After our detour to screw up Iraq, we can now return our attention to the real war zone.

Obama had been attacked by the right wing moonbats about not visiting Afghan, now he is being attacked by the moonbats for visiting Afghan.

Priceless.

HE'S A TUUUURRRIISSTT!

Better late than never.... still Barack went there primarily because of political calculations. So there is still an air of insincerity and lightfootedness about the whole trip.

But, again, better late than never.

McCain responded like his turf has been invaded by Barack.... instead of feeling that way, he should have welcomed Barack in catching up with security situations overseas and invite HIM TO KEEP LEARNING.

WHO CARES?

Ironic, Mr Obama laid out his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan and had NEVER visited the countries? That's just the kind of foresight we need.

Kinda goes along with the 57 states and speaking another language, not proud, etc.

You empty suit!

"Ironic, Mr Obama laid out his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan and had NEVER visited the countries?"

JFK announced a plan to get the US to the Moon.
Had he been there?
McCain's been to Iraq and he's still clueless.
What's your point?

Doc....those are really ignorant analogies. Airplanes and a day planner have been around for a while. He should have been there a year ago.

As far a clueless, you share McCain's trait.

Ironic, Mr Obama laid out his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan and had NEVER visited the countries? That's just the kind of foresight we need.

No, irony is McCain blasting Obama when McCain backed invading Iraq, said it would be short and sweet, we'd be welcome, we'd "win" in no time, and then after months of it not panning out, decided he ought to go visit. Irony is McCain visiting a "marketplace" on an "information gathering trip" being surrounded by over 100 military, 5 helos, snipers, flak-jackets, uparmored transports and proclaiming it's safe.

Oh, and Obama's been to Iraq before. McCain was foolish enough to highlight that with his counter of days since Obama's last visit.

WHY ARE WE EVEN IN Afghanistan? Maybe you democrates should ask Murtha. He refused during the Clinton administation to assist Afghanistan money from his committee to help rebuild their infastructure after the Russians were driven out.

Tell Obama he can keep the change.

Tell Obama he can keep the change.

Yeah, the status quo has worked out so well.

BTW - 1906 days since "Mission Accomplished"

Hey ACLUSUX how many visits did Bush make to either Iraq or Afghanistan before invading both????

At least Barrack could find both on the map. He also knew the difference between Sunni and Shia, and he knows that Al Quaeda is a Sunni terrorist organization unlike McBush who thought they came from Iran.

Barrack's suit is empty according to sme folks but then they are the same ones who don't recognize that Emperor Bush is naked.

"Obama, traveling as part of an official congressional delegation"

Hmmmm, that means the tax payers foot the bill for Obama to go overseas. What a slick move, no funds from his war chest. He does know how to play the system as well as he plays the people.

out of Iraq,troop surge into Afghanistan and when the taliban leave Afghanistan for iraq whats obamas plan then?

He does know how to play the system as well as he plays the people.

Duh.

If he didn't know how, he wouldn't run for the office.

Did anyone else here him say he would be president for 8 to 10 years?

"Did anyone else here him say he would be president for 8 to 10 years?"

Prolly just you, Shirts.

which is what bush should have did from the outset, go to afghanistan and kill those responsible for the attact on this country. mission accomplished! instead he chose to pussyfoot around, then embezzle billions & billions from the american people and stuff as much as would fit into his and his cronies pockets. see ya in the unemployement line mr. president

I hope Osama got a picture of himself shaking hands with a soldier. That will be useful in a few months to prove he's serious about national security.

"I hope Osama got a picture of himself shaking hands with a soldier. That will be useful in a few months to prove he's serious about national security."

the pictures of Obama with soldiers may annoy Vern, they are all smiling and hold up Obama posters. your "hope" came true!

Afganiwhat?

-W.

Hmmmm, that means the tax payers foot the bill for Obama to go overseas.

I'm sure the last time McCain traveled to the ME he paid for it with Cindy's American Express, right?

Idiot.

Obama's claiming that we need to have a SURGE in Afghanistan now and that it's the new central front on terror.

Gee, that ought to please all you Surrendercrats.

