Mr. President--I voted for you to get us out of these God Damn Wars!

[trumad]

Mr. President---if you send 35,000 more troops to a land that we will never conquer, it will tell me and many others who voted for you that you just don't get it.

That Sir, will be my biggest disappointment with you to date.

[VMI Dem]

1. Welcome to the underside of the bus.

[Fumesucker]

8. Hey, we're all bozos under this bus..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OinASMIDonI&feature=related

[NRaleighLiberal]

134. and Everything We Know is Wrong...

love Firesign!

[Krashkopf]

178. How can you be in two places at once . . .

when you're not anywhere at all?

[begin_within]

190. Don't crush that dwarf.

[HarveyDarkey]

191. Hand me the pliers

[begin_within]

194. Eat it raw

[KharmaTrain]

195. Shoes For Industry...

Raw Raw Raw...that's the spirit...

[annabanana]

199. He's no fun, he fell right over.

sigh

[kentauros]

217. So this is where all the Firesign Theater people are!

I can't ever get the Lounge to pick it up and that's the natural place for things like Loosener's Castor Oil Flakes and Fantastic Cigarettes - Long in the leaf but short in the can! :D

Fudd's Law - If you push something hard enough it will fall over.

[Hardrada]

235. The lonesome trains of Ioway, The White Trash Mountains of Virginny

[MrMickeysMom]

219. Fuck you!

So line up..
"fuck you"

and sign up!

:rofl: "fuck you, too!"

[Left Coast2020]

232. We're too late.

The staff from the WH office of "Department of Stupid Advice" already got to him.

[Le Taz Hot]

248. Porgy Tirebiter . . .

he's a spy and a girl delighter, Porgy Tirebiter, he's a student like you. (Like me?) He's a student like you!

LOVES me some Firesign Theater

[phasma ex machina]

105. +1 K&R nt

[kenny blankenship]

117. Let's take this bus to Washington

[barbtries]

155. yes. lets

i'll be in DC from the 23rd to the 27th of Dec. otherwise give me a date and i'll do my best to be there.

i saw the headline earlier "obama says he will finish what we started." i closed the tab and just felt like crying.

[defendandprotect]

186. No. 1 on our llist has to be Plan B = OPTIONS . . .. !!!

[JVS]

2. K&R

[JVS]

3. K&R

[MNDemNY]

4. Why are you surprised?

So many on this board warned of such outcomes. Obama is not a progressive. He did not run as a progressive. Why are people surprised that he does not act like a progressive? When you elect a corporatist, this is what is to be expected.

[bridgit]

9. Boy do I hear you, an oracle's work is never done

[Quantess]

256. Creepy painting.

[SammyWinstonJack]

32. I am not surprised, not at all.

I won't waste my vote again though.

[MissDeeds]

128. Same here

I had huge misgivings, but gladly voted for Obama when faced with the threat of McCain-Palin. This is not the "change" I hoped for. Not by a long shot.

[Naturyl]

197. Ditto.

Nobody but Kucinich was actually worth a damn, but Kucinich had no support. So it was the corporatists (Hillary/Obama) or McCain. I held my nose and tried to engage in wishful thinking, but that never lasts long with me.

Should have just voted Kucinich anyway. Live and learn. One can either waste their vote on somebody principled who has no chance or you can waste it on a corporatist who wins. Either way, it's wasted, because you end up with no representation. But with the first option you stood on principle and perhaps helped move the debate to the left.

[MissDeeds]

203. Well said n/t

[Djinn]

229. Debs said it best

"It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."

[The Wielding Truth]

236. Waste your vote? McCain or Obama...... hum....... Obama the better choice, still.

[blindpig]

47. It was a cynical ploy taking advantage of people's desires

Yes, he said what he said, it was all there for those inclined to look. A look at his advisers and campaign contributors spoke volumes.Yet the rhetoric was very different, it implied much but said little specifically. But it was what people wanted to hear, it spoke to their hopes and after 8 years of reactionary policy people assumed that voting against that reaction would get them the opposite. Little did they know....

So while all of these smart asses might have something of a point we cannot for a millisecond absolve the Obama campaign of massively obscuring it's intent right from the git-go, it was a brilliant campaign and a heinous deception.

[MNDemNY]

85. Yup, now WE must reap what we have sown.

And the corporations cheer!

[DWilliamsamh]

182. No...the rhetoric was not deceptive at all.

He stated clearly that he wasn't advocating Afghanistan withdrawal. To pretend otherwise is just, well.... either ignorant or a lie.

[The Wielding Truth]

238. Deception or a workable reality? How long should it taek to fix all

the laws, find the cooperation,and money to reverse and stop the corruption of the corporate greed and promoting republican and enabling democratic years. Obama never was a strict upset all the apples -to immediately make change for change sake, forgetting the correct moves needed to control a cohesive country - candidate.

We must grow up and face the reality of his situation. He has to work with what he has, and turn the ship using the equipment on board. He has been rebuilding a foundation using the blocks already in place. It is a shoddily formed bunch, ridden with bad mud and thin straw, but it's use them or give up. He has not. We can give up on him, or help him make the changes needed. It's fruitless to whine and give those who wish no change at all more foot hold. Of course, it is disappointing to see things scrapping up against what we want, and not being what we want, like watching a glacier slowly taking old all surrounding debris with it as it pushes against it's slow path.

I believe that things are changing, and for the better. If we would not have a captain who respects and considers consequences to the degree Obama does,we would be moving faster, but would it be better?

[lyonspotter]

92. There weren't any choices...

Hillary, Obama, and McCain were all corporatists. The left-right paradigm has become an illusion.

[mikelgb]

104. the alternatives were "unelectable"

[RedCloud]

141. Just as they used to be in Venezuela.

Sí podemos derrotar a los patrones. (Yes we can kick out the bosses.)

[Naturyl]

196. There were choices.

We chose not to support them because everyone insisted they were unelectable. well yeah, a candidate is definitely unelectable if nobody will support him. Funny how that works.

And even if Kucinich was unelectable, we all should have supported him anyway to send a strong message and move the whole debate to the left. We failed to do so, and this is the result.

[Naturyl]

96. Indeed.

Obama gave many indication he would do this.

And yet I bet most in this thread would STILL not agree that we should have supported Kucinich.

[FiveGoodMen]

129. Would have gone for Kucinich in a heartbeat if I'd had the opportunity

[maxpower]

152. Me too

I vote for him every time.


Happy Thanksgiving,
Max

[Enthusiast]

240. I hoped to vote

for Kucinich in the primary. Turned out I didn't get the chance.

[barbtries]

156. i would have

happily supported kucinich. still would. as it was he was already out of the race by the time there was a primary in my state. yes i did know it was a choice between bad and worse, but i admit i was euphoric when obama won. even after today, given the choices i had, i would vote for him again.

