To all you Obama supporters

[MalloyLiberal]

So who is going to fight this war in Pakistan?

I guess you're volunteering to go sign up? Because you know our army is stretched thin.

Go to the recruiting office and sign up for President Obama's endless war in Pakistan!

If you don't you're chickenshit. Lots of talk but no supporting your President Obama.

[Buzz Clik]

1. Hyperbole, anyone?

Next up: dueling with Zell Miller. Spitballs at twenty paces.

Please read this OP:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Seriously, read it. Then, plead with the mods to delete this thread.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Sign up for the duel with Zell Miller? Count me in!

Sign up for your over-the-top, out of context, smear the candidate rant? I'll pass.

[npincus]

12. AP: "Obama might send troops into Pakistan "

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_t...

Major gaffe on Obama's part, his words can be interpeted as not excluding use of ground forces. The MSM will certainly desiminate this far and wide; Hillary can just sit back and enjoy. Personally, infighting gets us nowhere, and Dems should be ripping at St. Rudy's halo. It that shithead is nominated, we're in trouble.

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he would possibly send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists, an attempt to show strength when his chief rival has described his foreign policy skills as naive.


The Illinois senator warned Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf that he must do more to shut down terrorist operations in his country and evict foreign fighters under an Obama presidency, or Pakistan will risk a U.S. troop invasion and losing hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid.

"Let me make this clear," Obama said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.]/b]"

[Clintonista2]

2. I forsee the next couple of weeks will be filled with

Mindless defense of Obama's latest gaffe, even when we all know that had Hillary said what Obama just did, the Obamanites' heads would have exploded with rage.

[MalloyLiberal]

4. Oh absolutely

And I'm not even a Hillary supporter, but she's right on this issue, invading them is not the right solution.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Gaffe? LOL!

God, I hate political campaigns.

Read this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[JANdad]

19. OK...so I read it...and your point is what?

"I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America."

If I did not know any better, this quote could come straight form the lips of George Bush himself...fuck that noise thank you very much!

This is classic...reminds me of a photo of GWB looking out the window at N.O.

"When you travel to the world's trouble spots as a United States Senator, much of what you see is from a helicopter. So you look out, with the buzz of the rotor in your ear, maybe a door gunner nearby, and you see the refugee camp in Darfur, the flood near Djibouti, the bombed out block in Baghdad. You see thousands of desperate faces.

What a tool!

[Buzz Clik]

57. You've got to be kidding.

So what? SO WHAT?

"I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America."

What's the alternative?

"If we are threatened by terrorists, I will take a poll to see if the anti-violence left-wingers will tolerate aggressive actions. If not, well, what the hell. How bad could it be?"

Sorry, but that's exactly what we want for a president. Clinton was that way, and we should never hesitate to defend ourselves.

Let me guess -- you're a Kucinich fan. (You couldn't possibly be an Edwards supporter, because even he isn't that unrealistic)

[JANdad]

59. I remember when I heard a president

refer to several nations as the "Axis of Evil" and used a lot of tough talk. He alienated us from the majority of the world...I do not want any more tough talk...

[Turbineguy]

7. Please do not read this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

You might become too well informed.

[Clintonista2]

15. That post doesn't address what was actually said-

Which was:

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Sovereignty- Look it up.

[npincus]

18. right- "we will" wasn't highlighted in the excerpt.

That certainly does not exclude the use of ground forces. Major gaffe; he really comes off like an amateur. SORRY.

[NYCGirl]

8. I guess you didn't read this part:

Obama also:

-- Says his anti-terrorism strategy is predicated on a withdrawal from Iraq
-- Calls for two additional combat brigades to be sent to Afghanistan
-- Says the war in Iraq has made the U.S. more susceptible to terrorist attacks
-- Defines the major threat to U.S. security as "violent extemists" who pervert the Muslim faith
-- Proposes a $5B "shared security partnership" to "forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks from the remote islands of Indonesia, to the sprawling cities of Africa."

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/ob...

[TwilightGardener]

9. I'm an Obama supporter. So is my Indie husband--he's in the Air Force,

and prepared to go where President Obama sends him! I was just saying two weeks ago that we might have to extend our efforts in Afghanistan over the border, since Musharraf seems unwilling or unable to stop AQ from re-strengthening. It's like Obama read my mind...

