Posted on 09/22/2010 8:05:15 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
White House: New Woodward book shows 'decisive' president By Sam Youngman - 09/22/10 10:23 AM ET
The White House says the new book by famed Washington journalist Bob Woodward, "Obama's Wars," paints a picture of an "analytical, strategic and decisive" wartime president and "does not reveal anything new" about the administration's war strategy.
After excerpts of Woodward's book containing explosive revelations appeared in The New York Times and The Washington Post late Tuesday night, a senior administration official responded that the full picture is one of a president asking hard questions to make difficult decisions about Afghanistan — not simply a White House badly divided over strategy.
While the early previews of the book, due out on Monday, focus on intense infighting among Obama's national security team in the lead-up to the president's decision on a strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, the official said "the debates in the book are well-known because the policy review process was covered so exhaustively."
"The president comes across in the review, and throughout the decision-making process, as a commander-in-chief who is analytical, strategic and decisive, with a broad view of history, national security and his role," the official said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Yeah we all knew all of this. It is just confirmed with details now.
Looking at all that have quit and a chief of staff that wants to take a paygrade drop and be mayor says a lot.
Woodward’s book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”
In a dramatic scene at the White House on Sunday, Nov. 29, 2009, Obama summoned the national security team to outline his decision and distribute his six-page terms sheet. He went around the room, one by one, asking each participant whether he or she had any objections - to “say so now,” Woodward reports.
The document - a copy of which is reprinted in the book - took the unusual step of stating, along with the strategy’s objectives, what the military was not supposed to do. The president went into detail, according to Woodward, to make sure that the military wouldn’t attempt to expand the mission.
After Obama informed the military of his decision, Woodward writes, the Pentagon kept trying to reopen the decision, peppering the White House with new questions. Obama, in exasperation, reacted by asking, “Why do we keep having these meetings?”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/21/AR2010092106706_pf.html
The President has decided to use the teleprompter
“We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.” Barrack Hussein Obama 2010
This is all you need to know about this so-called Commander in Chief. We are all expendable to him as long as he survives and rules.
Does anyone actually believe a dedicated leftist like Woodward would write a book highly critical of The One??!! Why do you think HE was invited to the White House to write a book rather than RUSH or SAVAGE or COULTER????
Interesting. There is no denial of Woodward’s account in the WH statement, just spin.
Sounds like the WH just confirmed the accuracy of the Woodward account. Draw your own conclusions.
Very true.
Read the Washington Post and New York Times articles about this. This book will be VERY, VERY bad for Obama, and should be a huge benefit for Republicans in the election.
Among other things Obama says that we can “absorb” a terrorist attack, so we are surrendering in Afghanistan. He says he needs to surrender because he wants to spend the money elsewhere (social programs), and because the Democratic Party wants him to. In other words, we are surrendering so that Obama can win this election.
Yes. Obama ignored the advice of all his generals and instead came up with his own 6 page document for surrender. That’s our war strategy.
The NY Times article also says that the White House gagged General Patraeus, ordering him not to appear on television talk shows.
divisive maybe but decisive???
Petraeus is turning into an O “yes man’. What a disgrace.
interpretation...
egads.
Here is how Obama will allow another 9/11 to happen:
So (1) Obama refuses to destroy the terrorist bases overseas, and is withdrawing all our forces
(2) Obama is leaving our borders wide open, so the Afgan-trained terrorists will easily be able to infiltrate through Mexico.
(3) Once the terrorists arrive, Obama’s “sanctuary” policy means that police can’t question those illegal alien terrorists, or deport them. (Under Obama’s policy only illegal aliens who commit other crimes like theft can be deported).
This means that 9/11 can be repeated again by the same process. First, terrorists will train in their bases in Afghanistan. Second, they will cross our borders into the USA. Third, they can remain here and train, like the 9/11 terrorists did, because Obama wouldn’t allow their expulsion. Finally, they could launch their attack.
I’ve met many stupid people who were decisive.
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.