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.

 

Why are Conservative Pundits ANTI Exit strategy?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
I was watching Orielly this evening on Foxnews and they were talking about what Obama might say in his Afghanistan announcement on Tuesday.

The two people who he had speculating on what was going to be said, continually said that any talk of an Exit strategy would be a sign of weakness.

I just don't get it. How is that a sign of weakness?

How is saying "We plan on getting out of this war at some point" a sign of weakness?

To Orielly's credit, he didn't give any credit to this statement...

But I still don't get where this sentiment is coming from.




posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


It is a sign of weakness because it tells your enemy that you are not commited to win, but only commited to fight until whatever date you set. They just hunker down until that date, shoot you on your way out, and then take over once you are gone.

Who would you rather be in a fist fight with the guy who says he will fight until one of you dies, or they guy that says I can only fight until noon because I break for my afternoon tea?



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Because they are not stupid, like Liberals.

History has proven, time and again, that once you go to war, the only acceptable exit strategy is "VICTORY".

There is no time table for a war. To think so is foolish.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by loki41872
 


Great post. Had to give you a star.

I believe that if we left war to liberals that they wouldn't want there to be winners at all. They would just hand out participation trophies to both sides and beg them to kiss and make up before someone's feelings got hurt.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Who goes into war saying "We shall stay at war forever! Muah ha ha ha!" ??? You leave after you win. Exit strategy is called VICTORY.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by loki41872
 


Great post. Had to give you a star.

I believe that if we left war to liberals that they wouldn't want there to be winners at all. They would just hand out participation trophies to both sides and beg them to kiss and make up before someone's feelings got hurt.


And a big group hug to the tune of kumbaya.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by plaidness
Who goes into war saying "We shall stay at war forever! Muah ha ha ha!" ??? You leave after you win. Exit strategy is called VICTORY.


Sure, easy, leave when we achieve victory. Yeah, no prob.

Hey wait a minute, when we went into this we had no clear objective in mind and no exit strategy. How do you achieve victory when you failed to define it form the start?

We took over Iraq & Afganistan. Saddam was executed. New Democratic (read puppet) governments were installed in both countries. Sounds like victory to me.

Why are we still there? To fight the resistance?

Seems like the resistance is there to fight the occupying army and their puppet govt, just as we would do if we were in the same circumstance.

Looks like circular logic to me. Maybe victory is defined as keeping the defence contractors fat & happy.

VICTORY ACHIEVED!!

Now lets get out.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem

Originally posted by plaidness
Who goes into war saying "We shall stay at war forever! Muah ha ha ha!" ??? You leave after you win. Exit strategy is called VICTORY.


Sure, easy, leave when we achieve victory. Yeah, no prob.

Hey wait a minute, when we went into this we had no clear objective in mind and no exit strategy. How do you achieve victory when you failed to define it form the start?

We took over Iraq & Afganistan. Saddam was executed. New Democratic (read puppet) governments were installed in both countries. Sounds like victory to me.

Why are we still there? To fight the resistance?

Seems like the resistance is there to fight the occupying army and their puppet govt, just as we would do if we were in the same circumstance.

Looks like circular logic to me. Maybe victory is defined as keeping the defence contractors fat & happy.

VICTORY ACHIEVED!!

Now lets get out.


Just because you may not know the real reasons behind the war (same goes for me), there is ALWAYS a reason.

Maybe it is a serious terrorist threat, economic resources (what I believe it is), or the want to spread democracy.

Could be other things as well, or a combination.

THERE IS A POINT...you can not use the medias word while at the same time discrediting them for everything they say.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


The real reason is simple: GREED.

We want what they have: in Iraq; oil and Afganistan; heroin and space to build the pipeline for more oil.

Conservative mouthpieces cannot admit this to the public, so they fall back on the old "fighting terrorists" (partisan freedom fighter movements) to protect the people of these countries line of BS to make us think our motives are pure.

It's just a con game.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 04:30 AM
link   
I love how you used the word pundit to describe the conservative view. I have read many statements from you in other threads and are you not also a pundit? Also you stated how how does it show weakness to consider a exit strategy. If we are going to fight we should fight to win and if we are not going to fight to win we should not fight. By letting be public know we are considering leaving it only makes the enemy fight harder and more soldiers die it truly is that simple.

I am afraid no matter how I explain it the message will be lost I mean how do explain how weakness is viewed to someone? I bet you did not think it was weakness by waiting for so long to make a decision also right.
I quess it is something that comes from your heart and if you dont see it no matter how hard you try all the explanations on earth would not part the skies.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by HotSauce
It is a sign of weakness because it tells your enemy that you are not commited to win, but only commited to fight until whatever date you set. They just hunker down until that date, shoot you on your way out, and then take over once you are gone.



Agreed. You have to be careful in publicly discussing an 'exit strategy' at a time when you've got a war that's starting to spiral out of control. Its a signal to your enemies, but also your allies and your own troops, that you really just want to get the hell out. The result? Your own troops are demoralized, your allies are reluctant to send more troops of their own, and your enemies just sit back and wait until you leave.

Obama should not even mention the words 'exit strategy' tonight. Instead, he needs to use the word 'victory'...repeatedly...and explain to us what 'victory' is in Afghanistan and how sending more troops over there helps us accomplish that instead. If he can't do that, then we probably shouldn't even be over there.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Putting aside the whole fact that we should never be invading other countries or nation building or maintaining permanent bases all over the world....

the whole notion of an "exit strategy" is ridiculous. You cant set a time table because the enemy will know when you're going leave and just lay in wait to take over. You cant set a series of "goals" like the mythical 'victory' because any goal is relative to the politician who interprets it.

