Judgement You Can Trust?

[dapoes]

The Obama White House website brags that Obama, as an Illinois state senator, supported keeping the Butcher of Baghdad in control of Iraq:

But not so fast...

Obama can’t withdraw troops before one year unless Iraq agrees

BAGHDAD / Aswat al-Iraq: Legal expert Tareq Harb on Wednesday said that new U.S. President Barack Obama can not withdraw his troops from Iraq before one year from notifying the Iraqi side, noting that he can withdraw the forces only if the Iraqi government agrees.

And also thinks Genocide is no reason for War:

SUNAPEE, N.H. (AP) — Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

"Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven't done," Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea," he said.

And the most shamefull of all...

Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

Barack Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later Tuesday evening. The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening - The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

:down:

 

[delldude]

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

Change you're going to believe in or else.

 

[southwind]

The reason Nobama wasn't in attendance at the "Most Important Gala" held that night was that the Gala did not attain the 98% minimum requirement of "Devoted Nobama Apostles and Followers" ! :blink:

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

The Theocracy bus(Marine helicopter) has "left the station".
(With an "extra section" going via a Wheelchair)

The ODOR of the GOP is starting to lift from the nations capital.
(Should be Gone within 4-8 Years)

Some STAINS take a Loooong time to REMOVE from any surface !!

 

[dapoes]

As He Now Systematically Dismantles The Last 8 Yrs Of Protecting This Country, The “Bush Policies†Averted A Possible Attack On Obama’s Day-Of-Days

Earlier this month, as FBI officials notified Ahmed’s family of his death, the Bureau began to investigate Ahmed’s circle of contacts in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. They discovered that many of Ahmed’s contacts –most of them Somali-American youth– had “gone missing†from their respective homes. Almost simultaneously, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began receiving information “of limited specificity and uncertain credibility†that the disappearance of the Somali-American youths may be connected with a plot targeting Barack Obama during the January 20 Presidential inauguration.

Just lovely...

 

[dapoes]

This will end in tears.

This will end in tears. The Obama hysteria is not merely embarrassing to witness, it is itself contributory to the scale of the disaster that is coming. What we are experiencing, in the deepening days of a global depression, is the desperate suspension of disbelief by people of intelligence - la trahison des clercs - in a pathetic effort to hypnotise themselves into the delusion that it will be all right on the night. It will not be all right.

How very true.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

But not so fast...

Obama can’t withdraw troops before one year unless Iraq agrees

BAGHDAD / Aswat al-Iraq: Legal expert Tareq Harb on Wednesday said that new U.S. President Barack Obama can not withdraw his troops from Iraq before one year from notifying the Iraqi side, noting that he can withdraw the forces only if the Iraqi government agrees.

Too funny, dapoes. If a President can invade a country, I am pretty darn sure that he can unilaterally start to withdraw troops from said country.

 

[dapoes]

Too funny, dapoes. If a President can invade a country, I am pretty darn sure that he can unilaterally start to withdraw troops from said country.

Perhaps, then im sure future presidents will have to deal with the consequences (ie blowback) due to the current Obama administrations "cut and run" policies.

 

[Cosworth]

Perhaps, then im sure future presidents will have to deal with the consequences (ie blowback) due to the current Obama administrations "cut and run" policies.

You mean the blow back of ignoring Afghanistan where Al-Queda is regaining strength because the previous POTUS went off and invaded a country completely unrelated tot he attack on the US. The country that did not have Al-Queda in it until the invasion removed the deterrence and opened that door wide open for Al-Queda and Iran to move in? The country that took resources away from Afghanistan which resulted in us loosing the battle in Afganistan according to the CJSC Mulen. Or are you referring to the blow back from all the hot air you and your ilk are spewing. I get so confused when you guys keep changing the reason for going into Iraq in the first place.


Cut and run my ass. We have been their for 5 years. Seems about time for Iraq to get off their ass and fend for them selves. Of course had Cheney followed his own advise none of this would have happened. I guess he and his conies were not in a position to make as much money off the deal as they were in 2003. If you and the rest of your friends are so damn scared of Iraq, go ahead and foot the bill. I for one am tapped out. I think $1,000,000,000,000.00 is quite enough for one money pit.

