THIS IS OFFICIALLY OBAMA’S WAR.

Good job Red; this one is definitely now Obama's war. He just signed his name to it in bold letters. If things don't go well, I think a solid conservative candidate, who offers a pragmatic and sensible exit strategy from Afghanistan in the 2012 election will be pretty hard to beat.

I think it'll be interesting to that kind of a role reversal, where Obama has to try to validate his actions to a public that wants to stop seeing their kids come home in body bags.

amen but they are not only getting shoot there. Remember fort worth

"Bush was right about Iraq and it seems that so far, under the leadership of Barack Hussein Obama, Afghanistan is turning into a Vietnam-like quagmire. Even from the most ardent of George Bush critics, they can all agree to varying levels, that there has been success in Iraq relative to many of the goals that were laid out thereof. Iraq has definitely benefitted from the presence of US troops and are on their way to some semblance of Democracy, economic stability and safety from the few remaining rebels opposing US presence."


The entire Iraq War is the problem with the Afghanistan War. Screw Bush being "right" about the surge(because he wasn't, there was nothing he was right about except agreeing with Petraus) Bush and his boys took us there when Bin Laden was in the other direction from Afghanistan.

The Afghanistan situation would have been long over and we never would have ok'd an Iraq War if the Bush War Crew didn't want to go into to Iraq and let Bin Laden get away and ignore Afghanistan for 8 years.


"When he was on the campaign trail last year, he constantly reminded us about how wrong Bush was about a “troop surge” and applauded those on the Left that claimed the surge was a failure when in fact it has turned out to be a success. So when Barack Hussein Obama sends in 17K troops back in February, the Left remains mysteriously silent as their CIC has to eat his own words and come across as simply a hypocrite."


How is Obama a hypocrite? Did you not write this prior to that paragraph:

"He has endorsed it from the beginning and has said all along that this is where the resources should have been in the first place. Back in February, he confirmed that belief by sending in an additional 17,000 troops to that country."

"where the RESOURCES SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE FIRST PLACE" that is what Obama said. The Left is a little too silent because they elected a man that was going to escalate a War, the ones that are hypocritical are the ones on the left that are now shocked that Obama is increasing troop levels.

I am against us being there, but I voted for this man and I know he said that he would increase troop levels there, he's only doing what he said he'd do.

So even if I want him to bring back the troops and put that money to use somewhere else, domestically, I'm supporting him, but with reservation, because he is doing what he said he would do.


"The Left which has taken every opportunity to protest the War under the Bush years, are no where to be heard. It seems that all of a sudden they are not so anti-war. It seems that when soldiers are dying at a faster pace in Afghanistan under Obama’s watch then at anytime under the leadership of George Bush, there is no outrage."

Protest the Iraq War(about going in there when there was no Al Qaeda, going in there telling lies, declaring victory, having no exit strategy, having no any strategy, allowing a civil war, tapping Afghanistan resources), protest the torturing and prisoner abuse (includes the prisoner buying program), protest the civil rights that were being trampled on in the name of the War(domestically and foreign).

Why are more troops dying under Obama than Bush? Could it be that the taliban has had 7 years to regroup and gain in numbers and strategies. That the taliban now is much more prepared to deal with American troops than the taliban from 2001 and 2002.

"The outrage over the death of American soldiers that was evident during the Bush years was more about a hatred for George Bush and simply using the dead corpses of American soldiers to advance their own selfish agenda. And as Barack Hussein Obama ordered and increased the Predator bombings in the Afghan / Pakistan border region and hundreds of innocent civilians were killed, the “International Community” that always gave George Bush hell about using this same type of force in civilian communities, all remained mum. No collateral damage could be severe enough to complain about so as long as Barack Hussein Obama was their CIC."


Um do you remember the outraged that happened after the predator bombings and the NATO bombing of the oil tankers?

I believe I was told to go live in Afghanistan because I wasn't supporting the troops when I expressed my outrage.

I believe true to their convictions the conservatives were all "so what...this is war, stuff like this happens. Stop bitc#ing."

I believe it was the liberals that were "this isn't good, we can't do stuff like this, even if we kill mid-level and their whole family, he will be replaced and even more people will be pissed at us and join the taliban and Al Qaeda"



As far as the rest of your post...I think you make a huge mistake in your logic.

"If the goal is not victory"

The goal is never victory. Never. Victory is when a goal has been achieved, not the other way around.

You set a goal and then you achieve it. That's victory.

This Afghanistan War was lost the moment someone let Bin Laden get away and then instead of getting him, we went to fight a useless war in another country for years.

Troops were asked for two years ago. A new strategy was asked for two years ago. More resources were asked for 2 years ago, and a few years before that. No one, two years ago, did anything to stop the Taliban surge that took place.



I understand the need for those on the right to pin this war on Obama. To no longer have it be political ammunition against the right, but you can not disconnect Bush from this WAR. HE STARTED IT, HE EFFED IT UP, HE WASTED THE RESOURCES, HE DIDN'T PLAN WELL, HE SET UP KARZAI, HE LET BIN LADEN GET AWAY.

THE ONLY REASON WE ARE IN AFGHANISTAN YEAR 9 IS BECAUSE OF BUSH AND HIS BLUNDERING BOYS.

Obama is now taking over, just like everything else for the worst Presidency in the modern political era.

A80,

You selectively leave out his campaign rhetoric about Afghan being the "right War". It was he that said this. If this is the case, how could it be Bush's fault that we are there when Obama is saying that this is where the war should be fought?

It is similiar to the spin we got from the Left when Republicans were up in arms over Obama qyadrupling the deficit. "Well, Bush and the Republicans spent a lot of money as well. Yes they did and that is why they are no longer in office. But does that make it ok for Obama to quadruple it in his first year in office? The same could be said of the Afghan war. Bush started it, so now Obama takes over and if he loses so be it, the Republicans got us into the mess to the begin with. Sorry, you can't lead that way. From the moment the first of those additional 17K troops landed in Afghanistan, it was Obama's War.

He has to own up to it. Just like Bush owned upp to Iraq and took all the criticism for it and the subsequent troop surge, Obama has to man up now.

It cracks me up to hear all this machismo, "man up" talk.

I didn't selectively leave anything out. I just used your words to make the same point. It's in there, one of the things written in cap locks is how he's talking about how resources should have been there in the first place.

How that is the war that should have been fought. "the right war".

Why did conservatives like you let Bush get away with starting the Iraq war and ignoring Afghanistan?

Talk about deficit...We borrowed money to pay for the Iraq War and then we borrowed money to pay for a tax cut to the rich. And we borrowed money to pay for the Medicare Part D.

The un-needed war is estimated at well over 1 trillion dollars. The bush tax cut is estimated at about the same cost as the health care reform. But of course there is interest on top of that money we borrowed.

An almost 2 trillion dollar deficit for two things that were not needed.

An economic stimulus was needed(and the tax cuts that are part of the stimulus). Extended unemployment benefits is needed. government saving jobs of teachers is needed. government starting infrastructure jobs is needed.

And now, just like everything else Bush and the conservatives did Obama is taking over and fixing things.

Um Obama is President and CIC and therefore is incharge of the War and everything else. But what you and the other conservatives are trying to do is totally disassociate Bush from his doings...well good luck, it's just not going to happen. There are a lot of people who remember just exactly how bad things got for them under the Bush White House.

People remember just what Bush did and didn't do while President, and what he didn't do was anything good in Afghanistan and went to Iraq for some reason.

I don't think we should be in Afganistan as well, but I think that Bush supporters have selective memory or they just say things like, "That's the past, this is now" and "Hindsight is 20/20". It's important to understand and ACKNOWLEDGE what was done wrong in the past so we don't repeat it, like we're doing now. I just don't think that occupying a country is right. I am anti-war. Obama is dead wrong on Afganistan. He said he wanted to go to Afganistan during his campaign and I thought it was wrong then and it has been the one thing in Obama's presidency I've been consistently against. But, I think most conservatives are usually for war, especially when they want to see justice for the loss of American lives. But I don't know how much this post has to do with conservatives being against war (or specifically this war) now and completely disowning the Bush years than it has to do with the fact that most people who dislike Obama and would rather him not be president will disagree with anything he does because of their own biases. I wonder if there would be a discussion among these very same people against the troop surge if we had elected Mccain as our president. I just think people should be consistent with their convictions. I certainly think you and I are.

A80,

"Why did conservatives like you let Bush get away with starting the Iraq war and ignoring Afghanistan?"

Hindsight is 20/20, but there were a lot of Democrats that were on board and approved the war.

The Tax-cuts that you talk about were not only for the rich. I was a beneficiary of those tax cuts and I don't consider my self rich. Tax cuts are always welcome as opposed to raising them.

The deficit at the end of the Bush admin was at $900 billion not 2 Trillion dollars.

I would not use the word fix and Obama in the same sentence. Maybe wreck, or exacebate would be more representative of what Obama has done so far.

It is lame for a President to continously blame the prior administration. Bush took and is still taking a lot of heat for Iraq and he deserves a lot of the blame. He never ducked the issue and as it turned out, Iraq is a better place for it.
This should be applauded by Liberals Globally. Liberals always espouse the need the uplift and empower those that have their human rights violated. Well Bush's war in Iraq did just that. Give credit where credit is due.

Redhanded, man, you're a piece of work! I bet you put rocks in your snowballs when there was a snowball fight! Democrats were LIED TO JUST LIKE THE REST OF CONGRESS AND THE SENATE AND HOUSE! That's why they voted for the war! If they knew what they knew now, I'm pretty sure that war would not have been an issue. You need to know your history, man! Those tax cuts did benefit the rich! They were talking about trickle down economics back in the Reagan days, but where did it trickle to? And we had a surplus when Bush took office! he wasted it on a war for Iraqi oil and Jobs for Dick Cheney's company, Halliburton! Did you know Dick Cheney was indicted by the World Court for crimes, but they had no jurisdiction in the US? I wouldn't put the word "fix" in ANY sentence with ANY of the republican administrations in the past 50 years! It takes money to fix bumbles, and that is what OUR president is trying to do! Look at what YOU SAID THE deficit was AFTER the Bush Administration left. If i'm not mistaken, we were out of the red when he took office!

Is this a repeat of the bush administration the world will feel betrade tonight when he speeks about sending more troops. He promised us he would start pulling them out I hope he knows what he is doing our troops is not going for a walk in the park.

Bmmc,

He put himself in this predicament. He is learning quickly that it is not the same thing to go on the campaign trail and say one thing and then live up to it. He can no longer continue to blame Bush after tonight. After tonight, he takes full ownership of this War for better or worse. For the Sake and safety of our troops, I hope our ground Generals can continue to perform under the half in half out strategy of this President.

omg what is he doing..what a nooob lol

a war? really? with adghan/?

thx so much

maybe he found out he didn't know everything...that should have been a hard lesson for him...:)....i am for more troops...either give the generals what they need to end this thing or bring our troops home NOW!!!!

LT,

I am also for more troops only if he is intent on victory and completely eradicating and disabling al-qaeda and the Taliban.
If victory is not the end game, pull out now and send everybody home.

Good post Red, regardless of what some say, it is obamas war NOW.

It is Obama's war. He can't escape that. As for Iraq I think it might be a bit premature assuming the war there was a victory. What's to stop the insurgents from returning immediately after our troops leave? They would have to be stupid to confront our troops when they know they are leaving. Given that almost everyone of our soldiers/Marines will be in Afghanistan or on their annual war-leave we will have no way to send troops back to support the government without a DRAFT

There's no need for a draft, nor will there be. We have enough troops to cover the board.

Yes, it is Obama's war now, absolutely, but it was Bush's mishandling of the situation from the start that puts Obama in the position of cleaning up yet another mess left behind by W.

The tone of this article, Red, really makes me wonder what it would be like if two people could switch perspectives, memories and expectations for just an hour. Because the reality I lived through regarding Bush and Iraq is absolutely nothing like the reality you are describing. This isn't to say that what seems real to you isn't, or that what seems real to me is, just that the huge gulf in perspective begs the question, "Is objective analysis possible without using relevant facts?"

In regards to your anti-Obama rant above, the answer most certainly is "no." Nothing objective about it, just another opportunity to badmouth the duly elected President of the United States in a time of international crisis. How sad. At least when the left (and the right, and the middle) badmouthed Bush, they were targeting the fool who put us in the horrible position we are in today, not the man elected to clean up his mistakes.

Well put. You are a smart man Punditty.

Its his war but he will blame Bush if he fails, and to announce a pullout like he is will give the Talaban a heads up on when to attack, after the pullout.

very well said that's just what I think, but its not Bush's fault as much as people say it is.

obama needs to start taking action to either pull the troops out or direct them better, definetly

Obama's speech tonight did more to solidify public support for a clearly defined mission in Afghanistan than Bush did in his entire presidency. Until I listened to President Obama tonight, I did not understand his rationale for sending more troops. It boils down to this: If American troops can execute the mission Obama articulated, and if the relationship with Pakistan unfolds at least somewhat according to plan, them maybe - just maybe - things will be better by the time Obama says he will begin withdrawing troops. It's a tall order, but it looks like the best chance we've got.

Punditty,

I have perspective. I served in the military under the Great Reagan administration.

WHat relevant facts are you referring to? And who are you to all of a sudden come trumpeting around your sanctimonious B.S.?

The left feasted on George Bush for 7 years and showed no compassion or respect duirng time of war and now because Obama can't decide if he's coming or going we should reserve judgement?
The vote to go war was 98-0 in the Senate and 420-1 in the House. How does Bush get tagged with going to war?

I call it the way I see it. You may like what Brian Willians, Matt Lauer or Katie Couric have to say about this situation better than what I have to say, I reserve no opologies for what I say.

Maybe, when this administration gets off the blame Bush wagon, I might have some respect for them. We need leadership not wee-weeing around the issue.

How does Bush get tagged with going to war?

Because Sens/Reps CLAIM they voted for the war based off of the false intelligence that Bush told them was reason to go to war in the first place. You will also recall that Obama spoke out about going to war with Iraq early on.

@ Redhanded,

Yes hindsight is 20/20. No one could see that the War in Iraq was wrong and unwarranted the first time, but now that they have a candidate they just don't like because "He's different from the rest of us", they all of a sudden flip flop and want fiscal responsibility and want to make sure the war is justified. Whatever. When your views start being consistent across the board, I'll have some respect for you. Until then you are just spewing more partisan politics. You just blow off 8 years of irresponsibility by saying "Hindsight is 20/20" and find another excuse to trash Obama. Whether he voted on it or not, he was always against the war in Iraq even when it was unpopular to say so. I have always been against the war in Iraq as I am the war in Afganistan, even though I voted for Obama. You are inconsistent and your rant here just proves you flip flop whenever the situation calls for you to talk trash on a politician or political party you dislike. Hey at least you're over defending Bush. That's not a position I'd ever want to find myself defending. It's a losing battle.

Chex,

Like I said, hindsight is 20/20. Those same SDemocratic Senators and House members that are complaining today, want to be on the Blame Bush wagon to save their own tails. Many of these same people sat on Intelligence Committees and were briefed were making the decision to go to War.

Obama, is a none factor in that decision. HE never had to make a decision as evidence of his record of voting present over 90% of the time while as a State Senator and as a Senator of Illinois during his 150 days in office.
It is much more difficult to make decisions when you are CIC than when you are out on the campaign trail telling people what they want to hear.

I was in the military in the Reagan Administration too! What did he do that was so great? I don't remember anything good he did for the people. Just the rich people! Civil rights came to a standstill and was almost non-existent! He snowballed the public and built up our military's nuclear arsenal, thus making Russia and communist Germany succumb to pressure from the US. He killed Khadaffi's family (I know! I was on the USS America when it happened). The rich prospered just like they did under both Bush Administrations! So tell us, What did he do to advance the American people as far as race relations and prosperity for all? His so-called trickle down economics was a joke! Where did economics trickle to? I'll tell you.....NOWHERE!! So when you say great the next time, you need to clarify yourself and tell us what exactly did he do for ALL the people of this so-called melting pot!!!

Buck,

With all due respect, you need to go back, open up the history books and re read about what happened from 1980-1988.

What did he do for the people? Under the Reagan years he created, not saved created, 21 million new jobs. Black unemployment was cut in half.Family income increased 12% during this time as well. So I guess you were not part of that 21 million people that benefitted.

Right before Reagan got into office and under the leadership of the Great Jimmy Carter, 7 million people were out of work and the inflation rate was over 13%.Are you sure you weren't in the military during the Carter years?

Have you heard about something called the Berlin Wall? You can look that up as well.Under the Reagan Administration, no country fell to communism and he took tough stances in Grenada, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf.

He killed? You were on the USS America when it happened? So what is the point?

No President has had that kind of Peace time properity since Reagan left office.

That was a rant and I effing love it!!!!!!

i liked his speech...but he is good at speeches...now we have to wait and see if he lives up to his words

all i want is no more war... i want to see al countries in this world live in peace

Most writers use someone's full name on the first reference and then use only the last name on subsequent ones. But saying "Barack Hussein Obama" on EVERY reference and never once mentioning that he is the president of the United States clearly shows an agenda.

One of the problems presidents all the way back to JFK and LBJ have had is the fear of being called weak on defense, so we extend unwinnable wars and fight goofy ones.

Capturing Osama bin Laden should never have been something to use the entire military for. Putting a $1 billion bounty on his head and sending Dog the Bounty Hunter after him would have worked just as well and a thousand times cheaper.

There is no reason for us to be in Afghanistan, there is no way for us to win in Afghanistan and there is nothing to be accomplished if they do win.

Get out now.

If Obama were really going to man up, he would bring the troops home now.

Mike,

What agenda is that? At last check, that is his full name. Ha he changed his name? How many times have you butchered Sarah Palin's name or used some degrading monicker?

No reason to be in Afghanistan? So you as Presdient of the US are going to stand there and risk another terrorist attack on US soil knowing that the mission to dismantle, disrupt and eradicate al-qaeda was complete? You would rather risk having thousands more killed by terrorist than complete the work that was started? This is why Liberal Presidents and administrations are tagged with being weak on defence.

I caught that too Mike. Definately emphasizing the Hussein part. I guess you cant teach an old DOG new tricks. I love the quip about sending Dog the Bounty Hunter after him. I heard he doesn't like people of color. He'd hunt Osama down and beat him like he stole something! And you are so right about sending the military to capture Osama being a bad idea.

Chx,

That is because subconsciously you have racist tendencies. Barack Hussein Obama is his name. Same thing if I had referred to Hillary Rodham Clinton or George Herbert Walker Bush. You tell me when should it be appropriate to use his middle name. Have you voiced your concern somewhere else on this site when Mike has butchered Sarah Palin's name and called her every name but her real middle name Louise?

@ Red below,

I read the article and you did not make a statement in favor of the surge. I don't read all the comments on the page but one thing is for sure Obama seems to be trying to make an informed decision before he jumps into war. He seems to be trying to make sure it is the right thing to do, because wars should not be gone into lightly as displayed by the Bush administration. I don't think we should go to war and if we loose, we all loose. It's not on the backs of one man. I consider myself a progressive and I am against this decision as I've said before. People across the board are criticising. Conservatives because they want to see him fail, and others because it is the wrong decision. You seem to think it's the right decision so what's the fuss about?

Chx,

If you would have taken the time to read between the lines, you would have noticed that I said I do support the additional troop surge in Afghanistan. Obama has been the one that has flipped flopped from his earlier statements in which he criticized the same action from George Bush.

