Comments on: Updated: Obama’s Address on the War in Afghanistan

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:41:50 +0000

… a ruthless, repressive and radical movement that seized control of that country after it was ravaged by years of Soviet occupation and civil war, and after the attention of America and our friends had turned elsewhere. Obama

So, the US and friends is the world’s “benevolent” tyrant. What conceit! Do we wish to visit Detroit on the rest of the world?

Wade in folks! The fishing is excellent if fallacy is your game.

By: james huggins

james huggins — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:47:32 +0000

No need to spend a lot of time dissecting this speech. Obama hasn’t told the truth about anything since he first burst onto the public scene. As long as you mistrust his words and his motives you won’t be far wrong. He’s a a snake-in-the-grass. He hates the United States yet many people still think he’s the be-all end-all of everything.

What a revolting development.

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:38:05 +0000

I believe with every fiber of my being that we – as Americans – can still come together behind a common purpose. For our values are not simply words written into parchment – they are a creed that calls us together, and that has carried us through the darkest of storms as one nation, one people. Obama

Our common purpose is (or should be) the protection of liberty. That “parchment” is the US Constitution.

I don’t have the stomach Ilana has but I would bet this speech is target rich.

By: George Pal

George Pal — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:37:46 +0000

That the Prez can recapitulate the past and make it prologue might lead to sleepless nights – had anything more been expected. Alice had the better of it making sense of Wonderland than anyone could possibly have of making sense of our efforts in Afghanistan. What is there to make of: “a test of NATO’s credibility” (it has none) “our partners, the UN, and the Afghan people”, “our partnership with Pakistan” (partners? really?) “our country has borne a special burden in global affairs” (a burden which has degenerated into “beat cop with an attitude”) If these points (there were more) really mean all that much, are that important, than why not insure success in Afghanistan with the entire might of our shock and awe capabilities? I’m beginning to thinking the Prez doesn’t really believe any of this any more than I do.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:35:18 +0000

Who created the monster? See:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:03:02 +0000

GOOD speech: (1) Obama shows some understanding of the tradeoffs; (2) He expresses that there are limits on American power; (3) this “18 month” commitment provides an excuse to “redeploy” [declare victory and get out] in time for his re-election.

BAD speech: (1) Arrogant overuse of “I” as in “I am the Lord thy God” – whatever became of Congress’ responsibility for declaring war policy? ; (2) Full of self-serving ass-covering excuses to differentiate Obama from Bush ; (3) 99% of the speech fits the textbook definition of schizophrenia – detached and delusional

What Afghan “government”?? What “dismantle Al Queda”??? What “Pakistani democracy”???? What “Afghan responsibility”?????

“International coalition” – like the Aussies, New Zealanders. Filipinos, Thais, Koreans … in Vietnam:

http://www.history.army.mil/books/Vietnam/allied/

That pathological schmoozer can argue for occupying Greenland to “dismantle Al Queda”. As Orwell acknowledged, if one can make up history and truth, anything can be justified. Facts, however, are difficult things!

Ilana, you must have been too exhausted to not trash this Obamian gem:
“We have joined with others to develop an architecture of institutions – from the United Nations to NATO to the World Bank – that provide for the common security and prosperity of human beings.”

By: Gringo_Malo

Gringo_Malo — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:26:05 +0000

"In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror." Um, wouldn't it be easier to, like, uh, not let these guys in? If we keep letting them in, won't they keep committing terrorist acts here, however many troops we send off to some foreign cesspit? The former peace candidate seems determined to continue the Bush administration's policy of Invade the World/Invite the World/In Hock to the World. The more things change...

By: M. B. Moon

M. B. Moon — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:12:03 +0000

Back when I was a deluded fool, I would fallen for that speech. My thanks to Lew Rockwell and Ilana among others for leading me to the light. I also wish to thank Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and the neo-cons for a great counter-example of wisdom.