"Blessing" Obama (yes, that's what "Barack" means in Arabic), who believes that radical Islam is a product of failed US foreign policy, reacts to rumors that jihadis are flocking to Afghanistan. "Obama Urges Increase in U.S. Forces in Afghanistan on 'Face the Nation'," by Dan Balz for the Washington Post, July 20:
Calling the situation in Afghanistan "precarious and urgent," Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama urged the Bush administration Sunday to begin building up U.S. forces there to combat the growing strength of the Taliban and al-Qaeda.In his first interview since arriving in Afghanistan on Saturday, Obama said on CBS's "Face The Nation" that conditions now warrant reducing the number of troops in Iraq and shifting them to Afghanistan.
"I think we have to seize that opportunity. Now's the time for us to do it," Obama said. "If we wait until the next administration, it could be a year before we get those additional troops on the ground here in Afghanistan and I think that would be a mistake. I think the situation is getting urgent enough that we've got to start doing something now."
Obama sought to use his time in Afghanistan to underscore his criticism that the Iraq war has distracted the United States, repeating his belief that the Bush administration had made a key mistake in failing "to finish the job here."
Obama said the goal of U.S. policy should be a stable Afghanistan and the disabling of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. "Losing is not an option when it comes to al-Qaeda and it never has been," he said, "and that's why the fact that we engaged in a war of choice when we were not yet finished with that task was such a mistake."
What does he mean by "get Osama"? Kill him in a cave or drag him back to the US and try him in our courts? And if we get him, either way, then what? Pack up and go home and ignore jihad?
Don't take him to Gitmo. The left will wail and mash their teeth.
Stabilizing Afghanistan has been a pipe dream of far too many. It's natural condition is bloody feuds, tribal warfare, and Islamic sectarian fanaticism.
Now, Mr. Obama, if we catch and incarcerate OBL, do we get to feed him a diet of beer and pork cracklins until he pops?
obama has been screaming about afganistan for two years---what he is saying now we all say "yes we can"
"Losing is not an option when it comes to al-Qaeda and it never has been,"
Just more platitudes and hot air. Al Qaeda, al schmaeda: the Bin Laden outfit is one of thousands, and as we have seen in Europe, Australia in Canada and the US, all it takes is the war manual called the Koran, the right sermons in the mosque and immidiately you have another Al Qaeda. The same goes for the 'MILF's' and the 'shadowy militants' in 'restive' Thailand, and in another 30 theaters of jihad warfare around the globe.
If Muslim doctors in Scotland load a vehicle with gasbottles and drive it into the airport or if a 'deranged man' shoots people in a Jewish community centre or drives a car into a group of non-Muslim students, is that different from those who blow themselves up in a crowded pizzeria? They all follow the same ideology. OBL was just better funded and could plan his spectacular attacks because Willi Clitman along with the stooges in the US-government (left & right) were fast asleep at the helm.
Obamessiah wants to make himself look like some kind of superman: he is an idiot and a fool. Even if he were successful w and capture bin Laden, would that stop the global jihad? Would that stop further Isam-invasion and Islamization of Western countries?
Fill in your answer here..............
Obama: All Things to All People--here (or there, as the case may be), he's trying to out-McCain McCain! Obama is starting to look like Bush III.
Everything Obama has said so far is evidence of his confusion, a confusion though different is as deep as that exhibited by Bush. He thinks that there must be a "central front" in the "war on terror"; he does not recognize that the "front" is everywhere and nowhere, for wherever there are Muslims, there is Jihad, to remove all obstacles to the spread and dominance of Islam. He gives Osama bin Laden too much importance, and in so doing, keeps attention on terrorism and terrorists, rather than on Jihad. He has not discussed Jihad, nor has he discussed, nor does he give any signs of having thought about, the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa (can someone who was so close to those close to Farrakhan in Chicago worry aloud about campaigns of Da'wa?), nor demographic conquest of the West -- for "the West" as an idea does not resonate, whatever words his telepromper may present him for echoing, with Barack Obama.
Anyone remember this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1340895/Bin-Laden-is-wanted-dead-or-alive,-says-Bush.html
Well, here is the chronological list of USPOT/commaner-in-chief on Osama:
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html
So BHO agrees with the war on Islamic terror; he just wants to fight it in a different place. That's fine with me; but it must come as a big disappointment to the leftist peaceniks who supported him in large numbers.
The central front of the "jihad" is the entire Islamic world. BHO is frightfully unaware of this. And, pretty much the rest of the world. We have a long, long way to go to educate the rest of the world. Can it be done? I have my doubts.
I keep hoping that they'll just KEEP him over there. But probably no such luck!
I sympathize with BHO's desire to "do something" about Afghanistan, but I fear he has no more thought through the problem than did Bush before going into Iraq. OK, suppose we send in more troops to A'stan. We build some schools, roads and water treatment plants, while at the same time bombing the crap out of the Taliban. That'll certainly slow them down a little, but how long will it take them to regroup, destroy those schools, roads, pipelines, etc., essentially erasing all that expensive infrastructure we built to help win the "hearts and minds" of all those "ordinary moms and dads?" What Afghan group will step up to the plate and shoulder the job of defending whatever bastardized secular state we might manage to get propped up once we leave (we are planning on leaving, aren't we?).
And what about the Taliban base of operations in P'stan? OK, I guess we'll have to bomb the crap out of that, too. Any bets on whether we'd get any help from the Paki army on this, and what are the implications either way? Seems like this could be a frying pan into the fire situation. Or Bush's Tarbaby Iraq being transformed into Obama's Tarbaby Afghanistan.
Meanwhile Iran obtains nukes. Israel bombs Iran. Tehran retaliates by bombing the Saudi oil fields and blocking the Strait of Hormuz. Gas goes to $12/gallon. With the transportation industry starting to freeze at $4/gallon, what do you think would happen to the U.S./world economy at these prices?
Our politicians need to take some time off from their nonstop rounds of campaigning, drop out of sight for a while for some serious time spent analyzing and thinking deeply about the situation in the world today and the need for constructing a new ideology based on updated 21st century economic and geopolitical realities. Continuing on the course we're on now seems destined for disaster.
Slightly off topic: I thought Barack literally meant 'divine spark'. (that's why I call him "Sparky")