Why is Obama expanding the war?

**johnsmith** · December-01-09, 02:17 PM

Obama said the first thing he would do if elected president would be to get our soldiers home from the wars.What is the holdup in Iraq and why is he expanding the war in Afghanistan? Is this what the people who voted for him want? Does he get a free pass for that doozy of a statement he made while campaigning? If so, why? Where are all the war protesters now? How can one believe anything he says? I'm all for ending the wars and there seems to be no end in sight.

Quote: "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank. " - Barack Obama Campaign Promise - October 27, 2007

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

**EMG** · December-01-09, 02:29 PM

Because he's a devious liar? But, wait, we already knew that...and the intelligent among us actually knew even before the election....

dfunkycity · December-01-09, 02:30 PM

Its ok, he's a liberal. They are allowed to do this without any thoughts of a real public backlash because they control the media.

It doesn't matter that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed by his war machine, he is right because he is the messiah and he knows whats best for all of us.

**EMG** · December-01-09, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Its ok, he's a liberal. They are allowed to do this without any thoughts of a real public backlash because they control the media.

It doesn't matter that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed by his war machine, he is right because he is the messiah and he knows whats best for all of us.

Exactly!!!!!

**elganned** · December-01-09, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Its ok, he's a liberal. They are allowed to do this without any thoughts of a real public backlash because they control the media.

It doesn't matter that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed by his war machine, he is right because he is the messiah and he knows whats best for all of us.

"His" war machine? You've forgotten who got us into this mess in the first place? Missed your ADHD meds this morning, did you?

I'm utterly disappointed and disheartened at this turn of events. I feel the same way I did when I voted for Reagan on his promise to balance the federal budget and then blew the budget to smithereens with defense spending. [[That was the last time I believed and voted for a Republican, BTW. This may be the last time I believe and vote for a Democrat. Wonder what the American Worker's Party looks like these days...?)

dfunkycity · December-01-09, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by elganned

" This may be the last time I believe and vote for a Democrat. Wonder what the American Worker's Party looks like these days...?)

Yea, its your last time , and don't wonder what the worker's party looks like Its already in the white house.

What's to wonder?

**elganned** · December-01-09, 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Yea, its your last time , and don't wonder what the worker's party looks like Its already in the white house.

What's to wonder?

What I'm really wondering is where your keepers are.

Lorax · December-01-09, 09:17 PM

Obama is making a mistake.

You'll never hear our friends on the Reich ever say Bush made a mistake, especially when he was in office. Hell, even Bush couldn't think of one when pressed for an example. I could have offered a few, starting with his mother's insistence on not having an abortion.

The wars are both mistakes, were from the start, and shows he's unwilling to stand up to our military-industrial complex, which probably is behind many of the threats to his life, so he's giving in.

There is no national security purpose to staying, no economic reasoning to staying, and there is only the contracting, and the wealth powers behind the military insisting on continuing this.

Pulling out the troops last January was what should have been done, starting immediately. He probably would have been assassinated, though.

No president wants to spend his time in office walking a tightrope. This is not of his choosing- his presidency will be determined by others, not himself.

He would be a one term president if he chose to really show us some change we could believe in. He's taken the course of least resistance, and constant equivocation as opposed to bold, transformative change.

The banks should be nationalized if things were done correctly. A single payer health care plan based on Medicare for all is the only way to providing coverage for all at affordable rates. And the list goes on.

**firstandten** · December-03-09, 12:34 AM

Originally Posted by elganned

"His" war machine? You've forgotten who got us into this mess in the first place? Missed your ADHD meds this morning, did you?

I'm utterly disappointed and disheartened at this turn of events. I feel the same way I did when I voted for Reagan on his promise to balance the federal budget and then blew the budget to smithereens with defense spending. [[That was the last time I believed and voted for a Republican, BTW. This may be the last time I believe and vote for a Democrat. Wonder what the American Worker's Party looks like these days...?)

Serious question. Do you think the American people would support and embrace a third party candidate who theorically could become president with 34% of the popular vote or even less depending on electoral college results ? I think this society is stuck with the two party system at least on a national level.

**1KielsonDrive** · December-03-09, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by firstandten

Serious question. Do you think the American people would support and embrace a third party candidate who theorically could become president with 34% of the popular vote or even less depending on electoral college results ? I think this society is stuck with the two party system at least on a national level.

I don't believe that is the question. I believe the question is : would the demicans and republicrats allow a third party to lessen their stranglehold on the money and power they hold?

**d.mcc** · December-03-09, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

I don't believe that is the question. I believe the question is : would the demicans and republicrats allow a third party to lessen their stranglehold on the money and power they hold?

The answer is no... obviously

**d.mcc** · December-02-09, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Its ok, he's a liberal. They are allowed to do this without any thoughts of a real public backlash because they control the media.

It doesn't matter that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed by his war machine, he is right because he is the messiah and he knows whats best for all of us.

Um... Again, pardon my language, but are you fucking kidding?

Did the Iraq [[illegal) War and Afghanistan Invasion start on January 20, 2009? I don't think so...

dfunkycity · December-02-09, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by d.mcc

Um... Again, pardon my language, but are you fucking kidding?

Did the Iraq [[illegal) War and Afghanistan Invasion start on January 20, 2009? I don't think so...

I suggest you put your liberal handbook down and try speaking the truth for a change.

The Iraq war is in no damn way shape or form an illegal war.

Bush the first took us there and we have been at war with them ever since never leaving their soil.

Now, on the other hand, lying about the reasons for ramping up the war in Iraq is a different story.

You want to moan and cry about Iraq, then do it truthfully.

**elganned** · December-02-09, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

I suggest you put your liberal handbook down and try speaking the truth for a change.

The Iraq war is in no damn way shape or form an illegal war.

"Illegal"? That can be argued. "Stupid"? No question.

Bush the first took us there and we have been at war with them ever since never leaving their soil.

If we never left, why did we have to invade again?

**1KielsonDrive** · December-03-09, 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

I suggest you put your liberal handbook down and try speaking the truth for a change.

The Iraq war is in no damn way shape or form an illegal war.

Bush the first took us there and we have been at war with them ever since never leaving their soil.

Now, on the other hand, lying about the reasons for ramping up the war in Iraq is a different story.

You want to moan and cry about Iraq, then do it truthfully.

The assumption implicit in your statement is that you know the TRUTH. Please, do tell us. I've been waiting for you all of my life. PRAISE!

ccbatson · December-01-09, 04:48 PM

Elganned...who got us there in the first place is the islamic terrorists/OBL/the Taliban. That isn't the question now, now it is a matter of how do we rapidly win on that battle front and in the greater war with islamic terrorism.

**1KielsonDrive** · December-03-09, 12:46 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Elganned...who got us there in the first place is the islamic terrorists/OBL/the Taliban. That isn't the question now, now it is a matter of how do we rapidly win on that battle front and in the greater war with islamic terrorism.

Typical deluded Bats. How quickly you fall into denial.

**Sstashmoo** · December-01-09, 08:02 PM

Bush and friends took office with an agenda to put American boots on the ground in the middle east, they just needed a reason, they were handed one and allowed it to happen. We're there and we aren't leaving anytime soon.

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that both parties are for such an utter failure? Does it strike anyone odd that our present "leader" harped for two years about how he would pull troops out, and now we will have an unprecedented number deployed? Makes ya wonder.

**Jimaz** · December-01-09, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Bush and friends took office with an agenda to put American boots on the ground in the middle east, they just needed a reason, they were handed one and allowed it to happen....

Rep. Hinchey: Bush Admin. 'Intentionally Let bin Laden Get Away' for Justification of Iraq War

Rep. Hinchey: Bush ‘intentionally let Bin Laden get away’

**Papasito** · December-01-09, 11:02 PM

It's funny how Obama was labed by the left as the candidate of peace
during the election....
He was [[and still is) nothing of the sort.
People voted for the shiny and heavily marketed exterior package,
but not what was inside the box

We will have nearly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan

The added troops will join an estimated 68,000 U.S. service members already in Afghanistan, and tens of thousands of allied forces.
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news...-78273987.html

We have the satellite technology to find our enemies from orbit and then bomb them at will. We have the technology to hit our enemies however and whenever we want and bomb them into submission. Instead, the President of Peace decides to send half of what his General requests [[he wanted 60,000 more troops) and to make this into our turn to pour hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of lives into what the Soviets could never accomplish.

Every soft tyrant with an oversized ego needs a war,
Obama just made this one his.

**firstandten** · December-01-09, 11:23 PM

Obama never made a campaign promise that he would end the war in Afghanistan he also made it clear that Afghanistan was the war to be fought and it needed more resources.

dfunkycity · December-01-09, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by firstandten

Obama never made a campaign promise that he would end the war

Really? Maybe someone should tell him that. I dont think he knew.

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

How are those tax cuts coming along?

**firstandten** · December-01-09, 11:41 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Really? Maybe someone should tell him that. I dont think he knew.

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

The campaign promise was to end the war in Iraq and I believe thats what the you tube video refers to.

**Gistok** · December-02-09, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

Really? Maybe someone should tell him that. I dont think he knew.

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

How are those tax cuts coming along?

Apparently some folks are not aware that there are 2 wars being fought!!

Maybe they should be spoon fed the words "IN AFGHANISTAN"... just to get them up to speed...

**barnesfoto** · December-01-09, 11:52 PM

A bit of historical perspective is necessary, for those who have conveniently forgotten who created the mess in the first place. [[Or maybe they never bothered to learn).

Thirty years ago, The Soviets invaded Afghanistan to prop up a guy who was trying to, among other things, create equal educational opportunities for women.

At the time, such ideas were called "communism".

Fundamentalist muslims began an uprising against such ideas, as well as the foreigners who were occupying the country.

A newly elected Ray-Gun administration began comparing the fundamentalist muslims to our founding fathers and sending them guns and money. They even sent CIA agents to show the fundamentalist muslims how to use rocket launchers, purchased by us, as in the American People.

One of the Fundamentalist Muslims that received guns and money was named Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

Today he's one of the people that US Forces are fighting.

The US Forces are fighting for, among other things, equal educational opportunities for women.

Obama was always against the Iraq War, and called it a "stupid war" from day one.
He was more wishy washy about A-stan.

Today, perhaps he has made a foolish mistake, and perhaps he is merely continuing decades of stupid American Foreign Policy.

On the other hand, did he not say "After 18 months, our troops will come home"?

That's still better than the previous criminally incompetent administration, [[who bungled an opp to get OBL) but it could very well be an LBJ moment, and Pakistan may be our next Cambodia.
I hope not.