[rapturedbyrobots]

212. that's the question

i keep asking myself. why is there this collective delusion that obama is a progressive? he stole the rhetoric of the left, but ran as a straight neoliberal...very, very not-progressive on economic issues. why is everyone surprised?

[Djinn]

228. my thoughts exactly

although the Hope & Change advertising campaign was one of the most successful in history I can't understand why anyone could have thought Obama had ANY intention of changing anything. Simply put if he had he would never have been the nominee. To get to be President (or even to get within a mile of it) one has to be willing to dance with those that brung you. In a state of corporate feudalism the fuedal lords decide which of two almost entirely similar people you get to "choose" from. There are minor differences in the sound bites they spout but in reality neither party actually does anything that will piss off their true masters.

Obama talked a LOT about fighting a "better" war, he never gave the slightest indication that he would cease fighting them.

Willing suspension of disbelief is not a good idea in politics.

[Captain Hilts]

5. No one believed me when I cited his quotation in the NYer saying he wasn't sure how he would have v

voted on the Iraq War Resolution.

[jaxx]

6. He didn't say he'd leave Afghanistan right away. What he said was:

(snip) It is time to turn the page. When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.

The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

[krawhitham]

22. People never listened to him, they just bitch after the fact

Did you people just blindly vote for Obama or listen to what he had to say while he was running for president?

It is like you people believed he was a great liberal giant and would lead progressives to the promise land, too bad you did not take the time to listen to what he was actually saying

[bigtree]

27. It can be reasonably argued

. . . that the 'terrorists' in Afghanistan are just resistance to NATO's occupation of their homeland. Even the military and administration admit that there really isn't some contingent of 'alQaeda' there. It can be reasonably argued, why (if reports are correct) we need so many troops in Afghanistan to accomplish that task?

It can reasonably be argued that our very presence is counterproductive and antithetical to the very goals he outlined months ago as justification for escalating the force by the first 30,000 troops he authorized. What's changed since the Bush administration's intelligence agencies collectively concluded that our military activity was 'fueling and fostering' more individuals bent on violent resistance against the U.S., our interests, and our allies than we could effectively put down?

Is it rational and responsible policy to have such a large footprint in the country?

[tekisui]

37. Jeezus Christ! That was on August 01, 2007.

Surely he has learned something in that time. His first surge led to the worst months and the worst year in the 8 years we've been there. It is time to change course and get the hell out.

[DWilliamsamh]

185. A) it wasn't "his" first surge, it was Bush's surge...

And B what part of 'he told you he believed we need to stay to finish the job - the job being rounding up the rest of the 9/11 terrorist including Bin Laden - didn't you understand?

Don't be made at him because he is doing what he said he'd do. Some of us who actually listened to what he said - voted for him in part BECAUSE he said he would do this.

[tekisui]

205. That same tired line.

I knew exactly where he was on Afghanistan, in spite of your petty condescending tone. And, (A) it was Obama's surge. He authorized 22,000 more troops to be sent to Afghanistan in January. They arrived by June. And Part B--So the fuck what. He was wrong and he is wrong.

[DWilliamsamh]

208. Ok... but stop complaining about him "lying" or "selling rhetoric that doesn't match actions.

Just disagree with his strategy.

[DWilliamsamh]

210. And BTW - he HAS learned something...

He has learned that we don't have a real partner in Afghanistan's Government. He has also decided that that knowledge shouldn't prevent us from pursuing Bin Laden and the rest of those assholes. Now - as I said before in another post - I would support a draw down in the name of focusing like a laser on that mission and that mission only. The goal of "rebuilding Afghanistan" and "making the Afghani Gov't a strong one supported by that nation's people," is NOT one that can be achieved by soldiers and they shouldn't be asked to do so.

As far as I am concerned we should have one mission and one mission only there - to prevent the escape of Bin Laden from Pakistan through the Afghanistan border in furtherance of capturing or killing him. When that mission is complete - we should be out of there ASAP>

[Egnever]

218. Well said

the tough part of all of this I think is the level of participation from pakistan. If we can strenghten their resolve to control the regions near that border then we can accomplish that mission. If we cant get cooperation from them then we need to be planning our withdrawal.

[dflprincess]

222. Assuming, of course, that Bin Laden is still alive

If he is, he's probably shaved off his beard, and has been hiding out at the Mayo Clinic getting his kidney disease treated. A lot of rich Saudis go there for treatement.

If the troops that have been there for so long haven't managed to find him, what makes you think sending any more will help? The whole thing reminds me of Forrest Gump talking about Vietnam "We was always taking long walks, and we was always looking for a guy named "Charlie".

[DWilliamsamh]

223. Did I SAY sending more would help? No. I said the opposite.

I said in black and white I would support a draw down to allow us to focus on finding Bin Laden. Read what I wrote and agree or disagree with it as you will. But don't react to what you THINK I wrote, or assume I wrote.

[dflprincess]

225. I did misread that part of your post

but you also say

"As far as I am concerned we should have one mission and one mission only there - to prevent the escape of Bin Laden from Pakistan through the Afghanistan border in furtherance of capturing or killing him. When that mission is complete - we should be out of there ASAP>"

So you think the U.S. should consider to sacrifice lives to pursue an enemy who has probably been dead for years - continuing to chase a ghost makes no sense at all. It is a waste of lives and money to stay there any longer.

[DWilliamsamh]

230. My answer is simple, even though your straw man is obvious,.

I didn't say we should spend lives pursuing a ghost. Not even close. If he's dead, of COURSE we shouldn't spend another American life in Afghanistan for any reason, least of all propping UP that festering pile of corruption that is their "elected" government. But You assume too much I think. I don't assume he is alive or dead. Haven't seen the intelligence - but considering the sieve that is the international intelligence community - I doubt VERY seriously that if there was credible evidence that Bin Laden is dead, the public wouldn't have heard if from multiple leaks from multiple countries - most probably from Pakistan and Afghanistan themselves.

[Subdivisions]

63. ... n/t

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

[LWolf]

76. I heard that.

It's another reason why I opposed his nomination all the way to the convention.

[jonnyblitz]

87. I always new this and it's part of the reason why i have never

been a fan.

[dflprincess]

102. He also said he opposed mandated insurance

if he could change his mind about that, he could change his mind about Afghanistan.

[leftstreet]

124. +1000000000000000000

[fascisthunter]

166. we don't give a turd anymore what the weasel has said

[cali]

7. I'm pissed and disappointed too.... BUT if you voted for him because

you believed he vowed to get us out of Afghanistan, you weren't paying attention. He said all along he'd focus on fighting in Afghanistan. I'd hoped he'd change his mind. Unfortunately, he hasn't.

[jaxx]

10. I think there will be an exit strategy this time.

That is a big change to open ended war.

I'm a peace nut, I hate wars and the endless killings and the endless wrangling. But I won't put words in the President's mouth. He said what he said.

[martymar64]

198. I'll believe when I see it

We're going to be talking"exit strategy" for the 2020 election and beyond.
We're never going to leave.

[Robb]

20. Indeed. That bears repeating.

"If you voted for him because you believe he vowed to get us out of Afghanistan, you weren't paying attention."

[Bluenorthwest]

137. I voted for him because he said he did not and would not

support Mandated purchase of private insurance products. It was the only real difference between him and Hillary. He was extremely outspoken against the mandates, almost as loud about that as he was quiet about his war plans.
He ran not just opposed to mandates, but deriding his opponent for supporting them. She was a monster after your paycheck. Now he favors them. So I fail to see the point you are making really.

[Robb]

164. I'm making a point that has something to do with this thread. You're not.

That's one difference.

Tangentially, one could say you have reason to be upset, as you claim to have voted for Obama for the SINGLE REASON that he said he was against mandates, and now he's apparently in favor of them. You would have a point, if anyone believed you voted for him only for that reason.

Now, I believe in the possibility of there existing a single-issue voter whose single issue is the war in Afghanistan. There are likely many. I know trumad, and doubt he's a single-issue voter, because he's also a damn sharp cookie -- but I agree elsewhere it's reasonable he inferred something other than what Obama said, because it doesn't "match" the rest of his policies.

You're simply still pissed off Hillary didn't win. I say that because the only other option that would explain your absurd post is your claim that you're a single-issue voter whose single issue is mandated purchase of private insurance products. :D

[rateyes]

165. You're right about that aspect of it cali.

However, IMO, if he's going to escalate (surge) then he ought to go all out and give the General the 75,000 troops he says he needs.

Part of the problem in Iraq becoming a quagmire is because Cheney thought the damned war could be fought with far less troops than it would have taken to do it "right." (if there is a "right" way to do a goddamned war.)

It seems to me that Obama is too much of a capitulator (trying to please everybody usually ends up in pleasing nobody).

And, you know that I supported Obama.

[SIMPLYB1980]

11. If you voted for him for that reason,

then you didn't pay attention or were willfully ignorant.

[Shagbark Hickory]

12. You voted for the wrong guy. He repeatedly promised to escalate Afganistan.

You may recall during the campaign, he repeatedly said he was going to move resources from Iraq to Afganistan.
At the time that sounded really good to me because I thought we majorly took our eye of the ball. More recently, after listening to the experts and reading about the history of afganistan and how things work there, it became clear that we cannot and should not waste one more minute there, one more dollar there or one more life there.

I fully expect he will send more troops because that is what he promised but I am to blame. I voted him into office to do just that.

[barbtries]

160. there is nobody you could have voted into office

who wouldn't have. i mean viable candidates. at least we're not bombing iran.

[beyond cynical]

13. No you didn't...

"As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO's efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations."

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_t...

[SIMPLYB1980]

23. Another good link.

http://www.barackobama.com/2008/07/15/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam_96.php

"The greatest threat to that security lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train and insurgents strike into Afghanistan. We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as President, I won't. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO to secure the border, to take out terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights.

Make no mistake: we can't succeed in Afghanistan or secure our homeland unless we change our Pakistan policy. We must expect more of the Pakistani government, but we must offer more than a blank check to a General who has lost the confidence of his people. It's time to strengthen stability by standing up for the aspirations of the Pakistani people. That's why I'm cosponsoring a bill with Joe Biden and Richard Lugar to triple non-military aid to the Pakistani people and to sustain it for a decade, while ensuring that the military assistance we do provide is used to take the fight to the Taliban and al Qaeda. We must move beyond a purely military alliance built on convenience, or face mounting popular opposition in a nuclear-armed nation at the nexus of terror and radical Islam.

Only a strong Pakistani democracy can help us move toward my third goal - securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states. One of the terrible ironies of the Iraq War is that President Bush used the threat of nuclear terrorism to invade a country that had no active nuclear program. But the fact that the President misled us into a misguided war doesn't diminish the threat of a terrorist with a weapon of mass destruction - in fact, it has only increased it."

[harun]

40. He should be selling that in the media not "40k more troops, sorry"

Get more commitments from more countries to help rebuild Afghanistan, not just escalate hostilities. Injecting violence only to solve the problem is a Repuke strategy.

[SIMPLYB1980]

41. It will take both force and diplomacy.

Imo.

[stray cat]

14. Why in the world did you vote for Obama then? He said the war if Afghanistan was necessary

If you vote for a candidate to do something listen well enough to what he says he wants to do!

[JVS]

18. Because the alternative was John "100 years" McCain

[kiva]

34. I didn't in the primary. In the general it was either

Obama or McCain, not really a choice. Please stop pretending that everyone on this board ignored what the candidate Obama said - many of us did not, but were ignored by some who chose not to listen.

[dysfunctional press]

139. there were third party candidates, as well having the option to abstain from voting that race.

PLENTY of choices.

[kiva]

189. I could have written in my choice, or I could have stayed home;

instead I worked for the Obama campaign and voted for him because the alternative was too horrible to contemplate. Do you really think that anyone who disagreed with Obama's campaign rhetoric should have chosen not to vote for him? Can you say 'President McCain'?

[Subdivisions]

62. ... n/t

[vikdavis]

15. One way or other

It is better than staying there for ages. Do something and if that fails, pull back all troupes. i am not if he has good choices at this point. He is clear on Iraq at least, which received trillions of tax payer dollars that could have used to avoid current mess with the economy.

[trumad]

16. The point to my Op is...

I thought he'd be smart enough to catch on that sending any amount of troops will still lead to failure.

[JVS]

19. He said he was against stupid wars and he seems to have flip flopped on that. These wars are stupid

[chimpymustgo]

48. JVS, you have hit the nail upon the head. This war is stuck on stupid.

[jaxx]

24. That's like marrying someone and thinking they'll change to be what you want.

He was open about Afghanistan, keeping it going.

[ChiciB1]

153. How Many Countries Have Tried & Failed In This Country??? How In

the WHOLE WIDE WORLD do you think we can ACTUALLY "nation build" or whatever reason we're going to get!!

I've really pretty much HAD IT! I don't even know WHERE TO TURN!! Flame away, I just don't care, I just don't care!

What's that thing about doing the same thing over and over & getting the same result??? Well, looks like we're headed there again! I just don't want to be a part of this anymore!!

OUR COUNTRY, RIGHT OR WRONG... Yea, BABY!!!

[Stinky The Clown]

17. Prepare to be told what he did or didn't say in this or that speech when he was campaigning

The sagacious supporters will all be here to tell you you were stupid to have hoped for whatever it was you hoped for because he never promised that.

[Robb]

21. Well, without being a jerk about it, what's wrong with that?

If I said I voted for him because of a particular policy issue that he didn't support, and never said he supported, that merely means I'm uninformed or projecting.

It's also not stupid to hope for something, either. Given much of Obama's platform, the Afghanistan piece could be argued not to "match up."

But it's there, it's always been there. trumad has every right to hope it will go away. Sorry if that comes off as some kind of cheerleading.

[martymar64]

200. Then if a loved one of yours dies over there . .

Then you better not shed a single fucking tear, because you knew this could happen when you voted for him. If you vote for war, then tears are not your right when those you send there die.

[Robb]

209. That's the most absurd thing I've read today.

High bar today, too. Congrats.

[martymar64]

213. The absurd thing is sending more troops to certain death in an endless war

Face it, there is not going to be any victory in Afghanistan. All those men and women that died there have died in vain on the altar of oil and Amerikkkan exceptionalism. They don't want us there. All the troops are doing is propping up the corrupt govt of the mayor of Kabul.

It the Fourth of July firecracker exploding in the grave.

Come back in 5 or 10 years and tell me how noble this war is. I bet you'll still be singing that same lame ass song.

[Robb]

247. Now I'm saying the war is noble?

Way to put things in my mouth. Grow up.

[martymar64]

251. You sure seem proud that he is escalating the war

Would you be so proud of his promise to send more of our men and women to their certain deaths if you didn't think this war was noble?

Methinks you protest too much.

[Robb]

252. English must be your fifth language.

On the plus side, it must be nice when traveling. :hi:

[jaxx]

25. Are we making it up?

[bigtree]

30. I'm not understanding the importance

Does what he said in the campaign preclude those who voted for him from questioning the policy he announces in office? What if we feel his policy won't even achieve the goals he's outlined?

[jaxx]

31. I didn't see that in the posts.

What I saw was the misinformation that he would end both wars now. You can question whatever you want, but don't change the truth.

[bigtree]

33. regarding the op

"I voted for you (because) . . ."

Sounds like a valid complaint, no matter what Mr. Obama said during the campaign. "If you make this policy decision, it will show that you just don't get it."

Often policy decisions don't match with the goals enunciated by the candidates during the election. Witness the health care legislation and debate. It's perfectly reasonable and valid to object to policy that is seen as counterproductive or ineffective to achieving those promised goals.

[jaxx]

35. hmmmmm I see

No matter what was said, it's valid to expect something else. Ok, you can do that if you wish.

[bigtree]

39. no, you got that wrong

Actual policy, fleshing out the promises, can be reasonably debated as to its expected effect and its prospect for achieving the goals outlined. Those types of judgments by voters are so fundamental to our democracy that I'm surprised to even have to explain them.

[jaxx]

52. I won't take you personally.

I read you almost everyday and know where you are coming from. Suffice it to say, you can have the last word.

[bigtree]

56. I didn't mean nothin'

It's just that even the president accepts (and welcomes the fact) that there will be disagreements over implementation of his policy which is a fleshing-out of his campaign promises. He's even provided for different views from the folks he's chosen to advise him. His Afghanistan decision is actually a compromise between his stated ideals and the wishes of his military leadership.

No matter what was said in the campaign, very little policy in office actually precisely mirrors the election promises. It just seems fair and to be expected that voters will and can have differences of opinion about how those promises and statements should translate into actual policy.

(sorry for being so snarky)

[FiveGoodMen]

133. He SHOULD end both wars now.

Regardless of what he said earlier.

If I said I would burn your house down with you in it. And then I went ahead and did that...

Would that make it okay?

(Please say no it wouldn't)

[Subdivisions]

61. deleted. wrong place. n/t

[MissDeeds]

130. Best post of the day

Thanks Stinky!

[fascisthunter]

167. most of them are on ignore now

so I won't be feeding those folks.

[donco6]

215. LOL! And here they are. n/t

[Paper Roses]

26. K & R

[ixion]

28. kicked and recommended

:applause:

[excess_3]

29. have they met? ./nt

[Xenotime]

36. He promised to end the wars. Now he needs to do it.

[SIMPLYB1980]

42. No he didn't.

He promised to end Iraq and he is.

[Bigmack]

38. Pres. Obama... we can't afford an Empire any more! nt

[tjwash]

43. Withdrawal of Iraqi troops are going on right now, aren't they?

And didn't the U.S. formally hand over the security duties to new Iraqi forces? The Iraqi government did declare a public holiday - National Sovereignty Day - over it, and Baghdad, threw a giant party to mark the changeover. There are also plans to halt all US-led combat operations by September 2010, with all troops gone from Iraq by the end of 2011 as well if I am not mistaken.

The Administration also canceled the pre-scheduled deployment of 3,500 U.S. troops to Iraq as the military drew down troop levels, October 17th as well.

He also signed legislation on October 29th that affirms the U.S. obligation to withdraw all military forces from Iraq. The legislation also requires the Pentagon to report to Congress every three months on progress to withdraw all U.S. troops, withdraw or transfer to Iraqi authorities all military equipment, close down or transfer to Iraqi authorities military bases, and release or transfer to Iraqi authorities all Iraqi detainees before the December 31, 2011 deadline.

Or something of that sort.

I do want to see them start a similar type withdrawal plan in Afghanistan though, but it IS a huge mess he is actively cleaning up.

[bigtree]

45. actually

. . .we've yet to see that drawdown which is supposed to be in 2010. In fact, the commander there, Odierno, said this month that he has until March to decide if he'll extend that date.

[tjwash]

64. Hopefully that will happen...I've been keeping my eye on that as well.

nt

[LynneSin]

44. Did you sleep thru the part that he said it would be an 18 month timeline

:shrugs:

I heard him say that several times throughout the course of his campaign.

[Subdivisions]

60. Yes, he did have an 18 month plan for Iraq. n/t

[WI_DEM]

46. Where have you been? He never said anything about abandoning Afghanistan

[Subdivisions]

59. ... n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. "Bring it on!" "Smoke 'em out" are now Democratic values. K&R

Now all that's needed is a chorus of "God Bless America" and some cowboy boots.

[SIMPLYB1980]

50. They always were you just deluded yourself into thinking

more of the party agreed with you than really did.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Nope. The Democratic party has proven, and proving again, that it's a war party.

And, just as liable to being frightened by politicians erecting bogeymen and waving flags as the republicans. And, as full of true-believers for which the party rises above principles in favor of CYA efforts to save face in a lost war.

