of his counter-terrorism strategy, not confined to the successful raid against 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden.

The word “drone” appears nowhere in the Democrats’ platform.

The 2008 platform included blanket opposition to racial profiling as a method of fighting terrorism, reading, “[W]e will ensure that law-abiding Americans of any origin, including Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans, do not become the scapegoats of national security fears.”

This year’s platform omits this language, only opposing racial profiling in the context of domestic law enforcement. The New York Times reported that the Obama administration mostly kept the FBI guidelines promulgated under President George W. Bush.

Four years ago, the Democratic platform vowed to review the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program and the Patriot Act while demanding “judicial oversight on any surveillance program involving Americans.”

Amid allegations that the Bush White House was targeting political dissenters, Democrats vowed to oppose “the tracking of citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war.”

In 2012, the platform doesn’t mention any of this, and a Democrat-controlled Congress passed and Obama signed an extension of the Patriot Act with little reform.

If I were more awake and willing to try to find something by an Ezra Klein clone or a similar source that wouldn't be dismissed in hand because it appeared in the Daily Calller, I would do so. But this author sort of touches on much what I detest most about the President. You can argue all day whether or not they are good policy, but the fact is that the douche spent the bulk of his campaign trying to play this card that he was all about "righting the injustices" that were being perpetrated in the name of the "war on terror". I guess some here don't remember that along with defense contracts and oil, the big "lie" told by Bush was aimed at installing legislation aimed at stripping the liberties of those on the homeland in the name of security. Obama played it up and then played off it - and has played all those that bought into it - much like he has on this front in other areas - like opposing mandates and a proliferation of executive powers that could be used as tools against citizens. For me, he's the worst of both worlds, not only a big government type that wants to see how much money he can piss away doing things he needn't do, but also an oppressive government type that can't resist every power grab that will EVENTUALLY (under him or someone even less desirable to some of us/you) severely abuse that power.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/07/democrats-shift-with-obama-on-foreign-policy-civil-liberties/#ixzz287Cqc3mS

[Steve 'StatMan']

What was the name of the women that was camped outside of Bush's ranch, protesting the war? Where is she now?

Cindy Shehan.

Used bigtme by the Dem Kingpins a MSM. Last I remember, she was upset with Obama and the dems for not stopping the war. Essentally all that happened was they used her to help change the party in power.

You'll lkely never hear from her again in the MSM and from the Dems, because she no longer servers their purposes.

[NJ Stinks]

trying to be honest here, NJ. I can't really buy into "Obama wouldn't have attacked Iraq", when he stated he was going to close down Getmo "right now". Obviously Obama changed his mind with info available to him after taking the oath. Why would anyone believe Iraq would be different for him?

Everybody's an all Pro QB on Monday morning. Obama moreso than you or America would like to admit

I would have responded sooner, Elkabong, but I'm in a real dogfight in my fantasy baseball league. I needed the Angels to hang on for Wilson tonight and they just did!

Anyway, I can see why you feel the way you do. Gitmo is a good reason why.

[Tom]

Hinesight is 20 / 20. But you might recall that Congress approved the resolution to go to war in Iraq. And that Dems like Pelosi etc also made claims that Saddam has WMD.

I would like to point out that perhaps we didn't find stock piles of WMD in Iraq, we did motivate Libya to give up their stockpiles, given the situation in the mideast today - Thank God.

Great point, Jeff.
Thank GOD for George W. Bush......if not for him, Al Qeda would have the bomb now.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
That Obama just cleaned up Bush's Iraq foreign policy blunder and eventually withdrew our troops. You come back and claim that's irrelevant. Like Obama was just following Bush's policy in Iraq because Obama is just like Bush.


You forgot to mention that this was done only after Bush implemented the "Surge," which Senator Barry was opposed to. And then tried to hide it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/barack-obama-purges-web-site-critique-surge-iraq-article-1.349828

And then he denies the fine work our troops were doing there...typical of this POS.

"The surge is not working," Obama's old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/U.S.+Armed+Forces) muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Anbar+Province).

But in reality....
The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004.

[Tom]

P_igpyewuzQ

P_igpyewuzQ

[ArlJim78]

I'm tired and can hash this stuff out with you in the morning if you would like. The fact is these claims of Obama being overly "pro-Islam" is backed by very little in the way of policy. They are merely talking points by right wing heads to bash the president and very little else. You don't like Obama so they resonate with you but 43 said alot of exact same stuff...

Bush Islam Quotes (http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/ramadan/islam.html)

The policies of this Administration are a continuation of the previous one... the truth hurts... and it should to both you and NJ...
the truth is you asserted that there was not one iota of difference in the foreign policy of Bush and Obama. In 2008 Bush reached an agreement with Poland and Czech Republic to install missile defense systems against the threat from Iran. One of Obama's first orders of business was to pull the plug on that agreement to appease Putin and in the process he left two allies high and dry. that example alone is much more than an iota, and I've given you numerous other examples of distinct differences. hence your claim has been easily disproven. I rest my case on that.

On the stuff about Islam it's not worth going into, because you are woefully misinformed. In a sense though there is some amount of dovetailing between Bush and Obama with respect to Islam, but for completely different reasons.

[delayjf]

Speaking of WMDs, where did Syria get their chemical weapons?

[rastajenk]

At the going-out-of-business sale held just across the border 10 years ago.