What's your 'exit strategy' for dinner? Leave when the food is gone? Just the food from your plate or the food from the kitchen or the food involved in the meal?Leave when fullness is achieved? What's full? Who has to decide and agree upos the requirements for fullness?

An 'exit strategy' is a virtual idea. Sure, people can have certain benchmarks in their minds they are looking for and working toward but to announce the benchmarks and set them in stone is idiotic.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   
An exit strategy implies you did what you set out to do - or that you are giving up.

Has anyone heard a clear goal for the war in Afghanistan? (from either the Bush or Obama admins).

Is it to wipe out AQ and the Taliban such that they are no longer a threat?

Is it to establish a stable (and US friendly) govt.?

Is it to "win the hearts and minds" as they say?

Is it all of the above?

Without a goal that people could point to and say, "Yes, we accomplished that." an exit strategy might be seen as just giving up.

It would be like saying, "Ok, we went into Afghanistan, shot the place up for a few years, we didn't really accomplish anything but we're pulling out."

At this point I don't see either party being able to say "We've accomplished X in Afganistan". So to talk about leaving could be seen as talking about giving up.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Let's look at what Obama has done....

Sat on his rear and waited for 8 months deciding what to do in Afghanistan while our troops are dying each and every day. CHECK

Deciding to send only a small portion of what the commanders who are there first hand and have trained in military strategy their whole life say is needed to achieve victory. CHECK

Given those insanely mind numbing facts, I am all in favor of just pulling the troops back.

Why let Obama send 30k more troops to die slowly instead of sending 100k and finishing whatever their goal is?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


It is a sign of weakness because it tells your enemy that you are not commited to win, but only commited to fight until whatever date you set. They just hunker down until that date, shoot you on your way out, and then take over once you are gone.



An Exit Strategy is TIED TO WINNING!

When I join a startup in America, every Exec has an "Exit Strategy" Which means "How do we declare victory?"




Who would you rather be in a fist fight with the guy who says he will fight until one of you dies, or they guy that says I can only fight until noon because I break for my afternoon tea?


The guy who knows what hes doing, and how hes getting out.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
I love how you used the word pundit to describe the conservative view.


I never did such a thing... I made a very clear decision to include the word Pundit, because I didn't think this was the conservative view from a long stretch (until I heard Cheney today talking about it).



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Thank you for clarifying hunka hunka you are a stand up person. I have alot of respect for you to write that. At the end of the day we all want the same things I believe. It is a shame it is getting so divided and the opposing viewpoint is no longer heard. At least you make well thought out arguements I will give you that I just happen to disagree with them. I actually feel the republicans and the democrats are playing on the same team and they are against us. They use the political and racial lines to divide us and it works great. All I want is to be free and be able to earn enough money to support a family and send my kids to college so they can be better than me. I dont feel that is to much to ask but it seems even that has been taken away and not just by obama they are all the same in my eyes.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I think alot of the conservative "pundits" don't really understand WHY the declaration of an exit strategy is really bad. They recite talking points about half-read, blogs that claim they know about geo-politics and how to conduct a war. These are "pundits" on TV and talk radio mind you, while a few have actually touched on the real reason most just spew regurgetated garbage from Rush. So my take. Having an exit strategy is necessary and is correct. Transmitting it over world-wide airwaves is ignorant. At times I wonder if some of these national security advisors and speech writers don't think that the Afghan fighters and thier commanders have access to these broadcasts and are just poor dumb mountain folk that enjoy the company of thier goats. Guerilla wars against a standing army center around collecting all the intelligence you can about an enemy before you strike. If your enemy is broadcasting his intentions it is quite easy to setup a suitable plan-of-action to maximize your effectivness on the ground while decreasing your overall casualties. The Afghan fighters, since this war started have made a very effective strategies of hitting hard, fast and then waiting. They are a very patient people as Russian forces can attest. They wait until troops become complacent or even until weather prevents certain air assets from being used to ambush. Aside from their ammo pouches and weapons they dress just like normal Afghan civilians. They recieve intel and orders from across the border or in populated areas that have satellite access and can watch all of these press conferences and news channels. Hell I watched a military "advisor" on Fox today outline what the most likely tactic for the troop surge would be, the main focus areas and likely troop dispursions. EVERYTHING that is sent out to the American public or worldwide is a source of Intel on our military startegy. We have to remember that is THIER country. They know it far better than we do and are far better adapted to fighting in it. Also thier troops don't carry 70 lbs. + of gear into higher elevations. So the real idea should be I AM PRO-EXIT STRATEGY, JUST ANTI BROADCASTING WHAT IT IS



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
All I want is to be free and be able to earn enough money to support a family and send my kids to college so they can be better than me.



Two things here that jump to mind...

1. We are all able to earn enough money to support our families. However, what we believe about ourselves, our world, and our abilities limits our reality more than any objective realities. I note your username is Subjective Truth... that is the highest reality, humans operate best when they take control of it.

2. I've never been to college myself, and own my own business. I'm not knocking school, but i wouldn't be where I am today if I had gone to college. I started out with an abusive alcoholic father, and I eventually ended up living out of a car. However, today I own a company, have 12 employees, and run my own life. At the end of the day, I chalk it up to Autotheism, and being hard headed enough to live life the way I want to.

Sorry for the lil bit off topic post there, but I just felt like sharing that.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
dup

[edit on 2-12-2009 by HunkaHunka]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join