Defend Israel

The Patriots Call
The Black Robe Regiment - The Patriots Call

Democrats party of Racism
Racism of the Democrat Party
Herman Cain - The DNC has BRAINWASHED most of the Blacks of this Nation
Racism - the Nemesis of the Democrat Party
Democrats invented racism and democrats HATE all blacks
The Snooper Report articles on Democrat invention of racism

The March on DC
Callin’ All the Clans Together
Sick and tired - marching towards the Constitution of the United States
We. Are. Finished. With.  DC.
We. Are. Finished. With. DC. - Addendum Part 1

Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It
Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It Part 2(?)
Civility: Leftinistra Own None Part Three
Obama, Civility and The Clansmen of Dumb
Brain Dead Leftinistra: Their Stoic Civility
Libtards Have No Class - Civility Escapes Their Brain Deadness
The States Will Be the Next Battlefield in the Fight Over ObamaCare
War Is Coming: Blood On Our Own Streets - Thanks Democrats
Civil War…
We Are In The Midst of Chaos and Civil War
Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die Trying
State’s Sovereignty or Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die - The Movement Marches On
The Country Surrounds The City

When They Came
Is The Left Still “Proud To Be a Left-Wing Extremist”?
Be It Known - Attention Unconstitutional Congress
Obama: One Big Ass Mistake America
Do Birthers Rock and Roll or Stop and Drool?
Good vs Evil…It Is Your Choice
I Apologize For My Nation
Obama’s Civilian National Security Forces (CNSF)
Obama’s Brown Shirts - Civilian National Security Forces
What Is It About The American Liberal?
The Plan To Destroy America
Another Soldier Has Been Given the Haditha Treatment!
Callin’ All The Clans Together
Callin’ All The Clans Together Show
A History of the List of 45
Constitutionality: The Movement
Vindication: Iraq’s Saddam and Al Qaeda Links Revealed
Redefining The Center or the Moderate
The HIC (Hoax In Charge) Going To Copenhagen
We Didn’t Start This Goddamn War!

Copy Cat Frauds of the IAVA

Contract With America
Snooper’s Declaration of Independence
Thanks Obama

Contract From America

Timothy McVeigh
Thoughts To Ponder and Reflect Upon
Snooper Report Vindication: Al Qaeda, TWA Flight 800 and OKC Bombing
Clinton alludes to 1995 bombing, says words matter

Missing 13th Amendment
TITLES OF “NOBILITY” AND “HONOR” - The Missing 13th Amendment

The Coup
Military Coup Against Obama

The United States Constitution
Our founding document wasn’t set in stone for a reason

Deepwater Horizon
Did Hugo Chavez Sink the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform?

The New Right

Arizona Rising

Texas Wars



Wake Up GOP

Powered by Squarespace
« The War Is Lost In Iraq But We'll Use Iraqi COIN To Win Afghanistan | Main | Two More Stikes Against Chucky Schmucky Schumer »

Afghanistan, The Troops and The Idiot Obama

I have four posts from Memeorandum today in this episode of Afghanistan...

I need you all to read these posts and determine just what in the hell Obama is doing...and why.  Does he know what's going on or not?  Does he know he is sending the Troops over just because he got caught in campaigning and the facrt that he wants to give the Taliban Afghanistan?  Remember what he said one week after 91101?  I do.  So, you tell me what Obama is up to.

I know this is a long post but sometimes the longer the better to get a good feel at what is coming our way.

Scott Shane / New York Times: C.I.A. Authorized to Expand Use of Drones in Pakistan

WASHINGTON — Two weeks ago in Pakistan, Central Intelligence Agency sharpshooters killed eight people suspected of being militants of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and wounded two others in a compound that was said to be used for terrorist training. [...]

I don't know why this is a big story other than the fact that Obama is an idiot and some idiot thinks this is news.  It's been going on for almost forever.  Rememeber all the libtards that have been whining about it all...since when Iraq was being lost?

New York Times: NATO Pledges 7,000 More Troops for Afghanistan

BRUSSELS — After months of anguished debate in the United States over how many new troops to send to Afghanistan, the numbers game switched to Europe on Friday, with NATO announcing that it planned to commit an additional 7,000 soldiers to the coalition in Afghanistan. [...]

Charles Krauthammer / Washington Post: Obama's hollow speech on Afghanistanor, Uncertain trumpet...

We shall fight in the air, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields, we shall fight in the hills -- for 18 months. Then we start packing for home.

We shall never surrender -- unless the war gets too expensive, in which case, we shall quote Eisenhower on "the need to maintain balance in and among national programs" and then insist that "we can't simply afford to ignore the price of these wars."