[SIMPLYB1980]

53. Must just make you so angry!!!

But look at it this way. If you are right you may get the anarchy you are looking for. So are you leaving next week when Obama announces his plan? Maybe you can start that third party that will represent only what you want, but don't expect it to get big enough to fill a room at the Marriott.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Angry? Naw. I got angry in '64 when the Dems decided to continue that other lost war.

And, pursued it in the same way until the American people had enough of bodies coming home and congress finally cut off the funding.

And, at that time, they had plenty of party "loyalists" to apologize for them in the face of reality.

[SIMPLYB1980]

57. Comparing Vietnam with Afghanistan is

apples and oranges. But if you want to sit and stew in your hatred go right ahead. It will not get you anything in the end. Even the great Anti war John Kerry and the ever so "progressive" DK voted for war in Afghanistan. Again if you can't take what our elected officials are doing I suggest you start another party that better fits your stance.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

65. Apples and oranges, in this case, is a very apt comparison.

Same tactics, same propaganda, same ending.

Thanks for the suggestion. But, I'll stick with being a dissident member of the party I've been a member of since 1965 just to irritate the knee-jerk true believers like you. Or, maybe you should join that other party of avid war supporters. Or, maybe join Smokin' Joe as an independent.

BTW How does Kucinich feel now about the war? Did you notice the Democratic Progressive Caucus is calling for a stop to funding of the war?

The tide is turning against you and the other hawks in the party.

[SIMPLYB1980]

70. And yet the anti war movement could be drowned in a bathtub.

So most Americans see a clear difference. The tide is not turning on those you call hawks they won the argument during the election.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

74. The polls show that most Americans want out of Afghanistan. Not more of the same.

And, Johnson won the election in '64. And, it was the Democrats and the anti-war movement that unseated him in '68 because he pursued the same policies, for the same reasons, that Obama is pursuing this lost war.

[SIMPLYB1980]

75. No the polls show it as a split decision.

Which is one of the reasons we have a CIC.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

78. In '67 it was 70% vs 17% for/against. Then the bodies started coming home.

50/50 is a non-majority of American support. As more bodies come home and the price continues to escalate along with the violence the people will get even more weary of this CYA, "tough on terror", cave in to the right.

Also, in the case of our "allies", how the popularity of the war there? Germany, France, the UK, Spain, Italy, Japan? I think, maybe, the Poles still think it's a good idea.

[bigtree]

80. I think the US body count in Iraq caused a turn in opinion against that occupation

. . . unfortunate and sad that it took so long.

[SIMPLYB1980]

81. More comparing of Apples and Oranges.

Have fun with that. Got a link to the polling to back up the 70% support when the war was given up on?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

91. No. But, I vividly remember it on CBS News in '67. And, it being used by the apologists.

And, the same kind of party loyalists using the numbers to justify the slaughter that are attempting the same now.

[SIMPLYB1980]

94. LOL! So no prof.

Just more cannon fodder for the Empire. Where have I heard the tripe before?...



Now be a good little Chomskyite and call me a Imperialist.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

97. Nah. Just a locker-room apologist for imperialistic lost wars.

A flag waver for American Exceptionalism. A PATRIOT!

"Patriotism is the most foolish of passions and the passion of fools." Arthur Schopenhauer

[SIMPLYB1980]

99. Nice little comrade.

:evilgrin:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

101. I'll let you know when I get my check from the Kremlin, Senator.

[SIMPLYB1980]

103. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[MNDemNY]

88. Could Obama do anything that you would not defend?

:eyes:

[SIMPLYB1980]

95. Nope. Is their anything that you will not use to attack him?

[MNDemNY]

106. I never attack him unless his actions (or inactions) warrant.

It's good to see you admit that you are but a tool. Well as long as you are up front about it, I guess it's ok for you to be a tool.

[SIMPLYB1980]

108. And it's O.K. for you to constantly have nothing but

bad things to say about Obama, unfortunately you can't bring yourself to admit that. So who is the tool really. I think it's you.

[MNDemNY]

109. have said quite a number of good things about Obama.

No, you are now, and forever will be , the first ADMITTED TOOL.

Congratulations, you have won the "Snap-On" award.:rofl: :rofl: (You really should put 'TOOL' IN your sig-line!

[SIMPLYB1980]

110. I haven't read them. All I have seen from you

since June or so is constant whining that you didn't get your pone. :shrug:

[MNDemNY]

111. You should pay more attention.

I have been more than complimentary toward his handling of the stimulus, also his rhetoric with our "friends" around the world, his choice for the Supreme court, but all you see is what seems to bother you the most. Somebody who dares to call out the "Big O" when he does things that are so outside of long held Democratic principles. He is, largely a right of center corporate politician, I knew this when I voted for him in the GE,BUT I will not give him a free pass when I feel he is abandoning further those Democratic Principles.This should not bother you, since you must see that he has quite an army of tools, such as yourself to defend his every move.

[SIMPLYB1980]

118. So you are in the purity brigade.

Glad Obama doesn't give a shit what you think. If he did he would not have been elected.

[MNDemNY]

121. You, now that you have admitted your status as a....

tool, are no longer relevant to anything.But, I must give you kudos, most of your ilk do not have the testes to admit their stripes.

[SIMPLYB1980]

122. Well you were never relevant to begin with

before you tried to deny that you are a tool as well. :toast:

[donco6]

216. Really? Nothing he could do you wouldn't defend?

Ignore and good riddance for being a tool

[pundaint]

176. I hope you are right but I see that what the people want really doesn't matter.

[MNDemNY]

112. ^years ago, apples-oranges, at this time? same-same.

[lyonspotter]

93. We used to be the anti-war party. NT

[ieoeja]

113. When?

Liberal Democrats started the War of 1812.

Conservative Democrats started the Civil War (Liberal Republicans won it; hint: worst thing you can say about a general in wartime is that he is "too conservative"; there might be a lesson there).

Liberal Democrats started the Mexican-American War.

Liberal Democrats started the Spanish-American War.

Liberal Democrats got us into WW-I.

Liberal Democrats got us into WW-II (and would have gotten us in a lot earlier had Conservative Republicans not so adamantly opposed it).

Liberal Democrats started the Cold War.

Liberal Democrats got us into Korea over Republican opposition.

Liberal Democrats got us into Vietnam.


Even in the late 70s GOPers occasionally referred to the Democratic Party as "the War Party". In fact, the only protracted wars that Conservative Republicans ever got us into are the two current wars. So "we used to be the anti-war party" makes perfect sense, if you're a Republican. But none whatsoever for a Democrat.


The only thing "anti-war" EVER about the Democratic party was its defense of the rights of anti-war protestors during Vietnam. Nobody believes the ACLU is pro-NAZI or pro-KKK when they support the rights of those organizations, but an awful lot of people seem to have made that exact mistake about Democrats and pacifists.

[TicketyBoo]

54. During the campaign

it was evident that he planned on escalating the war in Afghanistan.

