Comment from: Davy [Visitor] Email
I hope Obama does not fuel Russia, China and Iran's believe that he is a weak leader. Somehow I think their perception of Obama being a weak leader that can be manipulated and ignored will be emboldened.
Any bets to the contrary?
12/01/09 @ 10:28
Comment from: Able [Visitor] Email
He's already weak for caving, and sending 30,000+ troops to Afghanistan.
12/01/09 @ 11:06
Comment from: Len Roberts [Visitor] Email · http://dumpchrisdodd.com
**---
He is very weak. It is very hard for a liberal dem to look & act like a Commander in chief.
But at least he did make this decision to send in more troops & not leave the troops there hanging.
12/01/09 @ 11:43
Comment from: Alice [Visitor] · http://www.affordableaccuracy.com
This is a very good decision! Our nation's security is the first job of the President of the U.S., and if he failed to meet this urgent need, I would have been condeming the man for the rest of his term. I applaud him for taking the time to look into all his options.
12/01/09 @ 11:47
Comment from: Davy [Visitor] Email
How can anyone be applauded for being indecisive? And then make a make decision based primarily on politics.
Only a left winger could spin this other wise.
12/01/09 @ 12:55
Comment from: Ordinary Citizen [Visitor] Email
Able, you are right about him caving, but for the wrong reason.... He caved in to political pressure and didn't provide the requested amount of manpower to get this mess over and done with. He's now as guilty as Rumsfield/Cheney/Bush for screwing up the Iraq war by not sending more troops early on to get the job done. They caved to the political perception that by not sending more troops, it wouldn't become another VietNam... They were wrong then just as Obama is wrong now...
12/01/09 @ 12:56
Comment from: Davy [Visitor] Email
I am still waiting for Obama to announce that we will win the War on Terror. His press secretary has already announced that we are there to secure the Afghanistan government. I don't think that is in our Constitution to provide other countries security.
12/01/09 @ 12:59
Comment from: Able [Visitor] Email
'How can anyone be applauded for being indecisive? And then make a make decision based primarily on politics.'

How is taking your time to create a decision, whether supported or not, be deemed indecisive? Is there a time limit for decisions, or should the sending of young men and women to their untimely, unjustified and unwarranted deaths be made lightly, on a whim?

'He caved in to political pressure and didn't provide the requested amount of manpower to get this mess over and done with.'

If he caved to political pressure, it would have been pressure from the majority of citizens who disapprove of the war. Instead he supported a position held by all other warmongers.

'He's now as guilty as Rumsfield/Cheney/Bush for screwing up the Iraq war by not sending more troops early on to get the job done.'

'Get the job done,' you mean the job done by paying off locals? Or how about the job of finding WMDs? Or how about the job of finding terrorist connections to Saddam? Oh, really? Those weren't done either? My bad.

More troops wont end terrorism, the death of imperialism will end terrorism.

'They caved to the political perception that by not sending more troops, it wouldn't become another VietNam... They were wrong then just as Obama is wrong now...'

Just as 'defeating Communism,' was no more a 'just war,' than this one.
12/01/09 @ 13:54
Comment from: anonymous [Visitor]
You whiny liberal sissys have been crying about Bush for 8 years like a bunch of wimps. Now your President continues on the same path. For all you idiots who voted for Obama. Karma....What a bitch !! LMAO !!!!
12/01/09 @ 17:36
Comment from: Visitor2 [Visitor] Email
Yeah - Bend over you Obama voters - It's going right up your A$$ !


Voting has it's consequences - You got just what you asked for.......mmm mmm mmm
12/01/09 @ 17:49
Comment from: Able [Visitor] Email
'You whiny liberal sissys have been crying about Bush for 8 years like a bunch of wimps.'

Nine years, get it right or pay the price!

'Now your President continues on the same path. For all you idiots who voted for Obama. Karma....What a bitch !! LMAO !!!!'

He's not the 'liberal' President. Last I looked, he garnered votes from all sides. Now, with that said, your tone would support the belief that you are now behind Obama because he has swayed in a direction you favor.
12/01/09 @ 19:41
Comment from: Todd [Visitor] Email
So, Visitor2, according to one of your previous posts you don't support the war in Afghanastan. Yet here you stick it to those of us who voted for Obama, and therefore anti-war.

So, what is it you stand for? Do you a continuation of the war, or do you want the war to end? If you wanted the war to end I would presume that you wouldn't be gloating over Obama sending more troops to be killed in the mess the president YOU voted for in the past created.

"You whiny liberal sissys have been crying about Bush for 8 years like a bunch of wimps."

Then get off your lazy butt and go fight in the war! You whiny conservative sissy! Put your money where your mouth is, or shut up.
12/02/09 @ 10:15
Comment from: Todd [Visitor] Email
"Now your President continues on the same path. For all you idiots who voted for Obama."

You're ton would also imply that if Obama "continues on the same path" he is an idiot. So, does that mean you no longer support "the Bush Doctrine"? Or, are you just calling yourself, and those who support your war a bunch of idiots.

Frankly, I love calling your bluff. Because your comments in this thread have directly contradicted everything you presume to stand for.

And again... get off your "whiny", "sissy" neo-con butt and fight in the war rather than playing Monday morning quarterback.
12/02/09 @ 10:19

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
PoorExcellent
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)
« Governor's race filling upSalahi denies being WH party-crasher »