This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden

  • Joe Klein finds a nut

    As I told the young lady who sent me this link from Time’s Public Relations Office, I hate Joe Klein with the white hot passion of a thousand suns, but this time I can’t argue with him. He writes in Time “Ten is Enough” referring to ten years in Afghanistan. He begins the article like most of the media talking about SSG Bales, all of his deployments, his financial woes, anger over the promotion list and family problems, but Klein dismisses all of this;

    Once again, the 2.4 million young Americans who have served with honor in Iraq and Afghanistan are portrayed as victims and a potential menace, ready to pop at any moment. There has been little acknowledgment that the overwhelming majority of our veterans–even the overwhelming majority of those suffering from posttraumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries–have come home to lead productive and, often, inspiring lives. The unfairness of laying the burden of this stereotype on them, after they assumed the burden of fighting impossible wars for the rest of us, is infuriating.

    Klein goes on to interview actual veterans to get their views – it’s an entirely new concept, I know.

    And so I decided to check in with some of the other veterans I’ve come to know over the past few years, men and women who are leading exemplary lives back home, to see how they were reacting to the news from Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, almost all of them were infuriated by the spew of stereotypes. “The media have done nobody any favors,” said Jake Wood, a former Marine sergeant who co-founded Team Rubicon, a network of combat veterans–many sergeants–who provide disaster relief. “You see headlines like SERGEANT PSYCHO, and what can you say?”

    After repeating some more excellent quotes from other real veterans, Klein concludes;

    But it’s long past time for the bulk of our troops to come home–which means the Obama Administration should announce that our drawdown will not pause, as previously planned, in September but will continue in an orderly fashion. For the life of me, I can’t see the rationale for the loss of even one more American life or limb there.

    While I agree that it’s time for the troops to come home, I have different reasons. This administration has no intention of winning this war against terror past some catchy campaign slogans, and which of us wants to be the last to die for the Obama/Biden 2012 campaign?

    I sent my thanks to Joe Klein for doing the tough work this time, though.

  • Speaking of the Iraq War

    I just got this gem in my inbox from my BFF Barry;

    It says that the Iraq War began 9 years ago today, and because we have Barack Obama, it’s over;

    This past December, President Barack Obama stood at Fort Bragg in front of troops returning from Iraq, and said: “Welcome home.”

    Across the nation, and on America’s military bases around the world, it was a momentous occasion. The war had come to a definitive, responsible end. As an Iraq War vet, I’m especially proud to say that President Obama kept his promise.

    Actually, Barack Obama’s promise was to have the troops home in 16 months after he took office, not 35 months. So the promise he kept was President Bush’s promise.

    But, apparently this a call out to veterans to join the Obama campaign, because, you know he’s done so much for us. Like increased our healthcare premiums 500%, stopped our Cost of Living Allowances for the last three years. Screwed up the VA education benefits so bad that no one knows when or if they’ll ever get their VA checks. In fact, Ed benefits are so bad now, that chief proponent of the New GI Bill Jim Webb is proposing caps to the benefits that got Democrats elected in 2008.

    For the record, I’m thinking neither party deserves the votes of veterans in this election because both sides have sold us down the river on the things we earned based on an unwritten promise. But, neither should they take for granted our votes. But anyone campaigning for barack Obama can’t tell me they’re looking for veterans, like this dimwit Rob Diamond, another HuffPo dingus, who sent me this email.

  • That religion double standard thing

    Remember last year when the whole world had it’s collective balls in an uproar over an American minister who was going to publicly burn a Koran? The White House got involved and tried to shame him into not doing it, and sent out a preemptive apology. Well, where is everyone and their condemnation of the Saudi mufti who, the other day called for the destruction of all of the churches on the peninsula, as reported by the Washington Times this morning;

    On March 12, Sheik Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, declared that it is “necessary to destroy all the churches of the region.” The ruling came in response to a query from a Kuwaiti delegation over proposed legislation to prevent construction of churches in the emirate. The mufti based his decision on a story that on his deathbed, Muhammad declared, “There are not to be two religions in the [Arabian] Peninsula.”

    It seems to me that every “liberal” in the world would be shouting to the Heavens that this kind of rhetoric shoudlnt be tolerated.

    This is not a small-time radical imam trying to stir up his followers with fiery hate speech. This was a considered, deliberate and specific ruling from one of the most important leaders in the Muslim world. It does not just create a religious obligation for those over whom the mufti has direct authority; it is also a signal to others in the Muslim world that destroying churches is not only permitted but mandatory.

    So where is our own White House on this? Not a peep. So when churches and synagogues start going up in flames, I expect they’ll be issuing apologies for offending Muslims sensibilities for erecting the houses of worship for the infidels.

  • Focusing on our weaknesses

    The Washington Post reports that according to some of the recently de-classified documents that were gathered up at the site of the bin Laden execution in Pakistan, there was a plot afoot to kill President Obama and General David Petraeus.

    “The reason for concentrating on them,” the al-Qaeda leader explained to his top lieutenant, “is that Obama is the head of infidelity and killing him automatically will make (Vice President Joe) Biden take over the presidency. … Biden is totally unprepared for that post, which will lead the U.S. into a crisis. As for Petraeus, he is the man of the hour … and killing him would alter the war’s path” in Afghanistan.

    Administration officials said Friday the Obama-Petraeus plot was never a serious threat.

    I guess Obama had even bin Laden fooled that he is more competent than Bite Me Biden. While I certainly won’t argue that Biden isn’t completely unprepared to lead this country, I’d ask how anyone could think that Obama is any more prepared for the challenges of fighting terrorism than Biden ever was?

    Afghanistan was such a straight forward fight, it’s hard to imagine how anyone could turn it into a giant cluster fuck in a few short years like this administration has done. I mean, how could they screw it up more than the Bush Administration had already?

    I guess bin Laden believed all of the Nobel Prize shit and the rally in Berlin hype like most of the American voting public believed it. It’s difficult to imagine Biden screwing the war against terrorism more than Obama has already. I’m sure it’s possible, but it’s still hard to figure.

    So the quote from “the administration official” that the plot was never a serious threat is true, but not in the way he meant. It wasn’t a serious threat because even if they’d succeeded none of our national security would have changed and we’d still be just as screwed in either case.

  • Karzai wants troops pulled back from villages

    Yeah, so all of those apologies and making excuses for Afghans who are murdering our troops in their bases have provoked Karzai to turn on us and demand that Panetta withdraw US forces from the villages into their bases. Yeah, who needs to be near their enemy in order to fight them? (Fox News link);

    Karzai asked the U.S. to withdraw its troops from Afghan villages and to confine them to bases following a shooting rampage by a U.S. staff sergeant that killed 16 civilians.

    The dramatic request, which Karzai’s office said was made during a meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, would — if accepted — essentially end the US combat role just as the annual Taliban spring offensive begins.

    And the Taliban was quick to follow on the Afghan President’s heels;

    Within minutes of Karzai’s statement, the Taliban declared it was suspending their negotiations with the US because the US “turned back on its promises,” such as the release of Taliban prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    Yeah, so much for being the only rational actor in the room. The US should begin immediate plans for withdrawals in the next few weeks. If Karzai wants us pulled out of the villages, pull them all the way back home. Why waste one more life in the cluster fuck that the Obama Administration has made of the Afghanistan War? Firing top generals, half-assed granting their requests, and putting his faith in Bite Me Biden’s strategy was always going to end this way. If our allies and our enemies think that they can exercise sway over our strategies, it’s no strategy at all.

    To quote one of my recent spammers; I’m terribly multitudinous to here.

  • Post sees ambivalence in Prez’ words

    You know a Democrat President is in trouble when the Washington Post suddenly comes to the same conclusions that we came to years ago. They compare his words of strength before coming to office in regards to a renewed commitment to the war against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan and the words that come out of his mouth these days.

    While saying that he was “confident that we can continue the work of meeting our objectives,” the president said his goal was to “responsibly wind down this war” and “bring our troops home.” He promised to “continue the work of devastating al-Qaeda’s leadership and denying them a safe haven,” but he made no mention of defeating the Taliban or of peace for the Afghans themselves.

    Yeah, where have you been Washington Post? We’ve been saying that for years. No one in the current administration has been able to form the word “victory” on their lips in the past 3 years.

    The U.S. official most able to work with the Afghan leadership, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, was abruptly pushed out of his post because of a hyped magazine article. Mr. Karzai is an erratic personality — but is it any wonder that he has grown increasingly resistant to the Obama administration?

    And the Post led the charge for forcing McChrystal into an early retirement.

    The president reluctantly accepted the advice of his generals that he adopt a strategy of counterinsurgency against the Taliban and send additional troops to carry it out. But he arbitrarily cut the number of troops sought by commanders; set an equally arbitrary deadline for beginning their withdrawal; and rejected the military’s advice that the pullout be staged after this year’s summer fighting season. Now his aides are reportedly pushing for further troop withdrawals next year, once again against the Pentagon’s recommendation.