And, at that point, it was an okay thing to advocate.

But things have changed. Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan. They've hightailed it into Pakistan. So the strategy should change.

Since the ones who have declared war with us via 9/11, the supposed cause for the war in Afghanistan, are no longer there, why should we be there? We shouldn't.

We need to get the heck out of there, where the only thing our guys are accomplishing is getting themselves blown up. Get out and if al Qaeda dares to come back into Afghanistan, go get 'em then. The only reason I can see to put more troops into Afghanistan is if we're going to use it as a base to go after them in Pakistan, and I doubt very much that's what's going to happen (and it probably shouldn't).

Bring our guys home, darn it! This is not the same war it was a year ago when you were elected, Mr. President. Say that, and bring them home.

[trumad]

234. Good post

Many here are telling me that he never intended to end the conflict in Afghanistan and that he was going to escalate rather than de-escalate. I knew that----but....I thought he would use his good Democratic sense and come to the conclusion that this was a no win situation and simply pull the troops out.

A Republican like McCain would keep us there forever.... My hope was that a Democrat would not play the part of a Republican War Hawk and make things worse--- and it appears that I was wrong.

[Subdivisions]

58. 'You can take that to the bank!'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

[SIMPLYB1980]

68. Full context.

He was talking about Iraq and not Afghanistan in that speech. But the snippet could lead you to believe he was talking about both wars he was always careful not to.

[Subdivisions]

71. Ah...understood. n/t

[Occam Bandage]

66. Did you miss all that stuff about focusing on the "right war"?

I mean, if you voted for him to do the opposite of what he said he would do, I don't think that's his problem.

[Subdivisions]

67. 'You can take that to the bank!'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk

Now, what was that again?

[Occam Bandage]

69. He was talking about Iraq. So far, he's been following the 18-mo timeline he promised. nt

[Subdivisions]

73. Thanks for clearing that up. The video doesn't offer enough context. n/t

[LWolf]

77. Of course,

when some of us protested, the response was,

"SO YOU WANT MCCAIN?!?"

Those of us who didn't want war were screwed by January of '08.

[Occam Bandage]

79. Which was a reasonable response. Voting against Obama would have been embarrassingly shortsighted.

An anti-war person would be perfectly justified in saying, "I voted for Obama despite his view on the war in Afghanistan, and continue to oppose that position of his."

She would, however, not be justified in saying, "I voted for Obama to end the war in Afghanistan," because Obama promised to focus resources on that war.

[LWolf]

83. Except that he was campaigned as the anti-war

choice, because of a speech he made before he ran for the Senate. I knew better. Everyone should have known better. But the reality remains: he was campaigned as the candidate who would end the war (small print: in Iraq, while escalating the general war on terror) and as the "not dlc" candidate, when, dlc member or not, he's as corporatist as the other dlc choice.

An anti-war person had no good choices left from January '08 on. They could not vote, or they could choose a lesser evil.

[mvd]

107. I know what he said during the campaign, but..

I still was hoping he would adjust our policy over there - especially after the whole Karzai debacle.

[LWolf]

142. That was really all we could do, at that point.

Hope he would change his position.

I'm sorry that it doesn't seem to have worked that way. :(

[Sebastian Doyle]

84. Right war?

There hasn't been a "right war" since August 1945. And even that one only came about because the Bush Crime Family funded the bastard who started it.

[treestar]

72. Are we trying to conquer it?

Most citizens are not against that war. It was the one started within weeks of 911 and thought to be going after Al Qaeda.

Once out of Iraq it will be time to focus on Afghanistan. This is Bush's first war and we can't just up and pull out. Logistics, logistics. And if it gave Al Qaeda room to plan another attack, we'd be toast.

[paulsby]

82. then you made an uninformed vote

since obama made it abundantly clear that he was pro-afghanistan war, and that he would continue to fight that war vigorously.

did you miss that?

[branders seine]

86. mister, can you spare ANY change I can believe in?

[MNDemNY]

114. Sit down and shut up, Why are you a "hater"?

[Nikki Stone1]

89. Are you really surprised that he is doing this?

I'm not.

[Ozymanithrax]

90. President Obama said during the election that he would fight in Afghanistan.

even while he promised to get us out of Iraq.

He never promised to get us out of "these God Damn Wars!"

I understand your opposition, but he was quite clear on what he intended to do.

[Naturyl]

100. Agreed.

I'm no fan of Obama's actions so far, but he was plain about this from the beginning. We held our noses and supported him anyway. Nobody can claim surprise.

[FiveGoodMen]

254. "Nobody can claim surprise"

Yeah, but we don't have to be surprised to be disgusted.

[kenny blankenship]

115. And I promised to resist him. A promise I renew with each step he makes into "Af-Pak"

as will ALL GOOD AMERICANS AND ALL GOOD DEMOCRATS.

Fuck the criminal remainder.

[mullard12ax7]

98. This Iraq War is Over! It Really Is!

100s of rec's shall now flow my way!

[HughMoran]

116. Simple question: did candidate Barack Obama state that he would pull out of Afghanistan

or Iraq?

Extra Credit: did Obama state that he would 1) pull out of Afghanistan, or 2) do what it takes to win in Afghanistan so that terrorism can't reestablish root there, potentially destabilizing a nuclear Pakistan?

[crazyjoe]

119. sucker

[Vidar]

120. Agreed & recommended.

[yellowwood]

123. I'm So Glad You Said That!

I thought that DU would have more to say on this issue. It's so disappointing that we're talking of war escalation.
I have to admit that I never expected this. I still believe that this Administration is better than the alternative, but it is so disappointing.
Wisconsin Representative Obey is proposing a war surcharge. Do you think that Americans would notice the war if they had to pay for it?
http://www.obey.house.gov/

[grahamhgreen]

125. It will be a truly wicked plan - hand in hand with the crapsurance bill.

[24601]

126. I voted to get out of Iraq and pay more attention to Afghanistan.

Given that everyone who voted has a wide spectrum of positions - the only voter 100% in sync would be citizen Obama himself.

[demigoddess]

127. i thought anyone with a brain would get us out of there, but no.

he does have a brain so why is he falling for this BS, that we have to fight a war to win???

[Richardo]

131. Well then you weren't paying attention to all the campaign speeches

I can't help you there.

[valerief]

132. No war, no blank check to those profiteering off it. It's not like wars have to be funded

up front like friggin' healthcare. We work, slave, eat, sleep, and shit for war profiteers.

[Taverner]

135. Yes I know...I feel the same way

WTF is the point of either war?

Afghanistan is not the "good" war

It's just the "other" war

[dysfunctional press]

136. actually- all you did was vote for him.

nothing on the ballot made him beholden to any one particular task once/if he got the job.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

138. He campaigned on sending more troops to Afghanistan.

Does anybody read anymore? :banghead:

[Bluenorthwest]

140. He campaigned on 'No Mandated Purchase'

Called his rival all kinds of bad for supporting them. So your point about his campaign rhetoric is what again? That he has to keep his word?
And it is a real stretch to pretend that he used 'more troops' as anything like a campaign centerpiece. No mandates, now that he made commercials about, sent mailers, scored debate points, he was emphatically opposed to them.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

145. No, that you can't be surprised that he's sticking to those words.

[FiveGoodMen]

144. He should not have done that.

He should not be following through on it now.

We didn't have any non-war choices by election time.

That is not our fault.

I hope that banging head gives you the concussion that you deserve.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

146. I didn't say it was a good policy.

I said that it was what he promised on the campaign.

I hope that banging head gives you the concussion that you deserve.

So you misinterpret me and try to follow that up with some lame threat? Stay classy, keyboard commando.

[FiveGoodMen]

147. Please look up the words 'hope' and 'threat'

Come back when you know enough English to discuss this.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

148. My mistake, so here's a better example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=14497&mesg_id=14525

Here, you're "threatening" to not vote for him again, so I "hope" you get tombstoned for being a Republican enabler.

[FiveGoodMen]

150. You're the one trying to turn Dems into pukes by defending their every step in that direction

Who's enabling?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

151. Once again, learn to read before you post.

I said it wasn't a good policy, but at the same time, it's exactly what he promised on the campaign trail.

Therefore, you can't exactly be surprised and shocked at his recent announcement. Looks like you're the one who needs the English lesson.

[FiveGoodMen]

154. Actually, you did not say that. And the evidence that you didn't is here for everyone to read.

You claimed not to have said the policy was good. Which is not the same thing.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

157. Then I'll spell it out in simple and plain English so that even you can understand.

The policy is not good.

Now you have caught up with the rest of the English-fluent posters.

[FiveGoodMen]

163. It would have been far better if you'd started out saying that.

[Sebastian Doyle]

170. Well, he also promised hope, change, jobs, and a public option.

So how come the only one of those promises he keeps is the shitty one? :evilfrown:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

173. For one, "hope" and "change" are vague, undefinable terms in politics.

And the public option, though not perfect at the moment, looks likely to pass.

As for jobs, he's doing what he can, even though the results could obviously be better. Then again, he does have to clean up the mess from eight years of the worst president ever, so I do cut him some slack.

We have to remember that he is the president, not a dictator. He can't rule by decree. And considering he hasn't even been in office for a year, nobody should be expecting miracles here. It's as if people (not necessarily you) voted for Obama while thinking he was Kucinich. That is dangerous and ill-informed thinking.

[Sebastian Doyle]

175. No, I wasn't expecting Kucinich.

I was expecting better than Hillary though, because I knew her administration would be a rerun of everything that was wrong with the 90's. Thought Obama would at least go in a new direction if not neccessarily as good of one as Dennis or Howard Dean would have. Or Al Gore, who I was really hoping would finally take his rightful place in the Oval Office in 2008.

[martymar64]

204. Then you have no right to grieve for the soldiers that will die

You voted for him knowing that more of our finest will die horrible deaths or be mutilated or forever traumatized. You voted to willingly send somebody else's loved one to their certain death. Their blood is on your hands as well as Obama's.

So that being said, when they come back in coffins (as they certainly will) you better just salute and keep your fucking mouth shut. And when your kids or grandkids come of age, you need to walk them down to the recruiters office to be next in line.

You voted for this war. So suck it up and join the fight.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

220. Did you vote for Obama?

Then the same applies to you.

When I voted for him, I didn't perceive or expect him to be an ideal candidate, but overall he was far better than the alternative.

[martymar64]

250. We weren't given an anti-war alternative, it was Warmonger A vs. Warmonger B

But I will NEVER vote for another warmonger, no matter how flowery the speeches or promises of "change".
Anything he does positive will be forever stained by his decision to kill more of our finest men and women in that desert hellhole. It will destroy any domestic initiatives because the money needed for them will be poured into the sands of Afghanistan like the blood of our soldiers. Health care reform? Forget about it, gotta pay for the war. Jobs? You can have a job dodging bullets in Kandahar. Infrastructure? No can do, gotta buy more tanks and planes to kill Afghani civilians. Money for education? Don't make me laugh. Our youth can get their schooling in boot camp before they ship off to Bagram.

"Finish the job" my fucking ass. He knows as well as you and I that there is going to be no end to this war. By next year, I predict he'll announcing that he'll be sending another 100K or 200K troops to die for his dreams of glory to "finish the job". In this regard, he is worse than Bush because he should know better. But he's just another bloodthirsty pimp selling the soul of America to the Gods of War.

OBAMA THE BLOODTHIRSTY is my name for him from now on.

Yeah, some folks inherit star spangled eyes,
ooh, they send you down to war, Lord,
And when you ask them, how much should we give,
oh, they only answer, more, more, more

[Starbucks Anarchist]

253. I take that as a yes.

So that makes you as guilty as me.

Now either you voted for him knowing this, or you didn't keep yourself informed, so don't even try to point the finger at anybody before looking in the mirror yourself.

[pengillian101]

188. Does anybody read anymore?

Apparently not so much.

[RedCloud]

143. 12 years of illegitimate Bush government. He cheated 2x. O continues the legacy.

What is wrong with this fucking picture? Not even twilight Zone dreams up nightmares this fucked up!

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

149. It's All About The Pipelines.

Obama never said he'd end the war, we just believed he would.
When you get into the position of power you realize, maybe the "other guy" wasn't as wrong as you thought.

God how I hate to say that.

He really should ask Russia how they fared.

[ChiciB1]

158. Ya Know, The BFEE Must Be Laughing Their Asses Off! n/t

[branders seine]

159. War. It's America's business.

[barbtries]

161. i hope you don't mind

i copied and pasted your post into a letter to the president.

just because it is not entirely unexpected that obama would make this choice does not imo make it less of a disappointment.

end the WARS!!! :cry:

[flvegan]

162. Don't blame me. I voted for Dennis Kucinich.

Though, when facing the abyss, I happily voted for Obama.

[malaise]

168. I'm not supporting any escalation

of war. Fuck war.

[BooBluePotion]

169. +1

This all goes back to September 11, 2001 and those in the last administration who helped pull this endgame over the public. I personally believe that President Obama would suffer JFKs fate if he ever challenged the Military Complex so all I can do is agree that this decision is an upset.

[Skittles]

171. LOL

yet another one probably mesmerised by speeches without hearing what was ACTUALLY SAID

[Clear Blue Sky]

172. Talk is cheap, regardless from which politician it comes from.

[mzmolly]

174. I agree Trumad but Obama did promise to increase troop levels and finish

the job in Afghanistan before he was elected. I think too many either didn't listen or believe him?

