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.

 

Blood on Obama's Hands

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


Alas, the days when kings were mighty warriors who lead their men on the battlefield are lost in antiquity.




posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Centurionx
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


Alas, the days when kings were mighty warriors who lead their men on the battlefield are lost in antiquity.


Yeah, but antibiotics, antiseptics, and painkillers go a long way to mitigating whatever losses came with that particular cultural shift.

Nothing like a nasty case of septicemia after having your thighbone shattered by a rusty battle axe to ruin a perfectly good day.

Still, I grasp the basic point you are trying to make...sorry, please carry on...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by russ212
 






You sir just made me throw up in my mouth a little, and should simply leave the country if you are not going to at least support the people who DO PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE EVERY DAY. What have you done for the country? Who are you to codemn 18 year old kids that made a commitment not know what they were getting into.

People like you are the people that are ruining our nation.



I'm sorry, but i thought America was the land of the free? I thought America was based around principles of religious tolerance, equality and freedom of speech??

Isn’t that what makes America worth defending?

Apparently not, according to you... because somebody who doesn’t agree with the actions of Americas military should "leave the country"





SUPPORT THE TROOPS, AND THEIR FAMILIES WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE WITH THE WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So regardless of if the war goes completely against someone’s morals... if it spits in the face of what they see as right and wrong... if countless civilians are being killed... people should stand there waving their flags and give support??

Sorry but that’s ridiculous... people MUST have the right to disagree and the right to express their views!!


I'm not saying we should condemn, condone or commend the troops... what i am saying is we should support people’s right to free speech and not tell them to leave a country if we disagree with their opinion!!

Surely that is un-American?

Peace



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
what i think is funny,

i get confused when reading statements like




Blood on Obama's Hands

and



the increase in deaths is directly the result of Obama’s personal mismanagement of the war.


and then i get confused.

which obama.

the bin laden or the nedal nib wanna be manufacturer.

i mean his 1st name is "barrack" and we've all played RTS(realtimestrategy) games. a BARRACK is where you build/deploy your troops.

and then to take it a step further. his middle name is "HUSIEN" (*spelling)
the other bad guy who aparently makes mobs and blows ppl up but we wont mention him any more because we hung him, he's dead. (i think)

what we have here looks like. um DUNE. battle for IRAQus...

you have your

HARKONNEN your ORDOS. your ATREIDES(spelling)
however you look at it. haha what do u think the spice is.
whats the worms? i bet the ROV is involved somehow 2...

haha the game of DUNE in the NWO political system of the world. hah



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Muckster
 


It seems more like you believe America has no right to a military. And yes we were founded on freedom. However, I believe that if you are not happy you should leave. No where did I say that you should be forced out.

According to your statement, lets all just quit our jobs so we don't fund the war. You seem to have no concept of reality, and will receive no more responses from me. I will ignore you. I like the ignore button when I read idiotic statements like yours.

These troops committed to serve our country. They were forced into war. If every soldier laid down their guns when they didn't want to do something we would not have an army, or probably a nation right now.

These soldiers are trained to follow orders, that is the right thing for an army to do. If they don't they will die in combat.

People do have the right to disagree, but look at what happened when people like you protested the troops during Vietnam. The troops came home to country that threw eggs at them and hated them.

Protest, YES, but protest the people that started the war, not the pawns that fight in. Protest in front of recruitment offices, not soldiers returning from the worst experience anyone could imagine.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by russ212]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by semperfortis
 


From another post of mine....

US Paying Pakistan To Kill American Troops! A Crime Of Mammoth Proportions!


Taliban: Actively funded, trained and
supported by Pakistan's ISI


"The behind-the-scenes frustrations of soldiers on the ground and glimpses of what appear to be Pakistani skullduggery contrast sharply with the frequently rosy public pronouncements by American officials of Islamabad as an ally in the war against terror.”

As you know, thousands of classified US documents implicating Pakistan in its support for terrorism exploded in the public domain, sending officials in both countries scurrying for cover to defend a ‘dubious alliance and straining a phony partnership based on a misreading of the ground sentiment and situation.’


In effect, the chronicles suggested that Washington was blindly paying Pakistan massive amounts of money for access to Afghanistan even as Islamabad uses its spy agency, ISI, to plot the death of American and NATO troops, allied Indian personnel, and undermines US policy. The most devastating leaks showed that Pakistan allows representatives of its spy service, ISI, to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize attacks against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders, including President Hamid Karzai.


