Thursday, October 01, 2009

Obama Lied While More Troops Died

It has been 30 days since General Stanley McChrystal sent Defense Secretary Robert Gates a war assessment calling for reinforcements in the fight in Afghanistan; the very war Obama has said, “must be won.”

It has been six months since Obama announced a “comprehensive new strategy” for Afghanistan saying, “I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan and to prevent their return to either country in the future.”

August 17, Obama made speech before the VFW Convention held in Phoenix, Arizona where he again made some tall promises.

In part, he said in that speech,

“As President, my greatest responsibility is the security and safety of the American people.”

He also said, “We need to keep our military the best-trained, the best-led, the best-equipped fighting force in the world. And that's why, even with our current economic challenges, my budget increases defense spending.”

“We will ensure that we have the force structure to meet today's missions. And that's why we've increased the size of the Army and the Marine Corps two years ahead of schedule and have approved another temporary increase in the Army.”


“We will equip our forces with the assets and technologies they need to fight and win. So my budget funds more of the Army helicopters, crews, and pilots urgently needed in Afghanistan; the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance that gives our troops the advantage; the special operations forces that can deploy on a moment's notice; and for all those serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, including our National Guard and Reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives.”


“The insurgency in Afghanistan didn't just happen overnight and we won't defeat it overnight. This will not be quick, nor easy. But we must never forget: This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is a -- this is fundamental to the defense of our people.”

“And going forward, we will constantly adapt to new tactics to stay ahead of the enemy and give our troops the tools and equipment they need to succeed. And at every step of the way, we will assess our efforts to defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and to help the Afghan and Pakistani people build the future that they seek.”

Since Gen. McChrystal made his request for reinforcement’s, 43 Troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan.

What happened to Obama’s tall promises?

While Obama is dragging his feet, thinking about it, obviously forgetting his tall promises made in August and flying off to Copenhagen in an effort to secure the 2016 Olympics for crime riddled Chicago, our Troops continue to be sacrificed due to insufficient numbers and equipment.

Our Troops have stood up for America and continue to go into harm’s way to defeat terrorists. They have the support of most of the American people. They received supplies and equipment under President Bush.

Remember all the cries of “Listen to the Generals” made to President Bush when Democrats were politicizing the war?

Remember when campaigning Obama said he would listen to the generals?

Why isn’t he? Why is he off in Copenhagen when he should be fulfilling promises made just a month and a half ago?

Obama, if you aren’t going to support our Troops and give them the tools they need to win, then get them out of there. Our Troops don’t need to be sacrificed so you can fly around the world acting important.

Empty promises made to Veterans do not win wars.


Toni said...

Outstanding write up Lew!

It is apparent THIS president missed out on what 'campaign' means relative to 'Commander and Chief'.

I am absolutely ashamed for our troops that they must deal with the realities of an awful war making untold sacrifice while their commander is off trying to score for his corrupt cronies from Chicago!

Thanks for always focusing on our troops so poignently!

Canuckguy said...

I believe Afghanistan is a much tougher place to win a war than Vietnam was(and we know who won in Vietnam)

It is more isolated, tough and expensive to keep supplied having no sea access, on the east border is Pakistan, supposedly an ally but a country who can or won't control its border and whose military/intelligence network has divided loyalties, on the west border is Iran, certainly no friend of the USA.

The terrain is very difficult, Iraq was a cake walk for a conventional army(flat terrain and no jungle). Afghanistan's government, such as it is, is incompetent and corrupt, the Taliban implacable and cruel and effective in terror.

I don't believe the USA can afford the resources to properly win that conflict. Neither the USA nor it's week-kneed allies are prepared to throw in the resources and be properly ruthless to deal with a ruthless enemy. It is a lose lose situation. Be ruthless and all the bleeding heart barking dogs of the left and the Muslim world will whine and bitch.

And the USA presence there is losing the support with the civilians home.

I see no happy ending to this. Russia's ruin was hastened by the Afghan struggle. America must learn from past lessons.

My opinion, and I am no military expert, is to just forgetaboutit. Change over to be absolutely and completely ruthless with revenge attacks on terrorist bases no matter where they are, Yemen, Somolia,Pakistan or Afghanistan, etc. Total destruction or said staging grounds. Hold the host countries accountable. The USA has the means to do that relatively cheaply at arms length.

So Lew, what do you think the solution is? I figure you disagree with me.

Canuckguy said...

Slight typo on above post:
"... 'of', not 'or' said staging grounds. "

LewWaters said...

Canuck, I agree with much of what you say, but as expected, not all.

I agree with what you say about Iraq and that is one of the reasons I’ve always felt Bush was right in going in to Iraq, other than the obvious Saddam would not come clean about the WMDs.

Drawing Al Qaeda into Iraq made much sense to me since, as you say, Afghanistan is a much more hostile environment.

To me, this war is not just an American war. Yes, 911 happened on American soil, but was it only America they were attacking with the World Trade Center? Or was it a symbol of western culture?

All free nations must stand together against the radical Jihadists if we wish to not be thrust back into the dark ages that radical Islamics advocate. Don’t forget, they kill far more Muslims who refuse to surrender to their radical views and suppression than they do Americans.

To me, British Army General, Sir David Richards has it right as he says, "If al-Qaeda and the Taliban believe they have defeated us – what next? Would they stop at Afghanistan? Pakistan is clearly a tempting target not least because of the fact that it is a nuclear-weaponed state and that is a terrifying prospect. Even if only a few of those (nuclear) weapons fell into their hands, believe me they would use them. The recent airlines plot has reminded us that there are people out there who would happily blow all of us up."

I don’t know the size of Canada’s Military and as you already know, I do not think Canada has shirked in helping in the fight. But this fight is one that all free nations need to stand together for the survival of western culture.

As I see it, we cannot just “forgetaboutit” because they aren’t going to just “forgetaboutit.”

Revenge attacks sound good, but with current worries about “collateral damage” to civilians, how quickly such a tactic would backfire on us.

One difference between the Russian experience in Afghanistan and ours is that we are not trying to conquer Afghanistan, but more to liberate it and keep it free from such despots as the Taliban.

The other area I think needs to stand with us more is Muslims themselves. True, many are fighting with us, but many are not. Many just seem to go with the flow, not realizing or ignoring that the radicals are as much their enemy as ours.

With the population of word one fifth Muslim, they are a formidable force to ferret out those amongst them who carry out terror.

There is no simple solution and this war is unlike any we have had in modern times. Victory won’t come as it did before with a signed surrender, but with a drastic reduction of terror and with those who try being stopped by the very people they come out of.

But you have to remember, we are fighting extremists who, through misinterpretation of the Qu’Ran, feel their God has granted them sole conservators of the planet. They are zealots and monetary rewards or revenge will not stop them, I’m afraid.

I wish it weren’t so, but I’m afraid it is.

I don’t see that have any choice but to fight with all we have and hope the rest of the free world opens their eyes as sees that it is their fight too.

Canuckguy said...

I pretty well agree with you Lew.
However I am not concerned about collateral damage. Call me callous but my theory is if any bonified terrorist target is attacked and there is some collateral damage of nearby people, then they are guilty for tolerating terrorists in their midsts. Tough tittie. I say hold the host governments accountable. Let the victims bitch at them.

LewWaters said...

I understand, Canuck.

The current enemy is notorious for hiding around civilians and attacking from behind them.

Shows what cowards they really are.

And again, as you say, those civilians must stand up to expose those who hide amongst them.