If Obama were President on 9/11/01, there may not have been an attack on our soil.

[jenmito]

But he wasn't and there was. Obama won the presidential election in 2008. He ran on Iraq being an unnecessary war, a distraction from Afghanistan, where we should've kept our concentration. Now that he's President, he's concentrating on Afghanistan, just like he said he would. He lifted the ban on cameras recording the coffins returning if their families were ok with it.

He just took THREE months making a decision, after rejecting 4 earlier plans since none had exit strategies (to the criticism of Cheney and others for everyone who says he's caving to conservatives). He went to Dover to watch the Dignified Return of troops killed, went to Arlington Cemetery (making an unscheduled stop to Section 60 to the surprise of people visiting their loved ones), and got advice from anyone he possibly could.

He will announce his decision this Tuesday. And I will support him. Who's with me?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

1. Amen. I am certain of that. The man is loved. nt

[Oregone]

2. Breaking a campaign promise is a greater wrong than killing people and robbing the treasury

[jenmito]

3. Why should he break a campaign promise if he believes in what he's doing? n/t

[Oregone]

5. Why ask me. I also believe in killing people and robbing the treasury

Imagine a strange world where people operated on facts instead of fairy tales, beliefs and rhetoric. Disgusting.

[still_one]

35. No problem spending money killing people, but heaven help us if we spend money for HCR /nt

[BeatleBoot]

4. How could anyone criticize our president during a time of war?

Well, it's just beyond me.



:+

[still_one]

33. A declared war? /nt

[MadMaddie]

6. I am!!

I have a feeling (even if no one else here admits it) that Iraq and Afghanastan situations/wars were in much worse shape then we will ever know. I think that the wars were so mismanaged by */Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld that there weren't many options to work from.

From our soldiars being short changed in every aspect to actually planning a way to get out. Screwed up from the start.

No answer is a good answer but I would rather it be an answer that is well thought out.

[jenmito]

9. Thank you...

you're probably right. And you KNOW the Bush admin. left the next president a HUGE mess. And Obama is willing to clean it up.

[Clio the Leo]

47. Based on what they did with the economy.....

.... that is a VERY logical assumption. We should probably be glad there's not a large gaping hole in the Earth where we are all sitting right now.

[Diamonique]

7. I'm with you. I will support him, but...

... I'm *really* looking forward to him clearly defining the mission so the American people can understand exactly. And I'd like him to lay out his plans for accomplishing the mission, although I don't know if that's something that he can/should do publicly.

Obama doesn't do gut decision-making. He uses his head. So I'm confident that he will have come up with something reasonable that we can get behind... for awhile at least.

[jenmito]

10. I agree.

And I'm counting on him giving a long, well thought-out explanation. It's supposed to last bout 30 or 40 minutes.

[still_one]

21. Unless you can say that you would send your kid or yourself to Afghanistan, it means nothing /nt

[Clio the Leo]

52. Have no doubt he will......

.... outline the strategy as much as he can.

That's what he did during the first Afghanistan speech last spring.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=12515

I'm sitting here watching the Steelers game thinking he's probably sitting in the residence study right now, one eye on the game, one eye on the text, tweaking it and rearranging things.

[TheBigotBasher]

8. Afghanistan was a right decision

8 years ago, I am less sure of that now. I want to hear the exit strategy and the definition of victory, I can not however cheer lead for a war, especially as it seems we have not learnt anything from Iraq.

You cannot impose an administration upon an unwilling people. In France, 60 years ago those fighting such an imposition were called La Resistance. In Iraq and Afghanistan, we cal them terrorists.

[jenmito]

12. Like I said...

Obama is stuck cleaning up Bush's mess. He's dealing with the situation he was given. I'm sure he's not thrilled about having to deal with ANY war-but that's what he's dealing with.

[TheBigotBasher]

14. I do not disagree with that.

Some posters on DU may be wanting to sell a total anti war position afopted by the Green Party, I shall name no names, but there is the problem of reality and the advantage of those who will never win an election so that they can never take responsibility.

[jenmito]

19. OK...

and I'm sure I know the people you're talking about.