The quotes are from President Obama's West Point speech announcing the Afghanistan troop surge. What a strange speech it was -- a call to arms so ambivalent, so tentative, so defensive. [...]

With the Obama Disadministration working on Karzai to negotiate with the Taliban, why are we sending Troops over seas to fight the very group that Karzai is going to talk to?  Which sections of Afghaistan will be allocated to go to the Taliban as the Taliban are brought back into the government of the very Nation I and many others liike myself kicked OUT of Afghanistan?  Even in the AP, Karzai said that without the help of America and other leaders, his negotiating won't work.

So with The Taliban's Response to Obama Afghanistan Policy, what's to make Karzai's work, work?

President Obama's speech this week to the nation about his "plan" for the war in Afghanistan doesn't please very many in this country. Apparently, it doesn't impress the enemy either.

It took a day to get the translation done, but the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (the Taliban) now has a response. It is a warning for America:
Get ready to die.

Here is the Obama "plan" as outlined Tuesday evening:

  1. Rather than 40,000 troops surged to the war zone as his general recommends, Obama will "dribble" in 30,000 over the next twelve months.   Why only 30,000? We weren't told.
  2. As soon as the 30,000 extra troops are finally on the ground in Afghanistan next year, Obama intends to begin withdrawing them. Why? Because he says so.

Obama's plan to increase troop levels in Afghanistan has withering support from dithering Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Anna Eshoo, and certainly not from foaming-at-the-mouth antiwar groups like Code Pink. Many Republicans fret that the "plan" is yet another half-gassed, half-a****-war à la Bush-1 and Bush-2. [...]

This is what happens when those that do not understand Islamofascists and think that using American "theory" is going to work against a Caliphate destined and determined to kill all infidels or at least try and nationalize them all.  Oama is insane.  Let's send Troops over seas to get them killed while Karzai tries to give his country away.  It is all incredible.  There's more...

[...] The non-profit counterterrorism organization "Nine-Eleven Finding Answers" Foundation (NEFA Foundation) has obtained, translated, and transcribed a statement from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which has been issued in response to President Obama's directive on the Afghanistan war.

The unsigned statement is chillingly insightful and threatening. Full text here.

Here are some excerpts:
The essence of the strategy shows that the needs and wants of the American people have been overlooked during the framing of this strategy and it has been formulated under the pressure of (Army) Generals in the Pentagon, the American Neo-conservatives and the wealthiest few in America and for the protection of their interests. Hence it is a strategy of colonialism....

He wants to lessen the sensitivities of the Afghans about the surge of 30,000 troops through the ploy of ostensibly starting troops' withdrawal in 2011. He also intends to decrease the opposition of the American public (to the troops surge) and encourage his international Allies to send more troops. But this stratagem will not pay off.  

1. The reinforcement will result in (their) fatalities....

2. Throughout the history of Afghanistan, the Afghans have not been subjugated through deceits, ploys, materials power, troop reinforcement and military might of the foreigners. Therefore, the reinforcement of the American troops and other tactics will not have impact on the status quo. But the reinforcements will provide better opportunities for the Mujahedeen to launch offensives. On the other hand, it will deepen the crisis of the American economy which is already in shambles.

3. Obama's assertion to increase and train more soldiers and police for the Kabul Administration is pointless and not result-oriented....

4. We neither have bases in Pakistan nor do we need such bases outside Afghanistan. We have control over vast swathes of land in the country and do not face any problem about our activities and residence...

5. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has frequently said that we have no intention of harming any one. Therefore, the presence of foreign invading forces in Afghanistan has nothing to do with the security of the world. Obama sometimes calls this war, a war of necessity; sometimes he calls it a war for the defense of the West and some times, a war being waged for the security of the world.

They raise the issue of our residing in Pakistan in order to distract the attention (of the world) from our capability and strong resistance in Afghanistan...."

6. The Mujahedeen of the Islamic Emirate have worked out a vast strategy and prepared for strong resistance ....The Mujahedeen have high morale and complete readiness and believe that Obama's new strategy will fail like it did previously. It will face fiasco.

We deem it necessary to remind the American rulers if you persist in your aggressive policy, America will end up being disintegrated itself, instead of maintaining the occupation in Afghanistan....

We want to point out that the Muslim people of Afghanistan want to lay down their lives and properties willingly but are never ready to give up their faith and freedom.... you must wait a more severe reaction in the years to come.

It does seem our enemies in Afghanistan understand us much better than we understand them. [...]

Have I said "this is incredible" yet?  So what does Obama think he is doing?  As for me, Obama is clueless.  The Taliban does understand Obama and his panty waste cranial disturbances.

Associated Press: Gates Expects 2-4 Years of Big Afghan Role for U.S.