Gee, has anybody asked Obama what his timetable for withdrawing from Afghanistan is?

Nope, I didn't think so...

"Gee, has anybody asked Obama what his timetable for withdrawing from Afghanistan is?"

Afghanistan is really the central war on terrorism, Irag never was! Defeating these idiots and killing Bin Laden is a fairly good goal don't you think? (instead of wasting time and money in Iraq)

I guess you didn't read the link. Osama WANTS us in Afghanistan, stupid. He ALWAYS did. He can build his "jihadi Army" and eventually "liberate" Pakistan's nukes with it one fine day.

He beat the Russians that way... and now there nothing stopping him from doing the SAME THING to us.

Straturgery. Bush could teach Obama a lesson or two...

"Gee, has anybody asked Obama what his timetable for withdrawing from Afghanistan is?"

Still pretending that Afghanistan and Iraq are both synonymous with the war on terror I see. Most of us were smart enough to realize that Afghanistan was while Iraq was not. Too bad FArmer John isn't bright enough to get it.

You can fool all of the people some of the time
You can fool some of the people all of the time
You can fool Famer John whever you feel like it.

A trap? No you weren't. Ask the Ruskies. LOL!

the pictures of Obama with soldiers may annoy Vern

Posted by onna at 2008-07-20 04:00 PM | Reply

Not me Bozo. I know a photo op when I see one. They're gathering footage for TV commercials in the fall. Nothing more. Osama's just another hack politician with a good schtick.

Same as Bush, Cheney, Hillary!, McCain, Pelosi, etc. They're all using soldiers as advertising props; they're all guarded by Blackwater and surrounded by helicopters.

"My great grandpappy's uncle liberated Afghanistan from those awful Germans. Or was it Alabama? Albania? I think it began with an "A"....

--Barack Hussein

Kookfish-
Obama's great-uncle was there at the liberation of Buchenwald.

Grasping at straws much?

Cookfish I would bet the chances are that your great grand-pappy would think you are an unthinking fool. Tool also.

"Did anyone else here him say he would be president for 8 to 10 years?"

Prolly just you, Shirts. - Doc_sarvis

VERNON

I know this is off topic, but I was wondering what part of the PI you're moving to...

I spent about a month there with the USO once. I loved the Filipino people. What a kind, friendly, and great bunch of folks. I never got off of Luzon, but my time there was awesome.

Also, kudos for your support of the schoolchildren. It's amazing how little it takes to help so many in many parts of the world. Whatever your politics that makes you A-OK in my book....

When I was growing up our Sunday School classes at church supported a school in Africa. When I was about 16 one of the students who graduated was sponsored to come to the U.S. to go to college. He came and spoke to us. It was a very moving experience to see how all those quarters and dollar bills we put in the basket every Sunday morning had helped someone's life.

I find it amazing that a nobody, coming from no where, with no foreign experience (or experience period) can overtake the american people. He uses the media well.

Believer-
Gone are the good old days when all one needed was name recognition(Bush), well connected rich friends(Bush), a daddy who was President(Bush), and no foreign policy experience(Bush).

I'm not a good ole' boy supporter by any means, however, I think for myself. I do not allow media, or anyone convince me to jump on board with the "ROCK STAR".

Gone are the good old days when all one needed was name recognition(Bush), well connected rich friends(Bush), a daddy who was President(Bush), and no foreign policy experience(Bush).

So now we've got a no-name, corrupt Chicago political machine connected, daddy who was a foreign Moos-limb, with STILL no foreign policy experience A-hole running... my, what an improvement!

And you think for yourself? LOL!

"daddy who was a foreign Moos-limb"

Yeah, thanks for your input.

But, actually,being on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for several years gives Obama more foreign policy experience than Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and BushII when they were first elected President.

Of course I think for myself...I'm not bound. I vote on record and for the candidate who best resembles my beliefs.

Believer-
Who'd you vote for in the last two Presidential elections?

Farmer John-
I think you have the comments of two posters confused, just like McCain...

But, actually,being on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for several years gives Obama more foreign policy experience than Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and BushII when they were first elected President.