[still_one]

23. Getting bin laden, and AQ was a right decision, not occupying a country. Keep in mind we created

the taliban, they are a direct result of the mujahideen


Occupying countries isn't going to get AQ or bin laden

[newspeak]

83. but wait, * stated publicly that he was no longer interested

in getting OBL--OBL was a great ruse to go to war-if he really wanted OBL, he could have used strategic strikes against various positions-with an agreement with Turkey or Pakistan, instead of destroying infrastructures and civilians. If he really wanted OBL, he would have taken the Taliban up on their deal and given them proof that OBL was the mastermind, since they were willing to give us OBL with proof. Nah, what * wanted was war, and I believe for very greedy, corporate reasons. OBL was just Goldstein, to push their agenda.

[Cha]

11. I don't think there would have been

an attack on 9/11 if Gore had been able to take his rightful place, either.

Or Kerry for that matter..anyone who wanted to keep our country safe would have had a vested interest in investigating all the reports on terrorism especially the August 6, 2001 memo.

"APRIL 10--Under pressure from the September 11 commission, the White House today declassified and released an intelligence digest given to President George W. Bush weeks before the 2001 terrorist attacks. The confidential President's Daily Brief (PDB) for August 6, 2001 contained a two-page section entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," and refers to possible hijacking attempts by Osama bin Laden disciples and the existence of about 70 FBI investigations into alleged al-Qaeda cells operating within the United States. The August 6 PDB, an excerpt from which you'll find below, was presented to Bush while he vacationed at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. The digest is prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency, an official from which briefs the president on the report's contents. While Bush critics have described the August 6 PDB as a warning of an impending al-Qaeda attack, Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, testified Thursday that the document contained "historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information." (2 pages)"

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0409041pdb1.html

As others have pointed out..Obama spoke out against the war on Iraq in October 2002 when it was "political suicide" bc it was the right thing to do.

<snip>

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the President today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush?"

<more>
http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

[jenmito]

16. I agree. And thanks for the links.

I'm so tired of DEMS. criticizing Obama for dealing with the last admin.'s mess as if he caused it.

[Cha]

25. President Obama's history is why I

will trust his position on Afghanistan.

Nobody I know wants "war" but none of us want anymore terrorist attacks in the world, either.

Have you read grantcart's history and analysis on Afghanistan(and Vietnam) over in the Barack Obama Forum?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x6041

[jenmito]

28. That's a very good reason...

and no, I haven't read it. But I will now. Thanks! :hi:

[Enthusiast]

69. I agree with you!

I also think it reasonable to conclude that the Bush Administration felt an attack on the U.S. would serve their purposes like nothing else so they neglected to take the intelligence of a pending attack seriously. They might have even 'enabled' it to occur.

I remember hearing Limbaugh castigating AL Gore for his suggestion that cockpit doors should be reinforced on all commercial airlines. This was sometime in the late 1990s. Limbaugh's big beef was that it would cost the airlines $300 for each door. Strangely enough I have never heard this mentioned on the M$M.

[divineorder]

74. Limbaugh and the Republicans have blood on his hands

How much did, and will, before the last survivor of 911 dies, it cost us for not putting on those $300 doors? It was because they so slavishly followed him that this necessary reform was not done. If those doors had been on the cockpit, 911 at worst might have been a casualty toll of say 300 poor souls if the pilot had to crash. Just think, the World Trade Center would still be standing tall, the Pentagon undamaged.

How much will it cost us not getting Bin Laden? We don't even have a final estimate for that, as we do not know if he's anointed a successor to carry out his unfinished business, and Afghanistan is nowhere near over. When Clinton tried to bomb the training camps, the Republicans in Congress said he was "wagging the dog". If Clinton had been able to try until those camps were leveled, 911 would have been just another unfinished plan found among the ruins.

[Enthusiast]

81. Yeah, they were

in a constant state of abusing Clinton. All the crazy allegations were discussed every evening on MSNBC, Fox and CNN. It was the 'gotta get Clinton' all the time, M$M. It was as disgusting to me then as it is now. Far more disgusting than any sex act between consenting adults, that's for damn sure.

[ShortnFiery]

13. I don't know about the above. However, if we continue to occupy two Muslim Nations,

we will be under INCREASED threat of attacks on Americans, both at home and abroad.

No good can come out of OCCUPATION. But don't take my word for it, look how swimmingly it has worked out for the government of Israel? :wow:

Occupations foment increased resentment toward "the occupiers."

No good can come out of these occupations.

