It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama's Afghanistan Proposal Under Fire From Liberal Base

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Obama's Afghanistan Proposal Under Fire From Liberal Base


www.politico.com

The liberal base is increasingly disappointed in his war policies.

Russ Feingold, the liberal senator, said that Obama’s plan “could make the situation worse, not better.”

Peace Action, a liberal anti-war organization, is organizing a coalition to oppose Obama’s plan. And Win Without War, an anti-war group, slammed Obama.

The criticisms of the troop expansion in Afghanistan are similar to the liberal concerns over the slower than promised withdrawal from Iraq.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Even BHO's power base is losing faith with his broken promises, lack of spine and inept handling of froeign policy.

Chinese warships confront unarmed Navy vessels without recourse. China pressures down the dollar and ignores our attempts to prop it up.

Iran thumbs its nose at Obama's secret advances.

Russia laughs at Obama's offer to trade missile defense for help in Iran (and keeps helping Iran develop nukes.) Then demands the world abandon the dollar as reserve currency.

North Korea is testing ballistic missile technology that can reach Europe and the US. And WILL send it to Iran.

Even Chavez laughs at Obama's weakness and policies.

Even the UN is now pushing for usingWorld Bank/IMF funds to replace the dollar as reserve currency in international trade.

(Oh, and on the domestic/economic front, Geithner weakens the dollar, then denies it, and Treasury is LOSING staff!)

I hope every homeless, sick, jobless or pensionless American who voted for this moron enjoys their life and is prepared for things to get bad.

Deny Ignorance!

jw

www.politico.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 27-3-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
LOL, well I think we know how the OP feels about Obama.

News is news, but showing you are on one side, will defeat your point.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Peacenik here.
These guys supposedly (if they are not a CIA invention) get funded from Saudi Arabia and Iran. Cut off the funding and give them an old fashioned siege. Al queda should be affected by the lack of money. Sorry, this whole thing is ridiculous and I don't even buy the 911 story so why are we fighting this fake enemy? End this war.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
One of the main reasons I voted for him was that he was bringing home ALL the troops!


how many campaign promises is he actually going to keep?



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by breakingdradles
showing you are on one side, will defeat your point.


Facts are facts regardless of the messenger's ideology.

I don't pretend to be a neutral journalist.

But, it is sort of nice to be able to say "told you so" so early on.
(You know it's true.)

Obama opposed the Iraq surge. He "adopted" Afghanistan to quiet critics.

Sending civilian "advisors" and too few ill-equipped troops (he's slashing DoD funding, you know) into horrible terrain to seek out an entrenched enemy with local support, and refuge and support from neighboring allies (fractured, tribal, Pakistan and Iran) is a recipe for disaster.

Ask LBJ.

This will be his Vietnam.


jw

p.s.: deny ignorance, pass it on

[edit on 27-3-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
Obama opposed the Iraq surge. He "adopted" Afghanistan to quiet critics.


It's funny, isn't it? He was against the Iraq surge, but he's sending a boat load of troops to A-stan.

Kinda like a "surge", huh? But he won't call it that.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terces Pot Evoba
One of the main reasons I voted for him was that he was bringing home ALL the troops!

how many campaign promises is he actually going to keep?


When I think of one I'll get back to you.

I've got a running list of broken "pledges" and "promises." Begins with his pledge to limit his campaign only to public funds as provided under "Campaign Finance Reform", rather than accepting donations and contributions. It keeps growing.

jw



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
It's funny, isn't it? He was against the Iraq surge, but he's sending a boat load of troops to A-stan.
Kinda like a "surge", huh? But he won't call it that.


'cept this time he's sending civilian "advisors" along for the ride.

Remember when we sent civilian advisors to Asia? Took awhile to get everybody back, too.

jw



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terces Pot Evoba
One of the main reasons I voted for him was that he was bringing home ALL the troops!


how many campaign promises is he actually going to keep?

Hey! I thought of one, sort of.

Didn't BHO tell Joe the Plumber that he was going to make sure there was a redistribution of wealth?

I know he got a lot of mine, but I don't know who he gave it to.

jw



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 11:33 PM
link   
We need to stop the wars.

We are suppressing other countries and people.

They are threats because we hold them back. Look at things from their point of view...close your ears to the Sean Hannity's of the world.

They want to live a better life..just like we do.

And once again...we have NO MONEY...none.

The fed has been inflating our currency to finance war and social programs and we can no longer keep up with the debt.

Inflation and taxes are coming.

If we don't stop spending...on all terms...we are in huge trouble gang.

Our country is not the power it was 2 years ago. Our spending has caught up with us.

We are really running out of time.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terces Pot Evoba
One of the main reasons I voted for him was that he was bringing home ALL the troops!


how many campaign promises is he actually going to keep?



I believe he said he was going to bring all the troops from Iraq home. He has always been for more troops in Afghanistan.

He is working on the Iraq promise though. Good ole W started the path for that.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
When bush sent troops to die in the middle east, it was bad, but obama sending them is good. This is change. It's different this time.


TheAssociate



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


If you are referring to my post, then I must tell you that I'm all for us being in both places.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 
Sorry, but BHO is NOT bringing all the troops back from Iraq anymore.

He's gone on record several times describing forces as large as 50,000 to remain in Iraq. He is counting "savings" in his proposed budget for Iraq deployments out to 2019!

jw



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by jd140
 
Sorry, but BHO is NOT bringing all the troops back from Iraq anymore.

He's gone on record several times describing forces as large as 50,000 to remain in Iraq. He is counting "savings" in his proposed budget for Iraq deployments out to 2019!

jw




I'm not naive enough to think that we will ever be 100% out of Iraq. It just won't happen.

Think about it. Besides Vietnam, where have we fought a large war and left completely?

I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm not going to hold it over his head that he isn't going to get all the troops out of Iraq. I actually think it would be a bad idea if he did.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 





If you are referring to my post, then I must tell you that I'm all for us being in both places.


No, i wasn't referring to your post, just making a point and putting my 2 cents worth in. No need for hostility and my apologies for any confusion.

TheAssociate



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by jd140
 





If you are referring to my post, then I must tell you that I'm all for us being in both places.


No, i wasn't referring to your post, just making a point and putting my 2 cents worth in. No need for hostility and my apologies for any confusion.

TheAssociate


Wasn't being hostile.

Just thought I was replying to a post directed at me. No worries.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
I'm not naive enough to think that we will ever be 100% out of Iraq. It just won't happen.

Think about it. Besides Vietnam, where have we fought a large war and left completely?

I actually think it would be a bad idea if he did.


Although Obama's liberal base obviously disagrees, and prefers no projection of military force anywhere except against "red" states, it is a political reality and necessity.

I agree that we need a permanent presence in the Middle East besides Israel, just as we do in Asia (Japan and Korea), Europe (Germany, Italy, et c.) and the Pacific Ocean.

jw



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terces Pot Evoba
One of the main reasons I voted for him was that he was bringing home ALL the troops!


how many campaign promises is he actually going to keep?


Answer to your question: probably none.

Also, news for breakingdreadles: This is a discussion site and opinions are welcome here ...



Ah, the kool-aid starts to wear off for yet another obamaphile.


Now you will have to learn to deal with the fact that even though you put your heart and soul into supporting this charlatan (obama), it does not mean that he will live up to all - or even any - of your expectations.




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join