    And columnists in the Post cheered him every inch of the way and continue to push for an even earlier withdrawal.

    As they watch these moves, Afghans, the Taliban and neighbors such as Pakistan can reasonably conclude that the United States, rather than trying to win the war, is racing to implement an exit strategy in which the interests of Afghans and their government are slighted.

    It’s nice to see that the Post is making the same observations that this blog has been complaining about since the Fall of 2009. The Washington Post Editorial Board concludes;

    If it’s evident that the president won’t defend the war, and is focused on “winding down” rather than winning, why should anyone else support it?

    In other words, paraphrased from John Kerry’s 1971 declaration “Who wants to be the last to die for the Obama reelection campaign?”

  • Nervous Nellies at DoD

    Fox News reports that Leon Panetta is in Afghanistan in the wake of Sunday’s shootings of 16 unarmed Afghans by a US soldier. The trip had been planned for weeks, apparently, and by happy coincidence occurred today. So at the New York Times (by way of Bouhammer), they recount how when Panetta was about to address a number of troops, the soldiers were abruptly disarmed;

    In a sign of the nervousness surrounding Mr. Panetta’s trip, the Marines and other troops who were waiting in a tent for the defense secretary to speak were abruptly asked by their commander to get up, place their weapons — M-16 and M-4 automatic rifles and 9-mm pistols — outside the tent and then return unarmed. The commander, Sgt. Maj. Brandon Hall, told reporters he was acting on orders from superiors.

    “All I know is, I was told to get the weapons out,” he said. Asked why, he replied, “Somebody got itchy, that’s all I’ve got to say. Somebody got itchy; we just adjust.”

    Normally, American forces in Afghanistan keep their weapons with them when the defense secretary visits and speaks to them. The Afghans in the tent waiting for Mr. Panetta were not armed to begin with, as is typical.

    Later, American officials said that the top commander in Helmand, Maj. Gen. Mark Gurganus, had decided on Tuesday that no one would be armed while Mr. Panetta spoke to them, but the word did not reach those in charge in the tent until shortly before Mr. Panetta was due to arrive.

    Yeah, I know these are tense times, but holy smoke, disarming the troops in a war zone so they don’t shoot their civilian leader is a little bit pussyish. I don’t care if it was a general or Panetta who disarmed the soldiers, I think the troops need to know that their leadership has a measure of trust and confidence in them and their loyalties. This doesn’t demonstrate much of either. On the heels of Obama’s admission that he’s “generally proud” of the troops doesn’t help either.

    Added: From Mr. Wolf. I beheaded him at his request.
    (more…)

  • FL Vets demand Dems remove Obama flag (UPDATED)

    A link sent to us by ROS from the Sunshine State describes the scene outside of the Lake County, FL Democrat Party offices yesterday when veterans demanded that they remove the flag which had replaced the blue field and stars with an image of the President that was flying below the unaltered flag. The veterans offered a POW/MIA flag to replace the defaced flag;

    Don Van Beck, executive director of the Veterans Memorial at Fountain Park asked that the altered flag be removed, explaining that it was in violation of federal flag code. He offered a POW/MIA flag to fly in its place.

    Nancy Hurlburt, the Democratic Party Chair for Lake County, said she would research the issue but didn’t take the Obama flag down immediately, prompting Van Beck to declare that they would take the flag down for her.

    “No, you will not. This is private property,” Hurlbert responded.

    After a short time spent ‘researching’, Hurlbert relented and took down the flag while the veterans looked on. She did not accept the POW/MIA flag offered as a replacement.

    So where’s our apology for the Democrat-generated defaced flag? Yeah, the only flag allowed by law to be flown below the US flag is the POW/MIA flag. Ms. Hurlbert really stepped on it by not accepting the POW/MIA flag, too. So I guess you veterans in Lake County know where you stand with the Democrats there.

    UPDATE: According to Fox News, the Demcrats were in violation of state law;

    Jenn Meale, communications director for Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, referred FoxNews.com to state laws that pertain to the use of flags on public lands and property when asked for clarification as to whether Hurlbert could face any penalties.

    Statute 256.05, which covers improper use of state or United States flag, or other symbol of authority, reads: “No person shall, in any manner, for exhibition or display:

    “(1)?Place or cause to be placed any word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement of any nature upon any flag, standard, color, ensign or shield of the United States or of this state, or authorized by any law of the United States or this state; or

    “(2)?Expose to public view any such flag, standard, color, ensign or shield upon which shall have been printed, painted or otherwise produced, or to which shall have been attached, appended, affixed or annexed any such word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement.”