[MalloyLiberal]

11. Yep! Lets go piss off other countries!!

[TwilightGardener]

14. What other countries are going to be pissed off at our fight against the REAL al Qaeda?

For all we know, Musharraf may just decide to leave the western border area to us--I'm pretty sure he doesn't want AQ to spread and take control of Pakistan (and its nukes) either. This is a dire situation, if allowed to continue unchecked.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TwilightGardener]

31. 'Scuse me?

[JANdad]

39. Blindly follow untested leaders to war...

Was I not clear????

[TwilightGardener]

44. My bad, I didn't realize Obama had declared war on Pakistan.

I thought he just made a speech about how he would go about tracking down and fighting terrorists. That's quite an irrational leap you just made there.

[jefferson_dem]

37. So because one supports a responsible plan to aggresively pursue terrorists is a Chimpy supporter?

Um...bugger off...

[npincus]

23. saber-rattling and threatening to invade sovereign nations

to impress our electorate and advance one's political ambitions is not helpful or wise. The word "reckless" comes to mind.

[TwilightGardener]

32. He's being realistic. He's not saying he definitely WOULD, or HOW--

just holding it out there as a last resort, if Pakistan can't get control of AQ.

[npincus]

38. you don't show your hand to an opponent

and in matters of war, in particular. Lobbing threats across the globe is not wise, not helpful--a rookie mistake.

[TwilightGardener]

43. He's not the prez yet, first of all--

he's saying what he WOULD do, if he were--he's not telegraphing our next move. And I'm pretty sure Pakistan realizes the debate going on within the CURRENT administration over what to do about AQ in their country.

[Connie_Corleone]

10. I'll read his speech first before jumping all over something the MSM reported.

However, Obama never said he was anti all wars. Neither am I. I'm not going to start being a hypocrite now. I have said from the beginning that Bush should've finished the job in Afghanistan. Now, Osama Bin Laden and others are in Pakistan because of Bush's idiotic war in Iraq.

I have to read what Obama's plan is regarding Pakistan before commenting on it.

[bluethruandthru]

13. I don't support any candidate yet...

but you might want to read the entire speech. It doesn't seem to me that he's advocating an invasion.

[IndianaJones]

16. I like Obama...this looks like a huge gaffe on his part, from what I have seen. nt.

[dmallind]

17. Just as silly

as excoriating Hillary for not absiolutely ruling out military action against Iran. You absolutely cannot absolutely rule out anything so "might in some circumstances" is right whether Hillary says it or Obama says it.

I just wish everybody were as consistent. Even if you think it's wrong, at least have the intellectual honesty to think it equally wrong.

[Old and In the Way]

20. Not an Obama supporter, but I think you are way overstating his position.

I think he wants to go after Al Qaeda terror camps in surgical strikes and do this in conjunction with extricating ourselves from this occupation in Iraq. This was always the right way to deal with terror and we all know Pakistan is a major sanctuary for these fighters.

Personally, I think the real way to go after these guys is dealing with the financial networks that use AQ to further the agenda of some very rich clients....

[zulchzulu]

21. Go hide yourself in a hole and it will all just go away...

Ignore what's ACTUALLY happening and it will all disappear. Pakistan? Like what-uver dude...

[JANdad]

25. Your sig line does not match your commnets friend...

[TeamJordan23]

24. Go read the speech. He never has talked about war. nm

[Connie_Corleone]

26. Talk about overreacting! I just read the part in the speech about Pakistan.

It doesn't say anything about invading Pakistan. Actually, Obama talks about helping Musharraf get rid of the AQ and taliban fighters, not attacking the country.

READ THE DAMN SPEECH.

[JANdad]

27. I did...did you?

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

[TwilightGardener]

34. Yeah, does that mean dropping bombs and boots on the ground in Islamabad?

Or does it mean limited action where they're holed up near the border of Afghanistan? Maybe just airstrikes? How do we know that Musharraf would even be opposed to this, if it ever came to pass? People are making this into an Iraq-style invasion, which is NOT what he said.

[Connie_Corleone]

36. What did I just write above you?

Edwards' would do the same thing. You're deluding yourself if you think Edwards would not do the same thing. The only president that wouldn't do it is Bush. He had a chance to kill the AQ leadership and he didn't do it.

[Adelante]

28. How is Edwards going to do it?

"As President of the United States I will do absolutely everything to find terrorists where they are, to stop them before they can do harm to us, before they can do harm to America or to its allies." (John Edwards, New Hampshire Debate 6/3/07)

Will he leave them be in Pakistan but go after them everywhere else in the world?


