Author Topic: Lyndon Baines Obama and HIS War. (Read 1246 times)

Dee · « **on:** December 06, 2009, 02:05:57 AM »

With the decision for 30,000 more troops, after the campaign of promising to end the wars, is LBO, doing what LBJ did. Forget history, your condemned to repeat it.
I wonder if LBO will run up the same body count as LBJ did. LBJ ran on a ticket of ending Vietnam, just like LBO did. Then once winning the office, he ramped it up and the rest is history. A history not quite dead. As I read a little while ago. Same mistake, of trying to control a country thousand of miles away, made no sense then, and makes no sense now.

ironglow · « **Reply #1 on:** December 06, 2009, 02:11:45 AM »

...And another Lyndon Baines Obama mistake he's making; Trying to be the "general" who is running the tactical end of the operation.
Anyone know where he can find another Robert McNamara ? Or does he perhaps already have one in Robert Gates ?

magooch · « **Reply #2 on:** December 06, 2009, 04:35:27 AM »

My question is, now that the Obama surge is in process, when will John Kerry condemn our troops and when will John Murtha and Harry Reid declare "the war is lost"? Yeah I know--it ain't going to happen, but maybe there are some scuzzy Repubs that could step up.

Questor · « **Reply #3 on:** December 06, 2009, 04:55:11 AM »

I see it a little differently. By working on closing Guantanamo prison, and working against water boarding and similar interrogation techniques, he has done much to eliminate some of our few advantages in intelligence gathering on Al Quaeda.

Israel is now the most important anti-Al Quaeda intelligence gathering country in the world and we benefit from it. Only Israel has the ability and will to recruit people from Arab lands that can speak the languages colloquially and have life long knowledge of the region, and are loyal to their new home country. Britain is probably second in this capability because of their history and experience in the region.

Today, the few things that the US can do are monitoring communications, high altitude photography, and low altitude drone photography. There is some proven value in that, but it has limited effectiveness when working against this kind of enemy. Our traditional espionage expertise is not useful because these enemies don't frequent embassy receptions or hang out with the expatriate population. It is not centralized, and appears to be a group of several like minded organizations spread all over the world.

Given the reality of the threat, there is no rational justification for having significant troops in Afghanistan. The Obama policy is, effectively, to give Afghanistan back to the Taliban in 2011. What, in terms of national defense, is the point of that?

ironglow · « **Reply #4 on:** December 06, 2009, 07:20:48 AM »

The present administration has already aided the terrorists by;

1) Taking enemy caught on the battlefield from Guantanamo setting up a show trial in Manhattan and granting them Constitutional rights formerly reserved for US citizens.
These were armed combatants, Not in a uniform, fighting our troops on the battlefield..who in any other war, could legally have been executed on the spot.

2) Send in SEALs for a dangerous terrorist, then courts-martial the SEALs because the terrorist has a fat lip..and he claims the SEALs gave it to him.
This deal is going to lose for our military, some of their best, most valuable and experienced troops. Is it possible that is just what the Obamanation wants ?

Casull · « **Reply #5 on:** December 06, 2009, 07:33:47 AM »

But, remember (as I've heard a few on here say) that the democraps and Republicans are EXACTLY the same.

beerbelly · « **Reply #6 on:** December 06, 2009, 08:36:07 AM »

LBJ did not run on a pledge to end the war in Nam! He started the war. Before him there were maybe a hundred or so troops in Nam to train the troops.
He clammed the north attack one of our ships in the gulf and used that to send in combat troops.
Beerbelly

Dee · « **Reply #7 on:** December 06, 2009, 02:13:43 PM »

Quote from: beerbelly on December 06, 2009, 08:36:07 AM

LBJ did not run on a pledge to end the war in Nam! He started the war. Before him there were maybe a hundred or so troops in Nam to train the troops.
He clammed the north attack one of our ships in the gulf and used that to send in combat troops.
Beerbelly

Sure he did, and under pressure he broke his promise and ramped the war up.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #8 on:** December 06, 2009, 03:14:28 PM »

The way I see it:
We have a few problems.
1) BHO thinks he is smarter than everyone else and can change outcomes. He thinks he is a world chess master when he can not even tie at tic tac toe.
2) Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
3) He and the left do not want to Win the war. not once has this dolt said victory, And he feels guilty for killing his musilum brothers.
4) Dee, you said History about this group of History revisionists. If they don't like the history they will just make up a different one and have a different scape goat, as to why it is not their fault. Much like he did in his West Point speach when he tried to blame Rumsfeld rather than his Sec Def for not listening to the Generals for troop requests.
5) BHO has a problem with his extreme left wing loonies that do not believe in War of any kind, Especally one that frees people from opressive dictators or communists, that this war is about Oil, and he needs to pacify them as they are his base that seems to revel in a US loss.

torpedoman · « **Reply #9 on:** December 06, 2009, 03:20:04 PM »

Quote from: Questor on December 06, 2009, 04:55:11 AM

I see it a little differently. By working on closing Guantanamo prison, and working against water boarding and similar interrogation techniques, he has done much to eliminate some of our few advantages in intelligence gathering on Al Quaeda.