So one would ask, what’s new? The US of A has been known to mollycoddle Pakistan and its notorious spy agency the ISI since decades. And with military and other aid amounting to a whopping $17 billion dollars of tax payers money in the last five years to Pakistan, it seems the American policy makers prefer to keep those blinkers on for fear of ‘hurting’ the sentiments of a ‘trusted ally’ which is Pakistan (The fountainhead of terror) in the so called war against terror. Oh yes, they’re providing logistics support and tacit approval for those drone attacks, you see? Where would the US of A, NATO and ISAF be without the Pakistanis? Never mind if they’ve helped the Taliban (Haqqani) to kill more than 2000 ISAF troops in Afghanistan!

In other words, the US is paying Pakistan to kill American troops!


Salem-news

Now what’s all the fuss about? Why is Pakistan going all out to support terrorist organizations like the Taliban in Afghanistan? What’s their game plan? The Pakistanis contend that they are fighting the terrorists in Swat and the badlands in the North West and so is a victim of terrorism themselves. This is balderdash! So what’s the truth?



The Pakistan army is fighting the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan who are anti Pakistan and NOT the Afghan Taliban (Haqqani) to whom they’re providing logistics, military support and training for fighting the ISAF in Afghanistan.
Why? Here’s the Pakistani gameplan:

The Doctrine of Strategic Depth



'Strategic Depth', is a hare brained concept propounded by a Pakistani General, Mirza Aslam Beg, and included as a grand strategy of the Pakistan Army which needs to be achieved whatever the cost. So what is this so called ‘Strategic Depth’? For starters, it is vital to install a pliable government in Afghanistan without which it would be virtually impossible to achieve this. And therefore the imperative for winning the Afghan war at all costs, paving the way for the installation of a pliant government controlled by the Taliban at the helm.

Strategic Depth focuses on:

1. Establishment of a corridor within Afghanistan wherein Pakistani troops can concentrate in the event of a war with India to regain a ‘balanced disposition’ in case of an adverse situation in the event of war and mount a riposte at an appropriate time of their choosing.

2. Move their strategic assets into Afghanistan including long range missiles thereby putting them out of India’s reach. This would ensure a viable second strike capability.

3. Strategic depth is an offensive tactic to “bleed India with a thousand cuts in Kashmir.” (Zia). Afghan opium poppies and mujahideen, the two swords of ISI machinery, would be the servicing fuel and ammunition for overthrowing “the tyranny against our Kashmiri brethren” (Aslam Beg).

4. Strategic Depth is also a conduit through which mercenaries and “guest militants” from various Arab nationalities could be recruited for the jihadi terror in Kashmir and based in ‘friendly’ Afghanistan where they would be trained to carry out the ‘fight to the finish’ in Kashmir. Strategic Depth is thus the lynchpin of Pakistan’s offensive infiltrationist game plan in Kashmir.

4. Secure the vital trade and supply routes to energy rich CIS countries through Afghanistan without let or hindrance.


It is to achieve this mirage that the Pakistan Army assisted by its adjunct the ISI (Inter Services Intelligence), is supping with the Taliban (Haqqani) by providing the wherewithal required to fight the ISAF in Afghanistan without which it would have been well neigh impossible to have stretched this war for almost a decade by a band of brigands!

Now do you see what this war in Afghanistan is all about? Pakistan has its own agenda and it's not about the war on terror!

So, what is America up to? They know full well that Pakistan is running with the hare and hunting with the hounds but yet doling out billions of dollars in tax payers hard earned money to support an errant state since decades.

In a nutshell, The American government is squarely responsible for the deaths of more than 2000 soldiers by refusing to bring the proponents of this war, Pakistan, to heel.

As I write this, more American casualties are being brought in from Afghanistan draped in Stars and Stripes, thanks to American policy makers who refuse to act against the sponsors of terror – Pakistan.



timesofindia.indiatimes.com...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


This belongs in its own thread



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by russ212
 





Protest, YES, but protest the people that started the war, not the pawns that fight in. Protest in front of recruitment offices, not soldiers returning from the worst experience anyone could imagine.




That is a fair comment and one i agree with...

However, you probably will not see this post due to your fondness of the ignore button.

I will NOT use the ignore button on you because i believe everybody’s opinion should be heard... even if i disagree with it...

Just putting your hands over your ears and sings "na na nana naa" does not make someone’s opinion go away.

All that does is keep your mind closed to other possibilities... But... i guess im just talking to myself so never mind... a lesson you will never learn due to your entrenched position and actions.

Peace


[edit on 4-8-2010 by Muckster]

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Muckster]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Muckster
 


I saw this one. But some opinons I don't want to hear.

I don't want to hear people say the Holocaust didn't happen, and I don't want to hear people say things like what you said.

It is my perogative to simply not listen to mindless dribble. I listen to people that I disagree with, as long as they seem lucid and rational. I believe this is the only way to learn. But, in this case you are the person that is filled with hate and intolerance. You do not understand why these people joined the military, or why they fight.