And just how many meetings of his own subcommittee did he attend during his long and illustrious career?

McCain hasn't attended a single hearing on Afghanistan in a couple of years.

Bush and then Kerry

Americanunity-
McCain is an expert on the ME - Afghanistan and Iraq in particular, because he was a POW in Vietnam.

Don't you know anything?

" ABC News' Political Radar blog -- McCain hasn't been to any Afghanistan-related hearings in past two years: Republicans and their presidential choice's campaign have been critical of Democratic contender Barack Obama because the Senate subcommittee he chairs has not had any oversight hearings about NATO's role in securing and rebuilding Afghanistan and because he has attended just one other hearing about Afghanistan. But, "it turns out that presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain has attended even fewer Afghanistan-related Senate hearings over the past two years than Obama's one. Which is a nice way of saying, McCain, R-Ariz., the top Republican on the Senate Armed Service Committee, has attended zero of his committee's six hearings on Afghanistan over the last two years. ... McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers, in a statement to ABC News, argued that McCain's years of previous foreign policy experience make up for his recent lack of attendance at hearings."

Believer-
Hell, at least you learn from your mistakes.

McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain.

-Obama Supporters

I can't say I blame you. After 8 years of blaming George Bush for every problem in the world and deflecting to him whenever a democrat deserved criticism, it must be hard to break the old habit.

Joe - your response made me laugh.

Why should he? His senate responsibilities include:

* Senate Committee on Armed Services - Ranking Member

* Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
o Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security
o Subcommittee on Interstate Commerce, Trade, and Tourism
o Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Innovation
o Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Insurance, and Automotive Safety

* Senate Committee on Indian Affairs

Well, JOE. Let's be honest here...

The right has been screaming about this being Obama's first trip to Afghanistan (not his first to Iraq).

If McCain is such an expert on the 'War on Terror' why wouldn't he find it necessary to involve himself on Afghanistan issues - the REAL central front on the WOT?

This isn't some deflection. It's a fact.

Meanwhile Afghanistan has been deteriorating year by year. The Taliban, warlords, and drug kingpins control practically every area outside major cities.

The drug trade finances the Taliban. Still, poppy fields are boasting record crops. Nothing being done. Well, Bush did send $43 million to the Taliban in May 2001 for poppy eradication, yet now that we have all those forces there poppies are supporting the Taliban. I can't see the reasoning in that. If you can please explain.

the REAL central front on the WOT?

...in Obama's mind, anyway. I guess he wasn't privy to the al-Quaeda memo's designating Iraq the central front these past few years...

Oh, but McCain already single-handedly WON THAT WAR! LOL!

FARMER

Al Qaeda had far more American troops to use as target practice in Iraq.

You know Al Qaeda wasn't IN Iraq until we were?

They're loving the fact we've plundered our reputation and resources to get bogged down in Iraq while they regroup and strengthen themselves within spitting distance of Afghanistan though.

You have read the Taliban is the strongest it's been since we entered Afghanistan haven't you?

AU-

When did I say that the US policy toward Afghanistan has been the correct one?

My only point is that Obama supporters seem incapable of defending or promoting their own candidate. The only thing they know how to do is say "McCain isn't very good either." For people who already know McCain is a shitbag, that doesn't really help Obama. It makes them think that there is no real case for Obama, only a case against McCain. Sounds familiar.

Joe,

Obama's was right about Iraq being a distraction on the real WOT all along.

I've suggested that dozens of times before. This was just a response to your "MCCAIN MCCAIN MCCAIN MCCAIN....." comment.

American-
And then there's the fact that Barack Obama has been calling for increased troop levels in Afghanistan for over a year and McCain adopted that position last week, reversing his own recently consistent position.

JOE-

RE: "My only point is that Obama supporters seem incapable of defending or promoting their own candidate. The only thing they know how to do is say "McCain isn't very good either." "

There you go: my 10:00 post, and American's 9:59 post. What are you talking about?

I for one am glad to see Afghanistan is finally getting the attention that justifiable war deserves.

"What are you talking about?"