Israel is now the most important anti-Al Quaeda intelligence gathering country in the world and we benefit from it. Only Israel has the ability and will to recruit people from Arab lands that can speak the languages colloquially and have life long knowledge of the region, and are loyal to their new home country. Britain is probably second in this capability because of their history and experience in the region.

Today, the few things that the US can do are monitoring communications, high altitude photography, and low altitude drone photography. There is some proven value in that, but it has limited effectiveness when working against this kind of enemy. Our traditional espionage expertise is not useful because these enemies don't frequent embassy receptions or hang out with the expatriate population. It is not centralized, and appears to be a group of several like minded organizations spread all over the world.

Given the reality of the threat, there is no rational justification for having significant troops in Afghanistan. The Obama policy is, effectively, to give Afghanistan back to the Taliban in 2011. What, in terms of national defense, is the point of that?

Brittan is despised throughout the Arab world for their failure to keep the promises Lawrence made to them.

Dee · « **Reply #10 on:** December 07, 2009, 12:34:19 AM »

Well gentlemen, JFK, and then LBJ, was gonna free the Vietnamese from the Communists, and Bush was gonna free the Iraqis from the dictators, and Bush was gonna free Afghanistan from the Taliban that his daddy supported during the Soviet OCCUPATION?
Now LBO, is gonna RAMP UP the war on the terrorist, just like LBJ was gonna RAMP UP the war on Communist.
LBJ "HAD" Cambodia where they were coming in, and hiding, and LBO "HAS" Pakistan where they "ARE", coming in and hiding. SSDD!
Same movie, just different actors, names, locations and different names for the causes. All the propaganda you younger guys are now hearing on what, when, where, why, and who, I have already heard over 30 years ago. These two wars will end JUST LIKE THE LAST ONE DID. A lot of folks supportin the war, but not actually doing ANY of fighting in it, a lot of folks dying in it, and in the end, nothing being accomplished, and nothing changing.
Vietnam was the enemy then. A tiny little nation with no navy, or air force of any consequence, and of little, if any threat to the U.S. But those commies had to be stopped. Damn that rings a bell somewhere. And now their our buddies.

Redtail1949 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 07, 2009, 01:23:40 AM »

I agree with just about all the pevious posts. One correction Eishenhower first sent troops into vietnam in the early 1950s' as advisors.

Redtail1949 · « **Reply #12 on:** December 07, 2009, 01:58:28 AM »

ironglow:

it is unbelievable is it not? obama is only doing this to appease the musilum world. just the thought that he is doing this to such an obviously brave group of SEALS makes my blood boil.

lets see this guy literaly butchers these contractors and them the seal team was ordered to find him and after several years they do. then one of the team members hits him rather than put a bullet in his head and now they are the bad guys. he is lucky to still be alive. in the next hunt i bet whoever he is will die fighting.

i do not care if they beat the hell out him, they deserve to be honored not proscecuted.

Dee · « **Reply #13 on:** December 07, 2009, 06:26:00 AM »

I have not heard of these Seals ironglow speaks of. A thread on the subject might prove informative, and volatile at the same time.

Questor · « **Reply #14 on:** December 07, 2009, 08:38:11 AM »

Dee:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #15 on:** December 07, 2009, 10:15:40 AM »

Dee this is a sad but true topic .

The Hermit · « **Reply #16 on:** December 07, 2009, 03:49:40 PM »

Ironglow, you have a good point. I don't think Obama has any military background, but he turned down all the plan options provided by the military, so he could set his own course. Look for more bad decisions based on politics or political correctness. Besides he doesn't want to ruin Soros plans for one world government run by the elite.
Also, It DOES appear to me that a lot of people have forgotten 9/11. Apathy abounds.

The Hermit

Dee · « **Reply #17 on:** December 07, 2009, 04:07:41 PM »

I don't think any one's forgotten 911, but I sure think a lot of people ate the Bush BS with a grain scoop. Cause it was Saudi Arabians that paid for the training, and Saudi Arabians that flew the planes, and that's were the bombs should have been dropping.
What's happening in Afghanistan and Iraq, is like shootin the neighbors dog, when it's yours that's killin your chickens.

Casull · « **Reply #18 on:** December 07, 2009, 04:12:35 PM »

Too many have forgotten. And many of those that haven't yet, are mixing up tinfoil hat conspiracies with fact. Hmmmm, I guess that "we supported the war in Afganistan" crap is being dropped now.