Perhaps you are the one that needs to listen to a few more differing opinions. You are as intolerant as anyone that I have spoken with.

Simply because you have the right to free speech, don't expect people to listen to you. That is a freedom I enjoy. You probably don't want to hear someone say certain things as well.

Edit to remove something that I wish I had not said. I apologize.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by russ212]

[edit on 4-8-2010 by russ212]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by russ212
 





But, in this case you are the person that is filled with hate and intolerance


You do not know me at all... I kindly ask you to re-read my posts and point out anywhere that you think demonstrates hatred.

And you are correct about me needing to listen to more opinions... that how i learn... however, calling me intolerant couldn’t be further from the truth.




Edit to remove something that I wish I had not said. I apologize.


No problem... it is obviously a topic that is close to your heart and one that generates passion and anger... I can understand that completely!


Peace



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Actually, the blood is on ALL American's hands. Like it or not.

Agreed..

A politically correct slaughter?

Under United States and international law, the war in Iraq is illegal. And the People are not under any legal or moral obligations.

If you ask me, any foreign national in Iraq who acts as an accomplice, or actively participates in the commission of this crime, is a an accessory or principal of said crime. Of course the distinction is subjective, but the point remains.

At the very least we have a moral obligation and a ethical duty imposed by the standards of natural law to mitigate this slaughter, if we are in fact not legally obligated to.

This is not war, this is a slaughter. I should think that the only war going on here is the war in the hearts and mind of all every time the trigger is pulled, a dollar is made, and global economic fascism defeats natural law.

Sounds like the slaughter is going exactly as planned. I am Canadian, and I can see the blood on my hands.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


i couldnt agree with you more with every word that you wrote!
that is why i see this once great country the U.S going to hell in a hand basket as their is absolutely no leadership and the cronies that are in charge take their orders from only god knows who!
in short if you have kids leading a great nation you will have death and mayhem in a very short time
i am still wondering what in the sam hill we are doing over their? wasnt it over terrorism? or was is over being the worlds population police?

sad thing of it is we cannot even secure our da-m borders why in hell are we worried about everyone elses?



[edit on 4-8-2010 by allprowolfy]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The generals, pentagon, or joint chiefs haven't had a clue on how to handle this war since day one. We're still fighting it - nine years later! And as some of the Wikileaks have shown, the military is killing unarmed civilians and not taking the necessary precautions to protect them (last time I checked, that was a war crime).


Havin read the rest of the comments on here, the silence to your comments is deafening.

I couldn't have put it better myself.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis

Blood on Obama's Hands


frontpagemag.com

With the deaths of three additional U.S. troops on July 29, July officially became the bloodiest of the nine-year conflict in Afghanistan. The death toll for July was 63 and it captured the record as the deadliest month for Americans so far.
We all need to understand that the increase in deaths is directly the result of Obama’s personal mismanagement of the war.
Why? Upon taking management of defense policy, the Obama administration intervened to change the rules of engagement. Ralph Peters explained it this way in the New York Post: “Unle
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 8/3/2010 by semperfortis]


Ralph Peters views are no mystery...




In a 2009 article for The Journal of International Security Affairs titled "Wishful Thinking and Indecisive Wars" Peters' advocates the ruthless use of United States military power, declaring "If you cannot win clean, win dirty." Peters' also raises the controversial American practice of directing the United States military to attack journalists. Peters writes, "Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media."

en.wikipedia.org...

He has flip-flopped on the war several times with his only constant being a continous call for a "dirty war". He made similiar criticisms in 2006.

Seriouslly...research him..or at least read the Wiki link.

All and all, a predictable view by Ralph Peters and nothing new except the Anti-Obama spin.

A brief trip to non-partisan, objective analysis.

The IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) have gotten more sophisticated and numerous in Afghanistan.



Roadside bombs remain the number one killer of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and although their construction is relatively crude compared with those seen in Iraq, the sheer size of some of the bombs have thrown 30-ton vehicles high in the air.

www.globalpost.com...



U.S. troops in Afghanistan passed another discouraging milestone over the weekend. July ended with a tally of at least 63 Americans killed, more than two every day, the highest monthly death toll in nearly nine years of war.

Perhaps the biggest killer was the roadside bomb, also known as the IED, or improvised explosive device. The Pentagon has allocated $3 billion this year to counteract homemade bombs. But insurgents also keep adapting — at a deadly cost.

www.npr.org...


In Iraq ...a relatively flat field of operations..it was easy to drive beside the road or veer off road when circumstances were suspicous.



