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

At long last, President Obama decided to give his military commanders much of what they need to accomplish their mission in Afghanistan. In the end, he decided to endorse a “surge” for Afghanistan, applying the counterinsurgency principles of “clear, hold and build” that worked so well in Iraq. Given that he opposed the surge in Iraq, it is even more welcome that he now supports a surge in Afghanistan.

This approach means, as Senator John McCain has noted, that “We now have an opportunity to build a bipartisan consensus in support of a vital national security priority: defeating Al-Qaeda and its violent extremist allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and ensuring that these countries never again serve as bases for terrorist attacks against America and our allies.”

We should be clear, however, that fewer troops mean assuming more risk. Talk of an exit date also risks sending the wrong message. We should be in Afghanistan to win, not to set a timetable for withdrawal that signals a lack of resolve to our friends, and lets our enemies believe they can wait us out. As long as we’re in to win, and as long as troop level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of our military commanders, I support President Obama’s decision.

- Sarah Palin

1 posted on 12/01/2009 7:43:52 PM PST by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
To: Bigtigermike

I understand why she said this but I disagree with her. I NEVER heard Obama use the word Victory, NOT ONCE. He smeared the Bush Administration, and the look on the cadet’s faces said it all. He also did not say “God Bless our troops” at the end of the speech(she might have missed that).


2 posted on 12/01/2009 7:47:16 PM PST by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

She boxed Obama and the media in.....”SEE I Supported the President on his decision but he clearly didn’t trust the generals and cut and run out of there”


4 posted on 12/01/2009 7:49:17 PM PST by Bigtigermike (Loose lips sink ships, stay away RINO's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
Given that he opposed the surge in Iraq, it is even more welcome that he now supports a surge in Afghanistan.

Death by 1000 cuts........

8 posted on 12/01/2009 7:52:04 PM PST by capydick (''Life's tough.......it's even tougher if you're stupid.'')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Is she serious?

She better rethink this one.


9 posted on 12/01/2009 7:52:07 PM PST by Palladin (Holder and Obama terrorize New Yorkers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
In it to win it.

The woman is gifted at conveying a message in clear no nonsense language.

10 posted on 12/01/2009 7:53:39 PM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Except that Obama does not want to win it. He wants to look like he wants to win it and at that same time he is going to cut and run just in time for the 2012 elections.


16 posted on 12/01/2009 7:56:13 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike; All

“At long last, President Obama decided to give his military commanders much of what they need to accomplish their mission in Afghanistan. In the end, he decided to endorse a “surge” for Afghanistan, applying the counterinsurgency principles of “clear, hold and build” that worked so well in Iraq. Given that he opposed the surge in Iraq, it is even more welcome that he now supports a surge in Afghanistan.”

I agree with Sarah Palin. I don’t like POTUS Obama, wished someone else was in office. However, for the most part the decision is a good one....IF it is aggressively pursued. I value the lives of American military personnel. I want this surge to work, because I want to bring this conflict to a close. If a POTUS I can’t stand gets credit, then so be it. I put the lives of troops ahead of my political desires.


20 posted on 12/01/2009 7:58:10 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

I wish that this were so. It sounded to me like a half-heared, Vietnam-style no-win war.


21 posted on 12/01/2009 7:58:48 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
What ignorance: Define victory in Afghanistan.
22 posted on 12/01/2009 7:59:06 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

“We’re In It to Win It”

Huh?
Barry indicated that when?


28 posted on 12/01/2009 8:01:36 PM PST by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
I suggest that everyone who is disagreeing with her statement should read it again. She stops just short of adding "even though he's obviously a freaking moron" at the end of the last sentence.
39 posted on 12/01/2009 8:03:07 PM PST by Pan_Yan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
HA! DUers must have blood shooting out of their eyes right now. Nice way to chip away at his base support. Brilliant!
43 posted on 12/01/2009 8:04:14 PM PST by CanadianMusherinMI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
". . that fewer troops mean assuming more risk. Talk of an exit date also risks sending the wrong message. We should be in Afghanistan to win, not to set a timetable for withdrawal that signals a lack of resolve to our friends, and lets our enemies believe they can wait us out. As long as we’re in to win, and as long as troop level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of our military commanders, I support President Obama’s decision.

Perfect. Political savant Sarah makes a statement that can be used later to "call him on it" when he fails. She never ceases to amaze me.

79 posted on 12/01/2009 8:24:48 PM PST by Art in Idaho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Sarah Palin is our country’s shadow president right now.


82 posted on 12/01/2009 8:26:51 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

I agree with her.
But perhaps, she should have reversed the order of her phrases in her last sentence. The last phrase carried more weight than the set up.


88 posted on 12/01/2009 8:30:57 PM PST by citizencon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

She is off base on this one: She admits that setting a timetable is not a good idea yet she supports Obama’s overall approach. That doesn’t make sense. Sorry, Sarah - you lost me on this one.


92 posted on 12/01/2009 8:35:47 PM PST by WillT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

I agree with those who say she’s missed the boat on this one; however, so have all the other politicians whose statements I’ve seen. I want to hear Sarah Palin articulate what our national interest is in that regions of the world. Its got to be something along the lines of insuring that Afghanistan is never again used as a base for launching attacks against, or trying to destabilize, us or our allies. The strategy for achieving that follows.


93 posted on 12/01/2009 8:37:20 PM PST by sailor4321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

“As long as we’re in to win, and as long as troop level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of our military commanders, I support President Obama’s decision. “ Sarah Palin

Gold. Platinum.

“As long as:

1. we’re in it to win.” - Objective, Objective, Objective. The support is conditional. Be there TO WIN, not do a few things then cut and run.

2. “troop level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of our military commanders”....

They can’t come to her and say that she didn’t support the president. She did. BUt she qualified it with 2 VERY important qualifications.

1. Go all out. Win. Don’t play games.

2. Don’t meddle, listen to the commanders.

Excellent statement.


104 posted on 12/01/2009 8:46:49 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

"If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything."

~ Mark Twain ~

113 posted on 12/01/2009 8:57:27 PM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

For All you high-speed conservatives out there, you might want to consider one thing before you jump down Sarah’s throat over this. There a troops in the field; would you have Sarah come out and say that Obama should not conduct the surge because he is going to set the troop up for failure. As far as I know Sarah’s son is still in the military so there is a good chance he will be deployed to Afghanistan. Sarah has skin in this game so don’t think she is taking this lightly.


122 posted on 12/01/2009 9:05:46 PM PST by Sarah-bot (Palin or Communism -- You decide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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