:(

[martymar64]

202. Not like any of us had a choice

It was either Warmonger A or Warmonger B.

It's not like Sasha or Malia will have to go to Afghanistan. Only the kids and husbands and brothers and wives and husbands of those rendered destitute by the economic "change" and given the choice to fight or watch their families starve.

Anybody that is in favor of this war have no right to grieve when their loved ones come home dead or mutilated. You voted for your candidate knowing that this was a likely result, so no bitching or moaning will be allowed. Suck it up and accept your losses without a word or a single tear.

[swilton]

177. I can see the logic of the Democratic Party

They know that the Republicans are so far off the planet and, with candidates like Palin, Romney, Gingrich, et. al. that they have no opposiiton. So the madness continues...

[sandyj999]

179. What has Become of the Man I voted for? I think the aliens took him. n/t

[LuckyTheDog]

180. Obama said all along he might escalate Afghanistan

So, I kind of feel like I got what I voted for. I'm still glad I didn't vote for McCain/Palin.

[DWilliamsamh]

181. Well I guess you weren't listening. He said he'd withdraw from Iraq

And made it clear, DURING THE CAMPAIGN, that one of the reasons for doing so was to focus on being more effective in Afghanistan at tracking down and capturing the terrorists - including Bin Laden - who attacked us. Some military actions are worth doing and doing right. It sounds like you have a problem with that concept. Welcome to the real world.

Now what I would like to see is a de-escalation of general operations in Afghanistan - since the elected(?) government is corrupt as hell, and certainly no friend of the US. The reason would be not to withdraw, but to focus specifically on capturing Bin Laden (and yes he's in Pakistan, but he would just squirt back across the border if there was no American Presence there). Once Bin Laden is captured, or preferably killed, then we can leave entirely and let those assholes do what ever they want to do.

Yeah you might say I am not a typical 'peace at all costs' liberal.

[defendandprotect]

183. Bring our troops home NOW --

[defendandprotect]

184. Pelosi & Reid have also ignored the anti-war vote .... since '06 . . . !!!!

[tbyg52]

187. You assume he's acually in charge - I don't anymore. nt

[martymar64]

192. I agree completely

And for all those cheerleaders for these wars: Don't you fucking shed a single tear when your kids and husbands and brothers and friends come home in boxes! You voted for it, knowing full well what could happen. You made your beds, now lie in them.

[Stumbler]

193. Sorry. Sounds like you should've backed Kucinich

"Oh, but he's unelectable!!!" Well, that what we get for backing the corporate candidate.

[thegoodfight]

201. wtf

First the war on terror, then the war on the taliban,
then the war on al qaeda, then the war on womens rights, then operation freedom and now you its a war about conquering there land?! What the fuck, Americans, LAY OFF THE METH!

[David Zephyr]

206. trumad, I'm with you. K&R.

.

[twitomy]

207. What alternate reality were you in during the campaign?

Obama said he would wind down Iraq and put more resources on Afghanistan, not pull out...

[closetliberal]

211. Well he has had since August to make a damn decision...what gives?

[winyanstaz]

214. Yes...I had such hopes for Obama....now I am not so sure anymore...

[SnakeEyes]

221. What did you think?

Did you vote for him thinking he was lying during the campaign about wanting to withdraw from Iraq and shift to Afghanistan, the "just" and "necessary" war?

[Mosaic]

224. I wanted to vote for a real Progressive

I didn't vote for him precisely because he said he would continue the Afghan war. I wanted to vote for a real Progressive but Corporate Media shut down Dennis Kucinich for not towing the corporate line enough, and a dumbed down population barely noticed the only man who cared about peace and justice was silenced. America got what it deserved for being so dumb. Maybe people will wisen up by the next election, it's still too soon to tell. Internet *must* dominate media for people to learn the truth and bypass the darkness of our agenda driven teevee media yellow journalism.

[Enthusiast]

241. Oh, they have

plans to deal with the internet. I imagine it will be handled much the way health care reform was. Then we will actually have 1984.

[Vroomfondel]

226. At the risk of repeating myself....

Barack Obama does as his masters instruct. Just like every other president, with the exception of the Irishman (who wouldn't play by the rules) that the masters had to "take care of". No further navel gazing or speculation required. Next.

[AllyCat]

227. During the primaries, I was a single-issue voter: Out of the WARS!

Then I watched the few anti-war candidates fall out of contention, one by one. I decided that Obama was still better than McCain (he probably is still). Then I decided health care was the issue and look where we sit with that. On the brink of stupidly spending more money to keep the same crappy plans we have. The economy is in the toilet and the Administration appears to not notice. And back we come to the war. We are FREAKIN' ESCALATING IT!!! I'm done. It doesn't matter if I don't vote for him again. It doesn't matter who I vote for.

It's the FUCKING CORPORATIONS who run the place. There is not one other thing now that matters except:

Public Financing of Campaigns!

[BillDU]

231. Don't know.

During the campaign Obama stated that he was interested in drawing down Iraq militarily and interested in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
So I don't know what's wrong with you.

[JCMach1]

233. Spot on...

:(

[FlyByNight]

237. K & R

How can all too many in Congress bark about the cost of healthcare reform (such as it is), turnaround, then not shovel money fast enough into the military-industrial-congressional complex without a peep? The country is run by psychopaths.

The empire/republic is now unsustainable (hundreds of bases, two current occupations, overly expensive weapons systems, and 30+ years of Reaganism/Friedmanism to name a few factors). I realize Obama was handed a severely damaged product when he assumed office but he seems to be in Wall Street's and the Pentagon's thrall. And most of us will continue to suffer for it.

Get the fuck out of Afghanistan - pipeline(s) notwithstanding.

:scared:

[thegoodfight]

239. Thankyou

for your solitary voice of reason.

[Enthusiast]

242. Couldn't have said it better

myself. And the product was severely damaged by the 30+ years of Reaganism/Friedmanism. So we appear to be continuing along the same merry way.

[SmileyRose]

243. Barack Obama is doing exactly what he promised.

if you are disappointed then you weren't listening to him.

[lovelyrita]

244. Makes me fell sick.

New boss, same as the old boss.

I really do hope this will create an uptick in the anti-war movement. The war profiteers must be stopped.

[midnight]

245. K&R. no. 166.

[girl_interrupted]

246. K&R

[WeDidIt]

249. You didn't listen to him during the campaign, did you?

He NEVER said he'd pull troops out of Afghanistan.

He ALWAYS said he supported the effort in Afghanistan.

You're projecting your bullshit on Obama.

[earth mom]

255. I'm happy to see that people are waking up to the lies we've been fed. nt