I'm talking about the fact that earlier in the thread, someone mentioned Obama having no foreign policy experience. AU's first response to that was to say that "McCain hasn't been to meetings blah blah blah."

Either defend your candidate or admit he's a goof. Most people know McCain is a retard. If Obama's only defense is that he's just as bad as McCain, that isn't a very good thing.

Joe-
re:"If Obama's only defense is that he's just as bad as McCain, that isn't a very good thing."

Obviously, that's not the case. See 9:59 and 10:00 posts and hundreds of others.

JOE

We're never going to agree about much politically.

But, you can't dispute Obama was 100% right from the start that Iraq was an unnecessary war that would take our eyes off the ball in the real WOT.

I can post his 2002 speech if you'd like....

He said,

"After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administrations pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.

I dont oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

(YEP)

I am not opposed to all wars. Im opposed to dumb wars."

"You want a fight, President Bush? Lets finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

Prescienct and spot on it turns out..

I'd rather have a President who exercises good judgment and possesses foresight enough to prevent blunders than have to try to extricate us from a needless war after the fact.

I started typing "Prescience" and goofed up there when I changed it.

Anyway, this was in 2002 before we invaded Iraq.

If only we'd taken that course and focused on Al Qaeda and Afghanistan....

Americanunity-
Just imagine how bad off we'd be if we had that idiot Barack as president in 2001.

I agree with Obama that Iraq was unnecessary, the difference is that I'd pull our troops out today if it were up to me. Obama doesn't plan on doing that.

"See 9:59 and 10:00 posts and hundreds of others."

Those posts were after you were ripped for only talking about McCain. Regarding the "hundreds of others," changes are most of them contained references to McCain.

I don't think most Obama supporters believe Obama is qualified to be president. They just "like" him and think he has "good judgment" despite the fact that he has just as many personal follies (which relate to judgment) as any other politicians. So let's stop pretending that Obama is an experienced leader when it comes to Iraq. He wasn't even a Senator when they voted on the war, and he hasn't been the leader of any movement within Congress to end the war.

Hell, maybe a competent President with a competent crew might have prevented the attacks. (You'll remember that the Bush administration's international defense focus was on the missile shield...)

JOE

If I didn't think Obama was qualifed to be POTUS I wouldn't have supported him.

I've posted a myriad of posts pointing out Obama's good judgment over the last year.

This election is Obama vs McCain. It's completely fair to point out the differences in their judgment.

Obama has more foreign policy experience than Reagan, Clinton, Carter, or Bush 43.

"the difference is that I'd pull our troops out today if it were up to me. Obama doesn't plan on doing that."

Because that would be impossible, and if it were possible, it would be reckless and stupid. You need a smooth transition, not chaos.

The fact that Obama knows what to say about Iraq does not mean he has more foreign policy "experience" than anyone.

There's no point in debating whether Obama is experienced with a bunch of nuts who are going to vote for him and support him regardless. Fact is, Obama has been a Senator long enough to spearhead an effort to end the war - and he hasn't. That's not leadership. It's monday morning quarterbacking.

"The fact that Obama knows what to say about Iraq does not mean he has more foreign policy "experience" than anyone."

"Obama [knew] what to say about Iraq" before we invaded Iraq. He was against it. He listed many prescient reasons why it was a dumb war.

It's monday morning quarterbacking.

Monday 2002?

JOE,

I didn't say he had more foreign policy experience than anyone.

I said he has more foreign policy experience than Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush 43 had when they were elected.

JOE

See my 10:18 post for "Monday morning quarterbacking".

Not sure if it was a Monday, but it sure was in 2002 before we invaded Iraq.

AU-

Your 10:40 post makes no sense. You're either saying he has more foreign policy experience than certain people, or you're not. You are. I disagree with that. However, you are free to list his accomplishments in the area of foreign policy whenever you wish.

BetelG-

If Obama thought the Iraq war was wrong to begin with, he should have used his position in the Senate to do something to end the war. Likewise, you are free to post links to any bills, resolutions, etc with Obama's name on them purporting to do something - anything - about the Iraq war.