How does it work

[JANdad]

29. This thread is not about JE...(as much as you would like it to be)

But since you asked:

A "Smart Power" Strategy Against Terrorism's Root Causes

Terrorism takes root in weak and failing states. Poverty increases the risk to America by providing a safe harbor for instability, extremism, and terrorism. As president, Edwards will attack these root causes with dramatic increases in funding for global primary education, clean drinking water, protection of constitutional and democratic rights, and economic opportunity.

http://johnedwards.com/issues/terrorism /

btw...funny thing about Obama's website...no mention of a terrorist fighting plan that I could find...

[Adelante]

30. Root causes is one thing

To "find terrorists where they are" is something else.

How will he "find terrorists where they are, to stop them before they can do harm to us, before they can do harm to America" without going to Pakistan?

[JANdad]

33. OK...Am I talking with Cheney here...

We have been attacked exactly TWICE by terroists...in one instance they were caught and in another we still have not found them...In the immortal words of Lynn Samuels..."How the fuck are they going to get over here"

The Obama supporters today are starting to sound like Sean Hannity loving Neo-Cons in the defense of him...We are not in danger of being attacked...let it go and focus on the real issues...

[TwilightGardener]

41. "We are not in danger of being attacked"? Well, the latest NIE says we are--

AQ has regrouped and is as strong as on 9/10. But because if GWB says there's terra, it's automatically untrue, right? We don't have enemies, right? It's all going to be sunshine and marshmallows from here on out, if Edwards becomes Prez. Puh-leez.

[JANdad]

42. Maybe...Just Maybe...

If we stop the saber-rattling for a second...we would be just a little safer...whadya think?

[TwilightGardener]

45. Yes, you're right. We should invite OBL to Camp David for summit talks, instead

of trying to hunt him down and kill him. That would earn the respect of all of radical Islam, and then we would live in peace forevermore.

[JANdad]

46. Answer one question for me...

By what right do we invade and occupy or meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations?

[TwilightGardener]

48. Afghanistan? Or did you not support that war?

[JANdad]

51. By what RIGHT?

Please answer the above question...what gives us the AUTHORITY?

[TwilightGardener]

52. Countries that openly, actively, knowingly harbor terrorists who kill our people

are essentially engaging in aggression towards us--to fight those terrorists is self-defense. That's why we invaded Afghanistan. If you don't think we had that right, then we'll have to disagree.

[JANdad]

54. From what country were we attacked?

[TwilightGardener]

56. Oh lordy, we're going to go in circles. The Taliban regime in Afgh.

supported AQ. Thus we fight them. If you're arguing that the hijackers came from Saudi, I agree, there's a real inconsistency there. But the head of their organization was given safe harbor in Afgh.

[JANdad]

58. Oh...just wanted to make sure that I didn't miss

a declaration of war by a foreign country...

I truly believe that we have learned nothing from the past 20 plus years...one can not fight an idea...

We really have to re-evaluate our tactics and approach this mess from a completely different direction...and maybe...just maybe that would mean inviting your "enemies" to a meeting to work out the differences and grieveances...

[Adelante]

47. In the immortal words of John Edwards...

"find terrorists where they are, to stop them before they can do harm to us, before they can do harm to America"

Maybe he's the one talking with Dick Cheney?

I guess he thinks they can get over here and he wants to stop them first. So how will he do that? Find them and stop them before they get over here? How will he do it without addressing the inescapable fact that Al Qaeda is in Pakistan?


I am not an Obama supporter (and I do not advocate an invasion of Pakistan), so save the insults for when your aim is truer

[Connie_Corleone]

40. And we all know the 9/11 terrorists were poor sheep herders.

[JANdad]

55. And your point is what?

That poverty does not breed terrorism? That lack of oppportunities in the ME does not give radicals the power of influence over desperate minds? Or do you simply believe that they "hate us for our freedoms"?

edit for content

[sandnsea]

35. If we were fighting in Afghanistan

and not lost in this mess in Iraq, I imagine a larger number of people would be happy to sign up. Around 90% of Americans supported going into Afghanistan and are sick of these border games Bush has allowed to go on so that they could build their pipe lines.

[CGowen]

49. Newt Gingrich said Hillary + Obama

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_21...

Washington - Democrats will nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton for president in 2008 and Barack Obama will be her running mate, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicts.

[Harry Monroe]

It's New't wet dream...

[beachmom]

50. Special Forces would do such an operation. They don't have recruiting problems.

This thread is really an insult.

[Mass]

53. May be because Obama never said that?\nt

[tigereye]

60. Locking

This is inflammatory. Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements.