Posted on 11/29/2009 10:53:27 AM PST by AmericaTalks
The ditherer-in-chief will finally announce to our military and the rest of the world his decision regarding General McChrystal's request for additional troops in Afghanistan this Tuesday.
After months of keeping the fine men and women serving our country twisting in the wind, Barack Obama has at last made up his mind. It is estimated that he will elect to give McChrystal roughly 30,000 to 35,000 of the 40,000 troops McChrystal requested. The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan had warned in an urgent, confidential assessment of the war that he needed more forces within the next year and had bluntly stated that without them, the eight-year conflict would likely result in failure.
During the presidential campaign of 2008, Obama repeatedly stated that the real war, the one the United States military should be engaged in, was the war in Afghanistan. He was hell bent on pulling our troops out of Iraq. He based most of bid for the White House on ending our presence there until the surge worked and took the wind out of his sails.
So what took him so long to make up his mind on McChrystal's request?
Two things are in play here.
First, Obama's base is opposed to any surge in Afghanistan. Democrats are in revolt because a.) they believe the real threat from Al-Qaeda exists in Pakistan and b.) Obama has yet to convince his own supporters that the United States has an exit strategy and will not become bogged down, as it did in Vietnam.
Secondly, Obama has never shown much support for the war on terror. He has eliminated the word 'terror' from the lexicon and replaced it with 'overseas contingency operation'. Terrorist attacks are now referred to as 'man-made disasters'. The fact that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four of his minions are being brought to New York to face charges in a civilian court, where they will be allowed to spew their venom and rail against the United States as opposed to a military tribunal, is a clear indication that Obama has gone soft on terror at best, and is in bed with radical Islam at worst.
Witness also the three Navy SEALS who are facing criminal charges stemming from the capture of one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq. The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called a captain's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial in the capture of Ahmed Hashim Abed. He claims that he was punched by his captors — and had his lip bloodied. Now, instead of being lauded for the capture of this high-value target, the three SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained attorneys.
If Obama were truly a supporter of our military and their mission, he would have answered McChrystal's request much sooner. And he would immediately put a halt to the prosecution of these three SEALS.
But this president is allowing the fine men and women of the United States military to be thrown under the bus.
What a disgrace to our nation.
Listen to America Talks Saturdays at 10 am eastern time at www.blogtalkradio.com/americatalks. Visit our website at www.americatalks.com.
Unreal. Obama May Allow US Soldiers to be Tried in the Hague
Friday, November 27, 2009, 6:47 PM
Jim Hoft
Unreal. Team Obama may allow US soldiers to be tried in the Hague for war crimes. The Wall Street Journal reported, via Jihad Watch:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed “great regret” in August that the U.S. is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court (ICC). This has fueled speculation that the Obama administration may reverse another Bush policy and sign up for what could lead to the trial of Americans for war crimes in The Hague.
The ICC’s chief prosecutor, though, has no intention of waiting for Washington to submit to the court’s authority. Luis Moreno Ocampo says he already has jurisdiction—at least with respect to Afghanistan.
Because Kabul in 2003 ratified the Rome Statute—the ICC’s founding treaty—all soldiers on Afghan territory, even those from nontreaty countries, fall under the ICC’s oversight, Mr. Ocampo told me. And the chief prosecutor says he is already conducting a “preliminary examination” into whether NATO troops, including American soldiers, fighting the Taliban may have to be put in the dock.
“We have to check if crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide have been committed in Afghanistan,” Mr. Ocampo told me. “There are serious allegations against the Taliban and al Qaeda and serious allegations about warlords, even against some who are connected with members of the government.” Taking up his inquiry of Allied soldiers, he added, “there are different reports about problems with bombings and there are also allegations about torture.”
It was clear who the targets of these particular inquiries are but the chief prosecutor shied away from spelling it out.
Asked repeatedly whether the examination of bombings and torture allegations refers to NATO and U.S. soldiers, Mr. Ocampo finally stated that “we are investigating whoever commits war crimes, including the group you mentioned.”
I now have two reliable sources that have told me that Obozo was livid over the military saving the Mersk captain, and that this is payback.
I pity the cadets who have to listen to this SOB.
Just following GW's lead, as he allowed our fighting men to be tried as well, or have we forgotten about that?
I'm betting that when the actual 'number' is announced it will be just UNDER 30,000 troops. But since nobody in the MSM will be interested in actually checking that number it may well be that the number will be the full amount requested by Gen. McChrystal. Dems love to play number-games.
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.