[jenmito]

22. "I don't know about the above." And why not? n/t

[still_one]

29. I know about the above. Same crap they said during Viet Nam. Finish the job. What job?

bin laden isn't in Afghanistan anymore

Anyone who supports more troops, should either be willing to have their children go, or they should go to fight this perceived threat

[ShortnFiery]

34. Well put!

It's easy to cheer for more WAR when it's not your family and friends who must put their lives on the line.

[still_one]

37. Isn't that the way it always is? /nt

[Clio the Leo]

55. Is it easy to advocate a complete and immediate withdrawl.....

.... when one wasn't personally affected by the 9/11 attacks?

I dont buy either argument.

[still_one]

80. AQ essentially isn't in Afghanistan anymore. bin laden is in Pakistan. Sounds like we are changing

the original focus of why we went to Afghanistan in the first place

Karzi has no problem dealing with the taliban. Who are we fighting again?

Are we going to destroy the dope fields?

[Clio the Leo]

85. His strategy has never been one that dealt with Afghanistan alone....

From March...

The future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan . In the nearly eight years since 9/11, al Qaeda and its extremist allies have moved across the border to the remote areas of the Pakistani frontier. This almost certainly includes al Qaeda's leadership: Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. They have used this mountainous terrain as a safe-haven to hide, train terrorists, communicate with followers, plot attacks, and send fighters to support the insurgency in Afghanistan . For the American people, this border region has become the most dangerous place in the world.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=12515

And today..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x25282

[still_one]

88. and just like every other country that played this game in Afghanistan we will follow history /nt

[Enthusiast]

70. The occupation reinforces

every claim made by militant extremists and fosters a greater chance of an attack in the future.

[Mz Pip]

15. I was all for going into Afghanistan

after 9/11. But BushCo dithered around with that mission and started an unnecessary war and 7 years went by. I hoped that Karzai would bring some stability to the region but he turned out to be corrupt and outside of Kabul it doesn't appear that things are really any better.

Where to go from here? At first I thought "finishing the job" sounded like a good idea but I think it's just anaother simplistic talking point. I don't know what the job even is any more or what finishing it is supposed to look like.

So I will listen to what Obama has to say and hope for the best. I don't think I support any escalation in Afghanistan and if there is one I want a damn good explanation for it. "Finishing the job" doesn't cut it for me.

I am old enough to remember Johnson's escalation of the Vietnam war and how it defined his presidency; how he declined to run for another term and how we got Nixon and several more years of a war that we never did "win." Vietnam couldn't be won with 500,000 troops and I don't think Afghanistan can be won with adding more, either.

I don't want to see a repeat of Vietnam.

[still_one]

20. and you are right, it is too late now. Opportunities are gone /nt

[Warren Stupidity]

17. If Obama had been president on 9-11-01 impeachment proceedings would

have commenced on 9-12-01.

[Enthusiast]

71. I don't know about

impeachment, but rather than have a country united, the RW M$M would done everything in their power to blame the president.

[still_one]

18. I 'm not with you. I don't blindly follow anyone, and adding more troops to Afghanistan is wrong

What is the purpose in AFghanistan, to support or prop up a corrupt government?

Perhaps I should remind you that Obama has adopted Bush view on the powers of the presidency. I disagree with that also, and so did candidate Obama

Right now the Obama administration is a mixed bag. He allowed stem cell research funding, and appointed a Supreme Court justice that will uphold Roe, but there are also a lot of disturbing thing his administration has done

[jenmito]

24. I'm not blindly following him. I see how seriously he's taking this situation.

Why don't you wait and hear him SAY what the purpose in Afghanistan is?

You don't have to remind me. I don't blindly follow him, as I said. I don't agree with him on everything. I DO agree with him on finishing the job in Afghanistan.

[still_one]

26. Finish what job in Afghanistan? bin laden isn't there anymore. Viet Nam didn't stop communism,

and neither will occupying Islamic countries stop terrorism

[jenmito]

27. Why don't you wait 'til he SAYS what he considers "the job" in Afghanistan?

Don't you think he studied the Vietnam War in his decision process of what to do and what NOT to do in Afghanistan? Or do you think you and a few other posters here are the only ones?

[still_one]

31. No I don't. I think he is listening to a commander who already circumvented his authority

and by not replacing McKiernan doesn't say much for Obama. Truman would have never let that stand, and Douglas MacArthur was a hell of a lot more popular than mckiernan.