 

[dapoes]

You mean the blow back of ignoring Afghanistan where Al-Queda is regaining strength because the previous POTUS went off and invaded a country completely unrelated tot he attack on the US. The country that did not have Al-Queda in it until the invasion removed the deterrence and opened that door wide open for Al-Queda and Iran to move in? The country that took resources away from Afghanistan which resulted in us loosing the battle in Afganistan according to the CJSC Mulen. Or are you referring to the blow back from all the hot air you and your ilk are spewing. I get so confused when you guys keep changing the reason for going into Iraq in the first place.


Cut and run my ass. We have been their for 5 years. Seems about time for Iraq to get off their ass and fend for them selves. Of course had Cheney followed his own advise none of this would have happened. I guess he and his conies were not in a position to make as much money off the deal as they were in 2003. If you and the rest of your friends are so damn scared of Iraq, go ahead and foot the bill. I for one am tapped out. I think $1,000,000,000,000.00 is quite enough for one money pit.

This all could have been handled quite nicely, let see Clinton had 10+ opportunities to take out Bin Laden but when it got hot, he "cut and ran". Just like whats happening with the current POTUS.

 

[Cosworth]

and If Regan had not used OBL and his hench men to fight the evil Russians and them left him high and dry perhaps OBL would not have such a hard on for the US. Do you really want to play this game?

But of course you fail to address the central issue.. OBL was not in Iraq, he was in Afghanistan and your OP addressed the 'cut and run' in Iraq which had and has nothing to do with OBL since he was not in Iraq but in Afghanistan which the previous POTUS has all but ignored and allowed Al-queds to rebuild and become as strong as they were prior to 9/11.

If the FBI or CIA have credible threats all they need to do is get a warrant. Something W could have done but chose not too. Our inteligence has not been compromised (not sure about yours) it is just being brought back into compliance with the law. Something the previous administration did not feel it had abide by.

IIRC Clinton tried to takeout OBL one time but was accused of trying to distract US from the real crisis facing the US at the time. Apparently the blow job in the Oval beat national security at the time. Hind sight's a #### ain't it.

 

[dapoes]

If the FBI or CIA have credible threats all they need to do is get a warrant.

A warrant??? This aint a Starsky and Hutch episode. :blink:

Clinton tried to takeout OBL one time but was accused of trying to distract US from the real crisis facing the US at the time.

Err....try 11 times. He didnt have the Cajones to make the call.

 

[southwind]

A warrant??? This aint a Starsky and Hutch episode. :blink:

It is to the "American Obama Idol" crowd ! :blink:

 

[Cosworth]

Try the FISA court. They issue the warrant to the Fed.

In August 1998, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan in an effort to hit Osama bin Laden, who had been linked to the embassy bombings in Africa (and was later connected to the attack on the USS Cole). The missiles reportedly missed bin Laden by a few hours, and Clinton was widely criticized by many who claimed he had ordered the strikes primarily to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. As John F. Harris wrote in The Washington Post:

In August 1998, when [Clinton] ordered missile strikes in an effort to kill Osama bin Laden, there was widespread speculation — from such people as Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) — that he was acting precipitously to draw attention away from the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal, then at full boil. Some said he was mistaken for personalizing the terrorism struggle so much around bin Laden. And when he ordered the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House after domestic terrorism in Oklahoma City, some Republicans accused him of hysteria.

. . . the federal budget on anti-terror activities tripled during Clinton's watch, to about $6.7 billion. After the effort to kill bin Laden with missiles in August 1998 failed — he had apparently left a training camp in Afghanistan a few hours earlier — recent news reports have detailed numerous other instances, as late as December 2000, when Clinton was on the verge of unleashing the military again. In each case, the White House chose not to act because of uncertainty that intelligence was good enough to find bin Laden, and concern that a failed attack would only enhance his stature in the Arab world.

. . . people maintain Clinton should have adapted Bush's policy promising that regimes that harbor terrorism will be treated as severely as terrorists themselves, and threatening to evict the Taliban from power in Afghanistan unless leaders meet his demands to produce bin Laden and associates. But Clinton aides said such a policy — potentially involving a full-scale war in central Asia — was not plausible before politics the world over became transformed by one of history's most lethal acts of terrorism.

Clinton's former national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger . . . said there [was] little prospect . . . that Pakistan would have helped the United States wage war against bin Laden or the Taliban in 1998, even after such outrages as the bombing of U.S. embassies overseas.

 

[dapoes]

Barack and Michelle can do WHAT together??

ewww