Somebody lied the other day at West Point and one can tell by the crowd at West Point that everyone KNEW Obama was lying to them all.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Osama bin Laden may be slipping back and forth from Pakistan to Afghanistan. Or the U.S. might not have a clue, more than eight years after the al-Qaida leader masterminded the terrorist attacks on America.

Given a chance Sunday to clear away some of the mystery surrounding the whereabouts of the world's most wanted terrorist, Obama administration officials seemed to add to it with what appeared to be conflicting assessments.

President Barack Obama's national security adviser, James Jones, said bin Laden, believed hiding mainly in a rugged area of western Pakistan, may be periodically slipping back into Afghanistan. But Obama's Pentagon chief, Robert Gates, said the U.S. has lacked good intelligence on bin Laden for a long time -- ''I think it has been years'' -- and did not confirm that he'd slipped into Afghanistan.

The failed hunt for bin Laden has been one of the signature frustrations of the global war on terrorism that former President George W. Bush launched after the Sept. 11 attacks. The main explanation given by both the Bush and Obama administrations for not getting bin Laden is that they simply don't know where he is.

''If we did, we'd go get him,'' Gates said. [...]

But, what did Obama say at West Point?

[...] This review is now complete. And as commander-in-chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan.

After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.

I do not make this decision lightly. I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions. [...]

[...] We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban’s momentum and increase Afghanistan’s capacity over the next 18 months.

The 30,000 additional troops that I’m announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010, the fastest possible pace, so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers. They’ll increase our ability to train competent Afghan security forces and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans. [...]

And that, for the most part is what Obama said.  Right?  Then what in the hell is Gates saying?  Something different?

Ed at Hot Air explains that Gates watered the draw down even further in an attempt to make it all sound better...

Gates: July 2011 would only be “beginning” of drawdown

Robert Gates tried again to clarify what Obama meant by his 2011 deadline on the war in Afghanistan, but in the process watered it down even further.  He told Congress yesterday that the drawdown of troops would only begin in July 2011, but that US troops would take as long as three years to leave Afghanistan once ordered out — assuming, of course, that they are ordered to begin leaving in summer of 2011, which Gates said may or may not happen.  And the Pentagon also “clarified” that the additional troops will take longer to get in place than Obama implied: [...]

Ed explains the elongated abstractions.  Odd?  Obviously.

Here's Ed at Hot Air again: Video: Gates says “no deadline” on war in Afghanistan

Well, someone’s confused. Four days ago, Barack Obama said that July 2011 was “locked in” as the withdrawal date for withdrawal from Afghanistan. Today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates tells CBS that “there is no deadline,” and that the 18-month date is when Americans will start transferring security responsibilities to the Afghans — and then only when they can handle it. Maybe the Commander in Chief needs to get some clarity on what has become a complete muddle: [...]

So, who lied and who lied to whom?

Watch CBS News Videos Online

[...] It appears that President Obama spent the better part of four months vacillating on policy, only to have reached a conclusion that what he needed was … more vacillation. One has to hope that Gates has this right and everyone else wrong, but that seems rather unlikely. It sounds more like Gates is playing to the conservatives, Obama is playing to the Left, and Hillary isn’t sure what which side she’s supposed to be courting. As politics, it’s particularly inept, and as war management, it’s worse.  [END]

So, now, we have this little bit of data to decipher from Pat Dollard: Fresh Offensive Kicks Off In Afghanistan

KABUL — U.S. Marines and Afghan troops, conducting the first offensive since the new American war plan was announced, met little resistance from insurgents Saturday as they worked to disrupt Taliban supply and communications lines in a key valley in southern Afghanistan.

About 1,000 Marines and 150 Afghan troops are taking part in “Operation Cobra’s Anger” in the Now Zad Valley of Helmand province, the scene of heavy fighting last summer.

On Friday, helicopters and MV-22 Osprey aircraft dropped hundreds of troops behind Taliban lines in the northern end of the valley in the first offensive since President Barack Obama announced a troop buildup. A second, larger Marine force pushed northward from the Marines’ main base.

“We’re not taking for granted the low level of contact,” Marine spokesman Maj. William Pelletier said Saturday. “Just because it’s quiet now doesn’t mean it will be in 24 hours. Part of the operation is to have a disruptive effect on the Taliban resupply activities. The Marines and Afghan forces are continuing the clearing operation, continuing to move through the valley.” [...]

So, it all starts.  Been there and done this many times.  So, what does General McChrystal say?