Unless the NY Times is misreporting, there will be 30- 40 thousand more troops there. He is going to West Point to give the typical bravado speech

I have seen this movie many times before, and I will the same lame excuses.

[jenmito]

39. Then let me show you that you're wrong:

"...There's a book that's considered required reading at the White House, probably because the president recommends it. Gordon Goldstein's "Lessons in Disaster" is the story of the Vietnam War through the eyes of former national security adviser McGeorge Bundy. And it's a story of a decision-making apparatus run amok.

Not surprisingly, it seems that Obama sees himself as more President John F. Kennedy than President Lyndon Johnson: that when it comes to the use of force, all the pressure in the world cannot match the president's authority --and responsibility -- to decide independently..."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/24/borger.obama.tipping.point/index.html#cnnSTCText

[ShortnFiery]

46. Obama should have fired McCrystal instead of letting him make a chump out of him in London.

Instead, Obama is embracing ALL of the MIC of the former Administration.

That's NOT change by a long shot.

[noamnety]

58. He's been a war president for a full year now.

I'm appalled that after a year of having troops die under his command, we are being told to be patient and wait til he tells us what the mission is.

[Clio the Leo]

30. I'm going to reserve my judgment until I've heard what he's said...

..... but I think the chances are HIGHLY likely that he will present a clear case for the road ahead. We've been waiting for weeks now for this decision and WHY he's made it, I'm looking forward to him explaining his thought process.

And my prediction is that it is also highly likely that he'll address the very issues we're debating here and there will be cheers of "see there!" from those who tend to support him.

The man knows how to "make a talk" and he's not afraid of his critics.... thrives from them even.

I'm more interested to see the reaction of the cadets .... often military personnel dont cheer fro the President as a sign of respect. Should be interesting.

[still_one]

32. So if you become so convinced, are you or your children enlisting, or better yet, support a draft?

[Clio the Leo]

36. Yeah, sure. Why not. NT

[jenmito]

41. I look forward to your

opinion of what he says. I'm sure I'll see you here so we can talk about what he says. :)

[Clio the Leo]

42. Oh, I'll be here to offer lots of thoughtful analysis....

.... on how well (or poorly) his necktie coordinated with the cadet's uniforms. (you know, the important stuff)

In all seriousness, I know that you are just as interested as I am in picking up what the President is putting down. ;)

[jenmito]

43. I'm sure...

you'll be all over it. :D

I sure am. ;)

[boomerbust]

38. me

[jenmito]

40. Thanks.

[Skittles]

44. the 9/11 attackers were from Saudi Arabia, NOT Afghanistan

[jenmito]

49. They were BORN in Saudi Arabia. They were in Afghanistan when they planned the attack.

[ShortnFiery]

54. Then, to be intellectually honest, we're going to have to bomb Columbus ... Geogia.

Home of the infamous SOA? What we did in Latin America during the 1980s was horrific. And those men who comprised many of "the death squads" were TRAINED at the good ole SOA. As David Rovic's croons: They train the death squads of Latin America who commit a massacre every day.

Civilians are their targets
Folks just like you and me
I guess that makes them terrorists
Any IDIOT would agree.

:sarcasm: galore

[Skittles]

59. you must think America needs to be bombed too

honestly, your apologist behavior is getting sickening :puke:

[Cha]

60. I'm so glad we have President Obama in charge

and not someone like the hot-headed internet know-it-alls.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

66. or more likely

patsies for you know who

[Sebastian Doyle]

89. Bullshit.

They got their training at a flight school owned by CIA/Bush Crime Family operatives Wally Hilliard and Rudi Dekkers, under the watchful eye of Governor Jeb Bush in FLORIDA.

Should we invade Florida next?

[WinkyDink]

90. And you know this how?

[Honeycombe8]

45. I will. This is complicated. I trust that he has information that I don't have?

And that he can state a definite mission.

[ShortnFiery]

48. That's exactly how many here JUSTIFIED to themselves the Iraq WAR: they have SECRET information.

No, if any information that would have justified this escalation were available, the "all knowing" authorities would have de-classified and published it.

