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

To: Bigtigermike

I’m about 50 posts in and it seems a bunch of you have a hard time reading between the lines or simply have it in for Sarah Palin.

1. Palin said, fewer troops means assuming more risk, alluding to the fact that Obama didn’t give all of the requested troops in the requested time.

2. Talk of an exit date also sends the wrong message, meaning you don’t tip your hand and give the enemy hope of holding out until we leave. I don’t know if Obama is actually tipping his hand or saying something strategic at the behest of the Military. Knowing Obama he’s likely tipping his hand.

3. ...as long as troop level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of our military commanders... She knows damn well that Obama DID NOT give what was requested, it’s a direct shot at Obama.

I don’t know how anyone could read this and say she’s jumping up and down and thrilled with what Obama did. Some just want to take shots or Palin, didn’t read what she said, or don’t understand what she said.


127 posted on 12/01/2009 9:16:29 PM PST by word_warrior_bob (You can now see my amazing doggie and new puppy on my homepage!! Come say hello to Jake & Sonny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: word_warrior_bob

Ummm, Palin’s title for the Facebook post was:

“Finally, A Decision for Afghanistan: We’re In It to Win It”

Based on what Obama said tonight, some conservatives are questioning whether adding 30,000 additional troops (half of what McCrystal originally wanted) and an 18-month timetable means “We’re In It To Win It.” As a result, some of us disagree with her.


130 posted on 12/01/2009 9:20:38 PM PST by WillT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

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