Dee · « **Reply #19 on:** December 07, 2009, 04:25:12 PM »

Nope! I think most here supported bombing the training camps in Afganistan to powder, but many also realize whom was really responsible for 911, and it wasn't Iraq or Afghanistan's. It was Saudis. Many ignore that "fact" and think their being patriotic by supporting the lie, and ignoring the "fact".

Casull · « **Reply #20 on:** December 07, 2009, 04:51:36 PM »

You're entitled to your opinion, Dee. I just don't consider it "fact".

Cabin4 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 07, 2009, 04:59:07 PM »

Unfortunuatly, the US body count will rise as our surging troops engage the enemy. Amny of the Taliban and Al Queda will find sanction in Pakistan were they will launch attacks from. Next we will be faced with going into Pakistan.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #22 on:** December 08, 2009, 04:31:33 AM »

I agree about S.A. the attackers came from there . But oil got in the way so other places had to be attacked . We took their training ground , but only one of them .

Dee · « **Reply #23 on:** December 08, 2009, 05:23:30 AM »

Quote from: Cabin4 on December 07, 2009, 04:59:07 PM

Unfortunuatly, the US body count will rise as our surging troops engage the enemy. Amny of the Taliban and Al Queda will find sanction in Pakistan were they will launch attacks from. Next we will be faced with going into Pakistan.

You are exactly right Cabin, just like Vietnam, and Cambodia. Karzai, YESTERDAY, said that they would need OUR HELP for the next 15 to 20 years militarily. Our country is bankrupt, and failing, and we are going to be tied to this albatross indefinitely, just as I and others predicted 8 years ago. It is unwinnable, and endless, whether anyone agrees or not. These people don't want to be like us, and and have no respect or attraction to our ways. Kill a son, and you will have his brothers, cousins, and uncles to kill, and then theirs also, and then theirs, and then theirs.

Dee · « **Reply #24 on:** December 08, 2009, 05:31:30 AM »

Quote from: Casull on December 07, 2009, 04:51:36 PM

You're entitled to your opinion, Dee. I just don't consider it "fact".

What "fact" do you consider not "fact"? Who flew the planes on 911?

Did Cambodia not reek havoc on the U.S. effort in Vietnam to the point it failed?

Do you not see the same with Pakistan on the border with Afghanistan"?

These were, and are, not my opinions. They were on the news everyday in the sixties, and seventies, during Vietnam, and ARE on the news every day now concerning Afghanistan and Pakistan. The United States is bankrupt, it's on the news.
Don't let you dislike for me, blind you to the facts.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #25 on:** December 08, 2009, 06:20:23 AM »

Dee,
As I said the Biggest bunch of History revisionists!
If they do not like history or the facts they yell "Not True" and then not say what is not true.
Look at Harry Reid yesterday.
He said the exact opposite of what happened in history.
the Republicans were Against Slavery and the Democrats were for it.
While LBJ was pushing the Civil Rights he needed Republicans to get it passed.
Democrats Like Al Gore Sr. were part of the fillibuster to kill Civil Rights!
Byrd from West Va was a recruter for the Klan! And called Republicans Racest.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #26 on:** December 08, 2009, 06:49:12 AM »

Whats so rediculous about the idiot Reid rant on the floor is that he cited cases of legislation to targeted at securing rights for certian people. The Health Care legislation he's fighting for is all about limiting your rights and taking away your freedom. So for him to cite civil rights legislation as a parallel to government control in health care is stupid. Reid is really a complete and total moron.

Casull · « **Reply #27 on:** December 08, 2009, 07:08:03 AM »

Quote

What "fact" do you consider not "fact"? Who flew the planes on 911?

You're inference that it was Saudi Arabia that attacked us. I don't care where the a**wipes were born. They were Saudi nationals that were members of Al Queda, that were based in and training in Afganistan, with the support of Afganistan and the Taliban. There only proven link to Saudi Arabia was that they were born there.

Dee · « **Reply #28 on:** December 08, 2009, 08:01:51 AM »

Casull they were funded by Saudi Arabian money that has been on the news off and on for 8 years. They were paying Afganistan to let them have training camps there. Afganistan had no ax to grind with the United States. They were doing it for the money. Their were, and are, a third world country of war lords with no real organized army, no navy, and no air force.
The Taliban was funded by Bush One and Reagan, when Reagan was President and the Soviet Union was occuping Afganistan. When the Soviet Union collasped due to that war, and a failing economy (like ours) the Taliban moved into power. That's history, not me makin it up, it was on the news constantly.

Casull · « **Reply #29 on:** December 08, 2009, 08:08:55 AM »

Quote

Casull they were funded by Saudi Arabian money that has been on the news off and on for 8 years.

Dee, as I understand it, they were funded (in part at least) by money from Saudi nationals, not be "Saudi Arabian money". Saying that would be kind of like saying that any terrorists funded by money coming from US nationals were funded by US money. I think we are talking about individuals here, not the government. Confusing the two is a major error.