1st Major foreign policy of Obama:Pakistan captured

Quote from Landis82:

But didn't Bush and Cheney say that we were WINNING the war in IRAQ???

What does Afghanistan or Pakistan have to do with anything? Bush never spearheaded a military effort in Afghanistan.

I thought that all of the insurgents and terrorists and al-Qaeda were in IRAQ, no?

Isn't that why we invaded IRAQ?
That's what BUSH told us, no?

IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ.
More...

Spot on.

Afghanistan was left to fester while Bush and his Oil Men conjured Phantoms in Iraq.

The US has a long history of building and equipping threats only later to cut them down.

The Military-Industrial-Complex keeps the machinations of War well-greased and primed.
 
Quote from Landis82:

But didn't Bush and Cheney say that we were WINNING the war in IRAQ???

What does Afghanistan or Pakistan have to do with anything? Bush never spearheaded a military effort in Afghanistan.

I thought that all of the insurgents and terrorists and al-Qaeda were in IRAQ, no?

Isn't that why we invaded IRAQ?
That's what BUSH told us, no?

IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ.
More...

You can continue your blame Bush mantra, but here are the facts. 9/11 happened on GW's watch and he was blamed by the left. He was also blamed for all issues surrounding how he dealt with it. While all reasonable people knew there were events happening many years prior to GW's arrival which lead to 9/11, these events were basically ignored by the MSM and the left.
Obama will be judged in the same way. Pakistan is collapsing on his watch and he is to blame. The economy continues it's free fall on his watch and he is to blame. Political partisanship is worse than ever on his watch and he is to blame.
What goes around comes around and it's your boys turn in the barrel. The left is to blame for everything which is currently happening. What happened prior to 1/20/09 is completely irrelevant. Chew on that for awhile.
 
I think the Bush administration made serious mistakes in afghanistan. Unfortunately, we seem to be ignoring them. Most of the commentary I read focuses on the need to put more troops in there, which i see as hopeless. In my opinion, the initial mistake was to try to impose a centralized, democratic government on them and we compounded it by writing a constitution that enshrined islam as the official state religion. We should have worked at the tribal level, arming friendly tribes so they could protect themselves from the taliban, which were not very popular. We have no real interests in afghanistan, except that it not turn into a failed state and haven for terrorists. Ironically, that appears to be the likely outcome, plus we have exported the same problem to pakistan.
 
Obama inherited a bad situation that had basically been swept under the rug. He shows every sign of making it worse however. More troops will not be a solution, not when the taliban have a safe haven and hundreds of thousands of potential recruits next door in pakistan.

Obama has no real plan for dealing with pakistan, not that there is an obvious solution. Stepping up attacks there risk a full blown outbreak of warfare that could end with taliban controlling the country. We don't have enough troops to deal with it, plus we are talking about a country with scores of nukes. Does obama really want to be in a situation where he has to choose between not responding in kind to a nuke attack on our troops that maybe kills 20 or 30,000 soldiers or responding with a nuke strike on a large muslim country and kill millions?

The usual State Department recipe of negotiations and foreign aid will be laughably inadequate in pakistan however. They are perhaps weeks from being taken over by the taliban and associated islamist radicals. If that happens, it's pretty much game over. A nuclear exchange with India becomes a real possibility.

We saw this movie before, when Jimmy Carter let ayotollah khomeini take over our former ally Iran. Thirty years later we are still reeling from the consequences.
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

We should have worked at the tribal level, arming friendly tribes so they could protect themselves from the taliban, which were not very popular.
More...

Anytime you are in a situation where you have to consult the local tribal leader to do anything, you have gotten yourself into a very stupid situation. It is simply hopeless.


After 9/11 we should carpet bombed Afganistan and killed as many terrorists as possible. We should have stopped the bombing for a few months to let the terrorists regroup. Once they re-grouped we should have bombed them again. Then repeat.
 
The US shouldn't have been so eager to get Musharraf out of office. We should all recall that Obama campaigned on a very anti-Musharraf platform. To me, it looks like Musharraf was the only thread holding the country together. I think it possible he will be back.
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Obama inherited a bad situation that had basically been swept under the rug. He shows every sign of making it worse however. More troops will not be a solution, not when the taliban have a safe haven and hundreds of thousands of potential recruits next door in pakistan.

Obama has no real plan for dealing with pakistan, not that there is an obvious solution. Stepping up attacks there risk a full blown outbreak of warfare that could end with taliban controlling the country. We don't have enough troops to deal with it, plus we are talking about a country with scores of nukes. Does obama really want to be in a situation where he has to choose between not responding in kind to a nuke attack on our troops that maybe kills 20 or 30,000 soldiers or responding with a nuke strike on a large muslim country and kill millions?

The usual State Department recipe of negotiations and foreign aid will be laughably inadequate in pakistan however. They are perhaps weeks from being taken over by the taliban and associated islamist radicals. If that happens, it's pretty much game over. A nuclear exchange with India becomes a real possibility.

We saw this movie before, when Jimmy Carter let ayotollah khomeini take over our former ally Iran. Thirty years later we are still reeling from the consequences.
More...

All happening on the Obama watch. Now we have Iraq blowing up again with today's bombing the deadliest since last June, also making today and month the deadliest this year. Obama was a handed a relatively peaceful Iraq, but his obvious weakness is being exploited already.
When Pakistan falls, and it will, terrorists will have nukes. All on the Obama watch.
First 100 days have been a disaster. We may see a all out world war by years end...all on the Obama watch.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

Obama was a handed a relatively peaceful Iraq, but his obvious weakness is being exploited already.
More...

You are in such denial about us WINNING in IRAQ and your beloved George Bush that it defies description. And I'm not talking about a river in Egypt.
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Obama inherited a bad situation that had basically been swept under the rug.
More...

You mean George Bush sat idly by and didn't do anything in regards to Pakistan, or Afghanistan and devoted all of our resources to Iraq?

No.
That can't be TRUE!!!

George Bush is the greatest leader that this country has ever seen! He's kept us safe since 9/11, and he listens to his Generals, like Tommy Franks, former Commander of the US Central Command!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top