JOE

I listed the very people he has more foreign policy experience than before they were elected President.

Wrote it in plain English.

Right. You listed people. Now I'm asking for you to list Obama's accomplishments in the area of foreign policy. Not things he has said. Things he has done. That have been completed.

JOE-
re: "If Obama thought the Iraq war was wrong to begin with, he should have used his position in the Senate to do something to end the war."

Once we're in the dumb war you and your favorite politicians supported, it's an entirely different set of circumstances.

JOE

You're changing the debate.

Obama was right about Iraq in 2002. See his Resolution on Iran hoping to prevent another foreign policy debacle.

You know very well Bush is CiC and has veto power. The GOP have done everything in their power to block any and all resolutions regarding Iraq. Bush has threatened to do the same on any and all such legislation. Moot point.

Shoot, 2 years ago the GOP were still calling people who rightfully called for a timetable to exit that quagmire "traitors" and "defeatocrats".

If 4 Presidents I listed in the last 32 years had less foreign policy experience than Obama how are you possibly making the claim he can't be President with more?

One debate at a time.....

I'm gonna watch Monk with my wife. On that note, I wish they'd left him more Obsessive/Compulsive. Now he even uses phones without wiping them off LOL Still, a funny show.

JOE-
Say one positive thing about McCain that would make me want to vote for him.

Joe will probably say he doesn't support McCain. Just watch.

McCain's been to Afghanistan yet never suggested we needed more forces there. Of course, he hasn't attended a single hearing on Afghanistan in 2 years. He might have missed something he obviously didn't learn in Afghanistan - while laymen like us can read about it in the paper. Problem is Afghanistan has been forgotten until now. Good to see it getting much deserved attention for a change.

OK, Monk time

War-torn Afghanistan? Whew, I'm glad that's clarified. Otherwise I would have thought that he had visited "peaceful Afghanistan." We wouldn't want him to have dodged a theater of operations. I wonder if his group was attacked the same way Ms Hillary's was. Do we have a report yet on whether or not he also gained some combat experience.

so Johnson is surprized that Afghanistan is "war-torn", that's understandable given that his intellectual level appears quite low!

Fact is, after numerous demands, the Obama supporters in this thread cannot produce a single accomplishment by Obama with regard to foreign policy or the Iraq war. I don't support the war or McCain. That Null Set predicted I'd say that is only evidence of the fact that liberals are incapable of comprehending that someone could be against Obama and against the Iraq war and John McCain. To them, there are only two kinds of Americans.

"there are only two kinds of Americans."

BullShit!

article from ABC News
"McCain stumbled again over his geography while discussing the two war fronts. At one point he cited the problems with the "Iraq-Pakistan border."

Iraq and Pakistan do not share a border. McCain was apparently referring to the Afghan-Pakistan border. Taliban militants use the border area as a safe haven from which to attack U.S. troops.

Like I said - people only know how to defend Obama in the area of foreign policy by bringing up other people. Why is that?

JOE

You want to make an issue out of foreign policy 'experience', that's why.

Never heard a peep from McCain about Afghanistan for all his visits there. All the while the situation was deteriorating by the month. He's been there gobs of times and we've been there for 7 years. How did he not know we needed forces there ASAP? Why have we never heard a peep from him about it?

So much for 'experience'.

McCain can't even get his countries right. Today, he informed us the "situation is bad along the Iraq-Afghanistan border" Might be near Czechoslovakia? He's confusing me.

McCain did pass that Indian Gaming Act in 1988 - if they count as a 'foreign country' and thus a 'foreign policy' piece of legislation.

The issue is Obama. He is running for president and his qualifications deserve scrutiny at least for one moment without regard to the qualifications of others. I never said McCain had any more foreign policy experience than Obama did. I have never said anything good about John McCain. Therefore your comments with regard to him are irrelevant. I either want you to show me foreign policy experience of Obama's or admit that he doesn't have any.

JOE-
Say one positive thing about McCain that would make me want to vote for him.

Posted by BetelG

He's not Hussein Obama - possibly the most positive thing about McCain - no it is the most positive thing about McCain.