The Washington Post: Obama pressed for faster surge

[...] In June, McChrystal noted, he had arrived in Afghanistan and set about fulfilling his assignment. His lean face, hovering on the screen at the end of the table, was replaced by a mission statement on a PowerPoint slide: “Defeat the Taliban. Secure the Population.”

“Is that really what you think your mission is?” one of the participants asked.

In the first place, it was impossible — the Taliban were part of the fabric of the Pashtun belt of southern Afghanistan, culturally if not ideologically supported by a major part of the population. “We don’t need to do that,” Gates said, according to one participant. “That’s an open-ended, forever commitment.”

But that was precisely his mission, McChrystal responded, enshrined in the Strategic Implementation Plan — the execution orders for the March strategy, written by the NSC staff.

“I wouldn’t say there was quite a ‘whoa’ moment,” a senior defense official said of the reaction around the table. “It was just sort of a recognition that, ‘Duh, that’s what in effect the commander understands he’s been told to do.’ Everybody said, ‘He’s right.’”

“It was clear that Stan took a very literal interpretation of the intent” of the NSC document, said Jones, who had signed the orders himself. “I’m not sure that in his position I wouldn’t have done the same thing, as a military commander.” But what he created in his assessment “was obviously something much bigger, and more longer-lasting . . . than we had intended.” [...]

and then

[...] On Oct. 9, after awaking to the news that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama listened to McChrystal’s presentation. The “mission” slide included the same words: “Defeat the Taliban.” But a red box had been added beside it, saying that the mission was being redefined, Jones said. Another participant recalled that the word “degrade” had been proposed to replace “defeat.”

Already briefed on the previous day’s discussion, the president “looked at it and said, ‘To be fair, this is what we told the commander to do. Now, the question is, have we directed him to do more than what is realistic? Should there be a sharpening . . . a refinement?’ ” one participant recalled. [...]

and then

[...] Obama then went around the room asking one question: Do you support the strategy?

"If they didn't support the decision, he was going to issue another decision" until there was unanimity, a senior administration official said. "But it was his assessment that everyone could and should get behind it."

Each of them did. Obama then walked downstairs to the Situation Room to brief Eikenberry and McChrystal by secure videoconference. Later that night, he took a first draft of his nationwide address, planned for two days later, back with him to the White House residence.

On a chilly evening at West Point, Obama addressed a hall full of subdued cadets, some destined for harm's way under the strategy he outlined.

"As president," he said, "I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means or our interests." [END]

So, does Obama know what he is doing?  No, he doesn't.

In Jihad Watch via Weasel Zippers, we have this according to the WaPo...

[...] "Defeat" = "kill every last member"? [...]

American or Taliban?

So, again in the "now", we have this one from Pat Dollard: Bin Laden "Seen In Afghanistan In Early 2009"

From the BBC:

A Taliban detainee in Pakistan claims to have information about Osama Bin Laden’s whereabouts in January or February of this year.

His claims cannot be verified, but a leading American expert says his account should be investigated.

The detainee claims to have met Osama Bin Laden numerous times before 9/11.

He claims that in January or February he met a trusted contact who had seen Bin Laden about 15 to 20 days earlier in Afghanistan.

“In 2009, in January or February I met this friend of mine. He said he had come from meeting Sheikh Osama, and he could arrange for me to meet him,” he said.

“He helps al-Qaeda people coming from other countries to get to the sheikh, so he can advise them on whatever they are planning for Europe or other places.

“The sheikh doesn’t stay in any one place. That guy came from Ghazni, so I think that’s where the sheikh was.” [...]

And with all of the above, we now end this all with two retarded posts from two very retarded outfits.  One of them is Crooks and Liars and the other is Code Pink.

From the Crooked and the Liars via Donald Douglas: Crooks and Liars' Disgusting Moral Equivalence

Is there snything worse than that sad sack of a story?  And these thugs supported Obama and I hope they were thinking that they could arrange the killing of our Troops the hard way...or the easy way?  Making a very sad comparison of America with the Russian travesty of Afghanistan is something to behold.  Without the Troops we are holding our own currently and kicked the hell out of the Taliban many moons ago.  Russia ran away.  Period.  The Crooked and Liars...Code Slut wannabes.

The next one is Code Slut, I mean Code Pink from the Purple Avenger at Ace: CodePink is not happy

 Code Whores...anti-Americanists all.  And no, I do not believe in the communist political correctness that so many are guilty of.

Another Memeorandum piece here...

The Snooper Report.  Join us as we Take Our Country Back.
Sic vis pacem para bellum
Fight Accordingly

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (2)

So does Gen. Jones belong in the same category as Murtha and Kerry - veterans who have no clue?????

December 6, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterPastor Ed Boston


December 6, 2009 | Registered CommenterMark "Snooper" Harvey

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>