CinC Pentagon Channel Interview
President Obama of course spoke about his vision to draw down troops in Iraq but "surge" in Afghanistan. And once again more talk about "diplomatic efforts being ramped up."
So I am waiting, his "clear goals" seem to start and end at "diplomatic efforts." And what concerned me the most out of that exchange was the final sentence about support. It actually seems like "support at home" is an actual "goal." What kind of a leader is willing to actually imply in an interview that he would end a war if the Americans became restless?
"Well thought out strategy. Clear goals. Achievable. I can marshal and maintain strongest support possible from the folks back home."
Remember, terrorists have used the example of Somalia (Black Hawk Down) as proof they can win. Saying that we value life to such a degree that if they can kill a few Americans it will send the entire strength of the US military running the other way. Of course I value life, but at what point is life worth living if you don't stand up for what is right?
Here is the Commander in Chief of the sole superpower imply that if the public feels too much harm is being done he will not continue an endeavor? Where is Kennedy (the good one) when you need him:
"We choose not to do these things because they are easy, we choose to do them because they are hard."Does President Obama think that 100% of the people at the time of the Revolutionary War were behind fighting a war? There were pockets of anti-war people, would he have then felt there was not enough support?
"Greater additional casualties, at least in the short term. Just as there was in Iraq."What? Obama feels there will be greater casualties during the surge in Afghanistan? How can he commit troops to death? Hey the left spent the better part of 8 years asking Bush. But isn't it so ironic that when then Senator Obama was running around screaming about how the "surge hasn't worked," one of his reasons was an increased toll in life. So for all you youngins' out there. Surge resulting in KIAs under Bush is warmongering, surge resulting in KIAs under Obama is a "strategy" with "achievable goals." Ok.
But the best is his reasons given for the timeline being used:
"After the election takes place."That is right, We cannot pull troops out NOW because they need time to have elections. ONCE AGAIN, fine when he says it...not fine when that was part of the Bush Strategy to stabilize Iraq. Ironic, and would be funny if it wasn't so god damn pathetic.
As we start to come to an end, he is asked why the difference in numbers for the draw down? He gave a completely legitimate reason:
"All these decisions have to be made based on what the situation is at the time."From him I do NOT accept that. I am hearing support at home is most important, no diplomacy is, wait...the current situation. When Bush made similar comments the left tried to laugh him off the Stage along with General Petraeus...I simply want to Give Obama the same respect he gave the two of them.
In conclusion I am sadly forced back to the issue of the Commander in Chief inspiring hope, belief in our strength. Do you think the following statement induces such a feeling in Americans or our enemies?
"We do not have the strategic capability."
I am sorry but President Obama Has a long way to go in making me feel as though his heart is in the battle as much as former President Bush. Nor his mind. Which of these two interviews fills you with more pride and HOPE? HOPE I Say!
Also note how President Obama says his wife meets with the families, but former President Bush speaks about how he does...just saying.