Obama’s Uncommitted War
Today I am flying the Union Jack. US Liberty and Freedom are threatened by an indecisive and an UNCOMMITTED President of the United States. I’m referring to his speech on the war in Afghanistan on Dec 2n 2009. A speech in which he could not say, “Victory” or “Win” … even though standing before cadets at a military academy who will risk and give their lives for attempting to achieve both.
Un-Committed War
During his speech on December 1st, 2009 at West Point, the President of the United States told the audience how vital the war in Afghanistan was, and in the next few statements, also said we would be withdrawing troops within a year and a half. He made it clear that we “might be” at war with the Taliban, Al Qaeda didn’t seem to be the enemy any longer. Also, there was reference to the cost of the war and that it would be difficult to sustain in this poor economy.
Charles Krauthammer: 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.”(From his column Dec 4, 2009)
The Fox News All Stars gave an excellent “summary” of the President’s speech. The YouTube video from Fox News, Charles Krauthammer, A.B. Stoddard, and Steve Hayes can be viewed below:
“Obama Takes Reins” … that was the headline this morning. And it says it all about “commitment”. This man has been President of the United State since last January … 11 months! Do you mean this war has “not been in his hands for 11 months?”
Personal Note: (No I did not watch the speech,there was a great movie on TCM … so I read the full text HERE, you can see if you want to at the same site. I wish he would just send out an email and forget all the hype of Greek Temples and Military Schools. Words matter!)
The Bottom Line
Townhall.com - Gary Varvel
1. Death for no commitment By adding troops to the conflict in Afghanistan without the commitment of VICTORY and TOTAL SUCCESS, (by beginning a withdrawal wiithin a year and a half) the President is committing soldiers LIVES for no REASON! The morale in the military will go to ZERO … as it should. What reason would you have to volunteer to risk your life? … surely not for the pay or the death benefits if you are killed!
2. A War with no Name: Who are we fighting? Afghanistan? No, we’re trying to put that country back together. The Taliban? Why? We are trying to get them “reintroduced into the government” and trying to negotiate with them to end hostilities. Al Qaeda no longer seems to be the enemy, so we can’t be at war with them. The “War on Terror” is no longer called a War on Terror. So what have we got? A war, for a fuzzy reason, with no commitment, terribly dangerous for our troops. I guess we should just name it “Obama’s War” … it fits right in with the rest of his administration policies.
3. Budgeting for War: This to me is almost an oxymoron. You don’t restrict warfare because of a budget. Yes war is expensive (and do you notice we are only now learning the real costs/troop, etc … we’ve never seen that before). So we need to “limit Obama’s war” because it is difficult to fight a war in a recession. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! If the “costs” of a war is a limiting factor, then THERE SHOULD NOT BE A WAR because the reasons for war are not valid.
4. Past and Present War: What would a soldier from 1942 think about this situation. The “decision” for war then was VICTORY or DEFEAT. It was LIVE or DIE, it was USA or no USA! There was no discussion of costs or collateral damage. There were very few “rules for engagement”. You were in the WAR because if you didn’t WIN it, you would lose your COUNTRY and your LIFE. None of that is present in this war. It is Obama’s Uncommitted War.
5. The Threat of War: If the threat of war does not force you to:
- Drop worry about collateral damage (the poor women and children)
- Drop the cost of war (war during recession)
- Drop any thought of retreat and withdrawal
- Drop the idea of TOTAL VICTORY
- THEN YOU SHOULD NOT BE AT WAR!
6. Fight for Victory: When you declare war the reason had better be a good one. YOU and YOUR COUNTRY must be at such a risk that you give no thought to budgets, possible defeats, withdrawals, and collateral damage. There is no such thing as a “politically correct” war. That means if you are going to war, you are going to KILL PEOPLE … and that includes women and children and anyone else that gets in the way. You cannot fight a “politically correct” war. There is NO SUCH THING! You carpet bomb, you terrorize, you do EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO WIN and strike horrible fear into your enemy so you will be VICTORIOUS.
- In Afghanistan, you bomb them back to their BC roots … hurt them so badly they will never again even think of aggression toward the United States. Make them so afraid that if someone in their midst talks of terrorism against the United States, THEY take action and rid themselves of such a threat … knowing the WRATH of the USA will fall upon them again.
Summary: If we are not willing to do those terrible things, then we should not be at war. We should either WIN DECISIVELY or we should bring our blessed troops home to the safety of their homeland and families. The odds are we will pay for such a withdrawal … but then we’ll have a better reason for war, won’t we?
This is a special time to Pray for the Troops, and if you’ve forgotten how to pray, then as an alternative, get active to support the troops … give to the USO, give your time, do anything you can to help their morale. They need us more than ever right now. They have a Commander in Chief asking them to die for nothing. But such is the way of Obama’s War.
Relevant Posts since this post
- OneNewsNow: Obama’s War Plan fundamentally flawed.
- American Spectator: Translation of Obama’s Speech