Trying To Beat The IED

But Iraq and Afghanistan are different, according to Ash Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics. He and his team at the Pentagon spend a large part of their time trying to beat the IEDs.

The answer, he said, was an all-terrain M-ATV.

"We learned quickly that the M-RAPs that were so useful in Iraq were not always appropriate to the terrain here. They had suspensions that were designed for flat Iraq, not for mountainous Afghanistan.

So the M-ATV has independent suspension, which allows it to get off the road and therefore avoid IEDs," Carter said.

www.npr.org...

Here is the vehicle that they are talking about, with independant suspension allowing it to get off-road in mountanious terrian.

www.oshkoshdefense.com...

In the beginning of July the US Military placed it's rush order for over 8,000 of these vehicles.

I know it is not conveniently political or partisan but...

Rules of Engagement do not apply to the biggest killer in Afghanistan...A bomb burried in the road.

The main solution is much more mundane...different vehicles than we used in Iraq.











[edit on 4-8-2010 by maybereal11]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Well, I am not sure Front Page Mag's analysis holds much credence when your explore the site to discovery just how right wing it is. David Horowitz's Wikipedia entry is illuminating to say the least.

Okay, back to the opening post. Does Obama have blood on his hands? No, the Bush administration are the ones who have blood on their hands for starting and perpetuating a war on terror which has become a complete fallacy. Ten years of killing hundreds of thousands of innocent lives and nothing has been achieved. We entered Afghanistan under the pretext of eliminating al-Qaeda, however they quickly setup shop in a number of other countries and the military industrial complex spun the war as a fight against the Taliban who were never the enemy to begin with. A lot of analysis now suggests a power-sharing deal with the Taliban must be made before NATO withdraws. Pakistan will be integral to this as strategically they don't want instability on their western border as well as with India on the east.

Harm minimization tactics have been used by other NATO forces without direct association to an increased troop casualty toll. Was it not Stanley McChrystal who first implemented this mode of operation and he cared little for politics, let alone Obama who he suggested felt uncomfortable and ill at ease around the military?

Much like my new government, Obama has been left with the mess of a previous administration to clean up. A mess that has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Say what you want about Bush, and most of you have time and again; he never tied the hands of our soldiers like this.


Yeah. He didn't get us mired in two wars or anything.


The war lust of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/et al is the reason those troops are there in the first place. Yet you want to give him a pass.

The Rules of Engagement were put into place by Gen. McChrystal.

www.usatoday.com...

If you're claiming that Obama made him put those rules into place, you could have a point...but if it's so risky, then why didn't he resign in protest THEN?

And Gen. Petraeus is planning to modify them.

www.foxnews.com...

Maybe, just maybe, Obama is actually letting the generals set their own ROE. But please don't let that possibility get in the way of your blind hatred. I mean, if there's a negative result, it must be because of Obama. And if there's a good result, it's in spite of Obama.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
This war has gone on and on for much longer than it took to Defeat the Germans AND the Japanese. It is obvious that it isn't intended to be won.

First of all, this is an Occupation and not a war. We are not fighting a sovereign nation's standing military force.

When did Afghanistan ever Declare War Upon the United States ?

But instead we are "fighting" an armed militia rebelling against our occupation. An occupation merely for their Nation's vast natural resources.

And any of us would defend our homeland in the same way.Which if you recall was the purpose of an armed militia guaranteed by our 2nd Amendment.

Where is the legality of using the US Military which was intended first and foremost to defend the Constitution and our Nation, Used in taking foreign nations for their natural resources ever written anywhere in the US Constitution ?

It isn't. Because the Military was to be used in defense of our nation.
ONLY.

Call me anti war, NO. I am anti UNJUST wars for profit.

War is indeed A Racket !



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The generals, pentagon, or joint chiefs haven't had a clue on how to handle this war since day one. We're still fighting it - nine years later! And as some of the Wikileaks have shown, the military is killing unarmed civilians and not taking the necessary precautions to protect them (last time I checked, that was a war crime).


I have spent time reading a lot of those reports and they are damning to say the least. The magnitude of weaponry and indiscriminate use is shocking. Look back to Fallujah and you get an idea for how this has been played out. The environmental and human cost to these wars has and never will justify the reasons for them in the first place.

Edit: Typo

[edit on 4-8-2010 by LarryLove]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
It's blood on all of their hands, Democrat and Republicans.They are Luciferians.....they love washing their hands in blood. It's what they do, the more the better. Seems to me, it's a plan that worked out for them. Everything seems to be in line for murderers.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Maybe WE will not support the next call to arms that leads to such things?

Next time someone appeals to our patriotism in such a way, shall we remember this day?

I hope so -

Bring our troops home




top topics



 
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join