To that point, he is now entrenched in this war and by sending the additional troops, it is now his war to win or lose. Can you at least agree on that?

It's not Conservatives or Republicans that are upset with Obama's decision. It is the Left and Democrats that have been bashing him about this. All I am saying is, that it is about time that he takes ownership of this war. Leave Bush alone back in Texas and focus on today.

@ Red below,

Quite busy with work, thank you so I don't spend my entire day on Allvoices. Sorry to dissapoint, but I don't have time to read every single post. But it really doesn't matter anyway, because I am talking about you and what your motivations are. I'm not bothered by Obama's middle name at all, I do think you like to say it ALOT. Stop trying to play me close. You and I both know what you're trying to do so please stop playing dumb. How about we just stick to the issues and why your views seem to motivated by which political party supports them. You are a puppet. Too bad all that intellect has gone to waste on the easily brainwashable. Yes that means you. I am not here to fight Mike's battles, so please stick to the subject. Afterall, you wrote the blog.

Chex,

Well maybe, you can check out his last 2 posts and get up to snuff. If you & Mike are so bothered by his middles name, maybe you both can start up a collection and have his name legally changed.

There are no old tricks here. Just straight talk.

But you don't say Hillary Rodham Clinton or George Herbert Bush. Don't try and act innocent when you know exactly what you are trying to do. And no I did not criticize Mike because I haven't seen him do such a thing. But once again you are deflecting. I have racial tendencies subconsiously? I wont even dignify that with a response. It's been a while, but I see you are still up to your old tricks. You are such a hater. Suck it up baby because Obama is in office for 3 more years. I hope you enjoy it!

Agenda, you've got to be kidding cmike, it's the same respect you show Bush, so suck it up and deal with it. So W or dubya was your way of showing respect to the president.

heere we go again with another war...

NO MORE WAR!!! WAR IS BAD!!! STOP THE WAR

The war in Afghanistan was inherited from Bush and it should be somehow put to stop. 2/12/2009.

it isn't bush's war. congress must approve it still.

So true. you cut through the conscience of my mind like a hot knife through the butter of my soul.

How in the hell can you say George Bush was right when it came to Iraq?!! I hate to(no I really love it) to tell you that Bush was wrong! Where are you getting your info from, a dead man in hell? There was no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! You really sound like Sean Hannity!

Buck11880,

You really need to open up the history books. It was not Bush that ordered us into war. The vote in the Senate was 98-0, the vote in the House was 420-1 in favor. Eveyone was on board. That's 518 members out of 519 that agreed with Bush. Stay away from hindsight.

The United states will lost more their soldier and money, and the Afghanistan war probably like in the past when ''Mujaheeden'' can kick out the Uni Soviet troops. Because, you can win the war not only sophisticated weapon but also you should have a good morale to sacrifacing your country.

The United states will lost more their soldier and money, and the Afghanistan war probably like in the past when ''Mujaheeden'' can kick out the Uni Soviet troops. Because, you can win the war not only sophisticated weapon but also you should have a good morale to sacrifacing your country.

I like it... This is an amazing piece of art that should be continued on as a solo project.

Red, you can disrespect the man, but at the very least do not disrespect the position of the Presidency on both sides by not going with Pres. Barack Hussein Obama and former Pres. George W. Bush. As an entire nation, the lack of respect of position and of authority has caused the decline in the morality of America. Anyways, you are right that Pres. Obama had to eat his words last night by sending in more troops.

For anyone still on the fence about whether this is Obama's War or not, please read Joan Walsh's piece on this issue. Joan Walsh is a huge Obama supporter and Liberal who writes for many publications. She Write's : Yes' It's Obama's War Now.

She hits the nail right on the head. It feels good to have at least one Liberal agree with me.

Here is the link:

http://www.salon.com/news/afghanistan/index.html?story=/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/12/01/afghanistan_speech

very interesting news thanks for the information.

Really thanks!! For such a lovely news!!!