We're being punked again ... not unlike the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

And you're buying it ONLY because our President is "a democrat" and therefore must possess a secret decoder ring. :crazy:

[jtrockville]

50. I believe he'll make the best choice, after careful deliberation.

I'm also pretty sure I won't like the decision, mostly because I think war is wrong.

[ShortnFiery]

51. Yes, he'll make the BEST choice that will enrich his co-equals in the Privatized MIC. eom

[freddie mertz]

53. This is getting weirder and weirder.

Now we get "predictions" regarding a past that could never have been.

What was Obama's job in 2001?

He was a State Senator.

Nothing wrong with that, and he's come along way on his obvious talents. But he could not have been president then, and it is ridiculous AND meaningless to speculate about what he or other people might have done if he were.

Honestly, this hero worship stuff is getting more and more embarrassing.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

76. If Obama was president during Vietnam

we would have won and everyone would have gotten a puppy, I am not lying!!

[freddie mertz]

77. Right! And if he had been president in 1941, no Pearl Harbor attack...

And if he was prez in 1933, Hitler would never have come to power...

And in 1348, no Black Death.

This latest-phase cheerleading stuff (pro-war and death division) is below the level of the stupid, it's downright MORANIC.

[Mira]

56. Not me. N/T

[Fire1]

57. My only problem with Afghanistan is during his campaign

there WAS a good chance BL was held up there but reports have long since indicated that he was in Pakistan. So, I don't really know what to believe.

[burning rain]

61. You'd be better off making a case for escalation on the merits.

You appear to be implying that whatever Obama decides to do, it will be justified simply by his having deliberated and agonized over the decision so long, and gone to Arlington and Dover. That's sentimentalism and not a real argument.

[tekisui]

62. Or worse it would be justified because he campaigned on it two years ago.

The only other argument I see regularly is wait until Tuesday.

[tekisui]

63. Shit no, I do not support doubling an 8 year old war.

Obama's first surge led to a record number of deaths. It will likely be three times as worse with this one.

[agentS]

64. Obama and his staff read memos; Bush and Co did not

and the Obama admin so far would not milk an attack on US soil to push thru crappy security and whatever else the VP could come up with to secure Halliburton/KBR profits.

i can't quite get behind the 34,000 troop surge "bandwagon". But I am interested to hear what he says before I grab my protest signs. Namely, I want to hear what he decided would be the exit strategy.

[smalll]

65. I'm with you.

Obama has a choice to make. I can respect those who feel he should make the choice one way, or another way -- the people who realize the man has a CHOICE -- and who will generally defer to his judgement, even if with reservations.

What I cannot respect are the leftbagger deviationists who believe he had NO choice to make -- that, damn the evidence, full speed behind, he had no choice but to bug out, to give up, to surrender, to sigh a big ol' Emily Litella-style "nevermind" to 9/11 -- despite all the promises he made during the campaign.

[noamnety]

68. giving up, surrendering ...

lord we sound more and more like the devoted right during the Bush years with their "we don't cut and run" macho bullshit.

[still_one]

78. 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11... Sounds like rudy. bin laden isn't even in Afghanistan anymore /nt

[QC]

67. Hr eould have swatted those planes right out of the air, just like that fly. n/t

[freddie mertz]

72. He would have stopped the plot with the magic of his personality.

Seriously, some of the posts here are off the charts.

[eridani]

73. If he is escalating Afghanistan, hell no!

Before anyone posts any crap about "finishing the job," how about defining the "job"? Making people there like being pushed around by a foreign military? Getting bin Laden? What?

[spiritual_gunfighter]

75. There are less than 100 members of Al Qaeda

in Afghanistan at this time.

[still_one]

79. Don't confuse me with the facts /nt

[polichick]

82. Of course I won't support more unnecessary killing and dying. nt

[AngryOldDem]

84. Nope, sorry, I'm not.

This is senseless and pointless.

I was hoping that the U.S. ambassador's concerns would have been listened to and thoughtfully considered. And they probably were...for all of five seconds.

[SIMPLYB1980]

86. Been there for a while.

:toast:

[jenmito]

87. Thanks.

:toast:

[WinkyDink]

91. Not I. And I wasn't "with" LBJ back in the day, either. Afghanistan is HOPELESS, people! A tribal

HELL-HOLE.

[Deep13]

92. "...lifted the ban on cameras recording the coffins ..."

Still waiting for the Abu Grave photos. (sp?)