Like I said - people only know how to defend Obama in the area of foreign policy by bringing up other people. Why is that?

Posted by JOE at 2008-07-21 01:57 PM |

Because this trip is his only foreign policy experience. BTW... How many meetings has called for as the Chair of the committee which overseas Afghanistan? You know all that vast knowledge and experience he has about the so called deteriation of the region tells me he should have known or done something about the upswing in violence there.

How many meetings has called for as the Chair of the committee which overseas Afghanistan?

As many hearings on Afghanistan as McCain's attended

How many meetings has called for as the Chair of the committee which overseas Afghanistan?

As many hearings on Afghanistan as McCain's attended

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-07-21 03:56 PM

Just a blind little sheep aren't you AU? BTW... McCain didn't need to pad his reume by being on the committee. He actually went and saw for himself. Can the Boy Wonder say that?

AU once again demonstrates his complete inability to support Obama without denigrating McCain.

AU Logic: One person bad = Other person good

JOE

That's pretty disengenuous.

I never called McCain a bad person.

I aptly pointed out they have matching records on foreign policy legislation.

Besides, 'experience' from the 80's and 90's is about as useful today as an old phone book.

Presidential nominees are briefed on all the secrets they didn't get to see before - even Senators. Level playing field.

I've also pointed out (as others have) that Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush 43 had ZERO foreign policy experience before they were elected. I never saw this 'experience ' issue raised with any of them to the level the right is trying to do with Obama - a sitting U.S. Senator.

Thank God someone is finally giving Afghanistan 'the forgotten war' some much needed attention.

Again, AU logic:

One person has no foreign policy experience = other person does.

Right?

If that's not what you think, then why do you talk about McCain's lack of experience when someone asks you about Obama's lack of experience? The fact that McCain has no experience doesn't mean that Obama has any. If anything it means they are both bad candidates.

forget it Joe, it doesn't mean diddly!
but as for me I don't want a guy that doesn't know there is no Czechoslovakia or thinks that there is an Afghanistan/Pakistan border to be president.

I prefer the guy that wants to implement the real war on terror, the one that wants to finish the job in Afghanistan plus really get Osama. That man is Obama!

ONNA

You meant "Iraq/Pakistan" border I'm sure...

You meant "Iraq/Pakistan" border I'm sure...
yes, that was a typo as McCain said "...the Iraq/Pakistan border", thanks American Unity.

McCain has made a number of gaffs similar to this, and he claims to be better at foreign policy. most of his gaffs have been ignored by the press, but won't be at his debate with Obama.

All just very humorous.

Ya, funny as hell, eh MSGT?

Gen. Petraeus called for the surge in Iraq. Not McCain. He jumped on the bandwagon after the fact. Never heard a peep from him about Afghanistan in all these years. Just shy of 7 years since we invaded there.

Unless Iraq IS all about the oil, why haven't McCain, Bush, or any of the rah rah Iraq War guys called for a surge in Afghanistan?. I've been reading for for years the generals in Afghanistan have been begging for troops and resources as the situation has deteriorated. No one's been listening to them and responding.

Aren't we there fighting the people who harbored Al Qaeda and training camps? Who gave Bin Laden sanctuary? How quickly people forget.

Ironic, Mr Obama laid out his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan and had NEVER visited the countries? That's just the kind of foresight we need.

Kinda goes along with the 57 states and speaking another language, not proud, etc.

You empty suit!

Posted by aclusux at 2008-07-20 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, USUX, you now have to visit a country to have a policy towards them?

Bush bragged that he never left the shores of the CONUS and yet invaded two countries and wants to attack a third.

How could he have ever had a policy regarding NK, Iran and Iraq without having been there? I'm not really asking, I'm just pointing out your flawed logic.

I'll be waiting for your retraction regarding visiting places and foreign policy.

Ironic, Mr Obama laid out his plan for Iraq and Afghanistan and had NEVER visited the countries? That's just the kind of foresight we need.

Posted by aclusux at 2008-07-20 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

How does Bush create a 'Roadmap for Peace' when he had never visited Israel at that time.

I know, it stings a bit, but get used to it.