Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Obama-McChrystal Gap
Human Events ^ | 10-12-09 | Jed Babbin

Posted on 10/12/2009 1:33:38 PM PDT by smoothsailing

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 10/12/2009 1:33:38 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
The gap is simple. It's the unspannable gap and chasm between a loyal, dedicated American patriot and an abject marxist ideologue.


OBAMA IS A MARXIST IDEOLOGUE

Obama is going about systematically, and with a will, bringing the marxist fundamental change he promised. But more and more Americans are awakening to it and will not let it stand.


912: AMERICA AWAKES IN 2009

2 posted on 10/12/2009 1:41:58 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Nobel Peace Prize $1,400,000
American KIA’s 228
______________________________
$,6140.35


3 posted on 10/12/2009 1:43:41 PM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Obama is refusing a General’s request for REINFORCEMENTS..


4 posted on 10/12/2009 1:43:51 PM PDT by 4Speed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
Costing American lives!

Incompetence

5 posted on 10/12/2009 1:59:54 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

6 posted on 10/12/2009 2:12:30 PM PDT by Iron Munro (When seconds count, the police are only minutes away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 4Speed
Obama is refusing a General’s request for REINFORCEMENTS..

So what? Generals ALWAYS want more troops and presidents often turn them down. Bush turned down his generals early in his administration who wanted more troops in Iraq so did LBJ did when Westmoreland wanted 200,000 more (on top of 500K!) in 1968.

Besides, who elected McChystal as God? He wasn't so God-like when he clumsily covered up the truth about Pat Tillman's death.

7 posted on 10/12/2009 2:45:31 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

8 posted on 10/12/2009 3:00:30 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Bump!

See you got an isolationist Paulbot on your thread.


9 posted on 10/12/2009 3:15:47 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

10 posted on 10/12/2009 3:44:12 PM PDT by americanophile (Sarcasm: satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Of everything Obama has done, this is the most unconscionable, he is truly evil.


11 posted on 10/12/2009 4:49:48 PM PDT by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk

Yes, and then Bush listened to General Petraeus and he got his troops and it turned the tides. Bringing up LBJ as justification for Obama not sending more troops. That makes it ok?

IMHO, we have seen the Taliban move in because they know we have a weak President.


12 posted on 10/12/2009 4:56:40 PM PDT by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: panthermom
I am merely pointing that generals always want more troops and that presidents (including Bush) often turn them down. Just because a general wants troops doesn't make it automatically right.

Now a question for you: on what basis do you justify giving Obama more of our blood and treasure with (apparently) no strings attached? Are you prepared to defend the consequences here if he asks for and gets those troops?

13 posted on 10/12/2009 5:01:56 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

Why is it “evil” to put formers fighters of the Taliban on the payroll when it is not “evil” to put the Sunnis insurgents who have American blood on their hands on the payroll?


14 posted on 10/12/2009 5:03:35 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk

Actually, I believe the evil is the indecision and lack of any sort of plan. If he does not have the stomach to fight this war than say it and bring everyone home. Do I want us to see defeat? No, but I don’t want to see our military sitting ducks while he waits it out.

The “Taliban” are not necessarily Afghani’s, they are zealots that grew out of madrassa’s in Pakistan and have taken over the country. The average Afghani are farmers and nomads, however, they have seen so much war over the years they are just trying to survive. Right now the Taliban come in and will kill the locals in order for them to submit.

In speaking with some Marines that are just back from Helmand Province, the Taliban come in at night, I can understand us having more of a presence but that needs to be backed up by a different policy of ROE, if not, no more troops and they all come home. They can’t sit and wait on indecision!


15 posted on 10/12/2009 5:31:22 PM PDT by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: panthermom; jazusamo; Captain Kirk
Of everything Obama has done, this is the most unconscionable, he is truly evil.

He must be, but it would be bad enough if he were merely indecisive, in over his head and agonizingly incompetent.

In reality, he shows himself to be all of the above.

What else can be said about the top guy in an administration that is taking seriously the ideas of a complete buffoon like Joe Biden on what to do in Afghanistan at the same time it deliberately attempts to diminish and silence the public assessment of it's top military commander on the ground?

There's more excellent analysis of the reasons for Obama's dithering at the link below..

Unbecoming Weakness

16 posted on 10/12/2009 8:20:52 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing; Jeff Head

In analysis...we’re not dealing with a rational POTUS or a rational opponent, they’re one and the same. McChrystal is twisting door knobs.


17 posted on 10/12/2009 8:29:50 PM PDT by BIGLOOK (Government needs a Keelhauling now and then.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Excellent piece, Kaplan tells it exactly like it is.

In the eyes of our enemies Obama has already weakened himself and with his ego will never regain their respect.


18 posted on 10/12/2009 8:40:50 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
Its about allegiance, as the founders of our country and authors of The Constitution attempted to require of our commander in chief - born on our soil of two citizen parents. Everyone in congress is playing dumb because they let it happen. How many men will they have murdered by going along for the pay-to-play? They have countenanced disarming our military, our nation, and our former allies. Obama was not eligible for the presidency. No statute can make him a natural born citizen. We are learning why our founders considered it so important.

Even, unfortunately, Jed Babbin, a former JAG officer, either does not understand the Constitution, or has been ordered to be quiet about John Marshall, John Jay, George Washington, C.J. Waite, Alexander Hamilton, Joseph Story, John Bingham - perhaps having been threatened with fomenting civil strife if he dares tell the truth. Ask Mr. Human Events Babbin to cite any supreme court decision which does not use the common law definition of natural born citizen cited above. There are none, while there are at least ten citiations of "born on the soil of parents who are citizens." It is a simple truth.

Ridicule is a potent weapon on weak men and women. The strife will probably come anyway, and could be worse as Obama’s team of Marxists destroys our economy. We have a great Constitution, but many men and women who, for a variety of reasons, protect only those provisions which suit their fancy. At least Obama told everyone that this Constitution prevented him from redistributing wealth, and suggested, along with FDR, a second bill of rights. We have hundreds of prominent pundits and politicians who are more devious because they know the truth and pretend they don't.

19 posted on 10/13/2009 4:04:47 AM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

We seem to agree for the most part. Shades of LBJ, Obama is splitting the difference and that is worse than either alternative.


20 posted on 10/13/2009 7:25:22 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson