Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

Afghanistan's election commission proclaimed President Hamid Karzai the victor of the country's tumultuous ballot Monday, canceling a planned runoff and ending a political crisis that began with a fraud-marred first round two and a half months ago.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Corky

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

" We congratulate President Karzai "

......shame on Obama......supporting a narco-dictator.......


Yes, the Taliban is so much better.

They kill poppies and people.

We should just help them stone women and behead US supporters... ... .... .... ... ..... and then we could send for a moving van to bring back al Qaeda..... great plan...!

From the article

"The Obama administration which has been waiting for a government deemed legitimate to emerge in Kabul before announcing whether to deploy tens of thousands more troops quickly welcomed the result."

So Obama will finally listen to his theater commander General McCyristal...


You mean the General that covered up Pat Tillman's killing? That guy?

"So Obama will finally listen to his theater commander General McCyristal..."

*Sigh*
Another wanting the Commander to take orders from the subordinate.

"You mean the General that covered up Pat Tillman's killing? That guy?"


Yeah, you know the guy Obama appointed....

WASHINGTON With the White House's reluctant embrace on Sunday of Hamid Karzai as the winner of Afghanistan's suddenly moot presidential runoff, President Obama now faces a new complication: enabling a badly tarnished partner to regain enough legitimacy to help the United States find the way out of an eight-year-old war.

It will not be easy. As the evidence mounted in late summer that Mr. Karzai's forces had sought to win re-election through widespread fraud to defeat his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, administration officials made no secret of their disgust. How do you consider sending tens of thousands of additional American troops, they asked in meetings in the White House, to prop up an Afghan government regarded as illegitimate by many of its own people?

The answer was supposed to be a runoff election. Now, administration officials argue that Mr. Karzai will have to regain that legitimacy by changing the way he governs, at a moment when he is politically weaker than at any time since 2001.

"We're going to know in the next three to six months whether he's doing anything differently whether he can seriously address the corruption, whether he can raise an army that ultimately can take over from us and that doesn't lose troops as fast as we train them," one of Mr. Obama's senior aides said. He insisted on anonymity because of the confidentiality surrounding the Obama administration's own debate on a new strategy, and the request by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the American military commander in Afghanistan, for upward of 44,000 more troops.

"Needless to say," the senior aide added, "this is not where we wanted to be after nine months."

www.nytimes.com


But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
In proving foresight may be vain;
The best-laid schemes o' mice an 'men
Gang aft agley,
An'lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!

Still thou art blest, compar'd wi' me
The present only toucheth thee:
But, Och! I backward cast my e'e.
On prospects drear!
An' forward, tho' I canna see,
I guess an' fear!

You mean the General that covered up Pat Tillman's killing? That guy?


#4 | Posted by Corky at 2009-11-02 09:05 AM

Yes that guy: If he is not fit to be the Theater commander it is Obama's responsibility to relieve him of his command effective immediately, are you suggesting Obama is not doing his job by keeping General McChyristal in charge


Yeah, you know the guy Obama appointed....

#6 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2009-11-02 09:17 AM

Damn Pesky facts again...


lmao! Funny how Wingers have so little to cling to these days.

Last week the Gen was their guy for wanting more troops and this week he is Obama's guy because the news came out that he covered up Tillman's death.

Whether Obama knew this or not when he was selected, I don't know.... but then, neither do you.

Yes, the Taliban is so much better.
......#2 | Posted by Corky

.....no.....they're not.......

...but somehow we've found ourselves supporting a lassaiz-faire narco-dictator, who is in a civil war against the Taliban (which we funded as an anti-Soviet start up project)......

......a really ugly choice.......

....the decent thing would be to withdraw, and leave the Afghanis to settle their own problems....

lmao! Funny how Wingers have so little to cling to these days.

Last week the Gen was their guy for wanting more troops and this week he is Obama's guy because the news came out that he covered up Tillman's death.


#10 | Posted by Corky

General McCrystal is Obama's theater commander and Obama is the Commander in Chief who appointed him. Obama must choose to either send in more troops or get the hell out...
This may surprise you but I hope Obama overrules the good General and bails out before more soldiers die. Any president that is perceived as being weak on the battle field emboldens our enemies in both Afghanistan and Iraq...

-the decent thing would be to withdraw, and leave the Afghanis to settle their own problems

The list of countries that America has promised to help later if they would only help us now, and then abandoned to the gentle graces of our enemies, is longer than your arm.

The retaliation on US supporters, not to mention hardships on women and indoctrination against the US of youth were we to just pull out would hardly be, "the decent thing to to".

It is an ugly choice, but choosing to yet again stab an "ally" in the back isn't necessary or..... prudent.


#13 | Posted by Corky at 2009-11-02 09:47 AM

When our military is in harms way they deserve the full support of the President as well as the theater commander who is asking for more troops to WIN...
If the President does not agree with his General then he should be relieved of his command and replaced with a General Obama can trust, that being said it still boils down to one thing either send in more troops or get the hell out...

It is an ugly choice, but choosing to yet again stab an "ally" in the back isn't necessary or..... prudent.
.....#13 | Posted by Corky

......the alternative is a war without end.......

......I can't support that......

......and while I am an Obama fan, his embrace of Karzai's corrupt presidency is a deep disappointment to me........

......this decision will tarnish Obama's presidency, and may even cripple it, the way the Iran hostage crisis destroyed Jimmy Carter's..........

"If the President does not agree with his General then he should be relieved of his command"

What an idiotic pile of shit.

......the alternative is a war without end.......

That's even too lame to repeat..... "War without end".... Hyperbole much?

I see you have no retort for the severe on the ground consequences were we to just pull out.... other than, "so what?".


#14 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2009-11-02 10:07 AM | Reply | Flag: Thinks CinC decisions should be on 24/7 cable TV schedule


btw, Cheney/Bush dithered in Afghanistan for 7 years, including getting a 20K+ troop request in Aug 2008, which they ignored until Obama filled it in March of this year.

Bush also took 6 mos deciding on the surge in Iraq, but I'm sure that was fine with you then.

I see you have no retort for the severe on the ground consequences were we to just pull out.... other than, "so what?".
......#14 | Posted by ATaxpayer

......if we pull out, then either Karzai gets his shit together, or the Taliban takes over.......

......but as long as we stay, Karzai's gang steals the infrastructure money, and lets the US do the fighting against the Taliban.......makes suckers of us all around........

.....at least if we go, the war will end quickly, one way or another, if we stay, it will go on forever.........

......if we pull out, then either Karzai gets his shit together, or the Taliban takes over.......

After 7 years of doing nothing but alienating people, the gov has no chance against the Taliban were we to pull out.... as you conveniently ignore the consequences of that yet again...

The only organization that the Afghan people have confidence in is their military, and if we get them on their feet to hold what we take, they can have a decent chance after a few years.

......but as long as we stay, Karzai's gang steals the infrastructure money, and lets the US do the fighting against the Taliban.......makes suckers of us all around........

Just because it was that way under Bush's policy of ignoring the situation, does not mean it will remain so.

-the war will end quickly

Which is somehow preferable to it ending with the people in control instead of the Taliban?

I've protested almost every war since 'Nam, but I've never advocated leaving allies to the wolves.

There is also the imminent possibility that a re-organized Taliban in Afghanistan would aid the Paki Taliban in the overthrow of that nuclear country.

There are geostrategic concerns as well.


"If the President does not agree with his General then he should be relieved of his command"


What an idiotic pile of shit.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-11-02 10:12 AM


Danforth as usual what an intellectual well thought out response...

"as usual what an intellectual well thought out response..."

Versus your moronic suggestion that every General who disagrees with any command from above should be relieved.

Do you believe that all the way down the chain?


Versus your moronic suggestion that every General who disagrees with any command from above should be relieved.


Do you believe that all the way down the chain?

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-11-02 12:11 PM

First I said General McCyrstal the theater commander not "every General". Obama appointed the good general and now has no faith in what he is asking for on the battle field. While our soldiers wait for an answer from Obama casualties increase on a daily basis, so if we wait and wait as Obama is doing right now the casualty rate will continue to increase as our enemies become more and more aggressive under a weak President

Obama needs to be decisive not Indecisive as he has been so far...

"First I said General McCyrstal the theater commander not "every General". "

Bullshit. Your post #14 started out with generalities.

"Obama appointed the good general and now has no faith in what he is asking for on the battle field"

More nonsense. The good General may be talking about what's needed for on-field tactics, whereas the Commander has to look at the larger picture.

"While our soldiers wait for an answer from Obama casualties increase on a daily basis, so if we wait and wait as Obama is doing right now the casualty rate will continue to increase as our enemies become more and more aggressive under a weak President"

Either link to where you excoriated Bush for dithering or STFU.

POST 14 in Full Context...

When our military is in harms way they deserve the full support of the President as well as the theater commander who is asking for more troops to WIN...
If the President does not agree with his General then he should be relieved of his command and replaced with a General Obama can trust, that being said it still boils down to one thing either send in more troops or get the hell out...


#14 | Posted by ATaxpayer

Bullshit. Your post #14 started out with generalities.

Danforth you will please note that I was not using "generalities" in post #14, I clearly referenced "theater commander" I am sure you know the meaning and context

Go spam somewhere else troll


"note that I was not using "generalities""

Huh? Are you actually suggesting there are times "When our military is in harms way" they don't deserve the full support...?

"I clearly referenced "theater commander"

As if Afghanistan is the only theatre of war in history.

"Go spam somewhere else troll"

Translation: I never made a peep when Bush was dithering.


Do you believe that all the way down the chain?

#22 | Posted by Danforth

I do. When your orders are to follow orders, then, yes you have to relieve those that disobey.

It's all acedemic anyway. The powers that be went to all the trouble to rig the elections the first time, and they don't want to have to go to all the trouble to rig them again.

Have you noticed that Gen. McKrystalburger has been very silent lately after getting reamed for talking out of turn.

Sorry, I don't really care! I will say it again, If them women have to wear sheets over thier heads, it is not any of my business. If Abdullah the goat farmer marries his nine year old niece, well it's thier country, I guess it is none of my business. And if a corrupt politician named Karzai won office again, I don't care. How much money/lives have we blow on this fifth world country. This is the country that has shattered the hopes of many invaders, we are just fooling ourselves about winning (winning what?) over this barren, desolate wasteland.

Send guns, money and opium, or else.

"Obama appointed the good general and now has no faith in what he is asking for on the battle field."

Except that he has also appointed a Sec. of STate, a head of the CIA, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Sec. of Defense, Ambassador to the UN, etc.
This is not just a tactical decision and that is what the fools of the right don't want to acknowledge. This is a decision to commit American bodies to, at least, a decade of carnage. To, at least, 15,000 deaths. This is not a time for Bush like bravado, it is a time for serious reflection and consideration of the risks, the potential gains and the costs of such a long term commitment.
My opinion, America will not tolerate the losses over the long term, American cannot afford the costs, but Barack Obama does not have the cajones to say, bring it on home. I voted for him, I support him, but now I need to see the cajones to stand up to Gen. McChrystal and the rest of the hawks who do not look down the road when America will tire of this war and come home anyway. I respect the troops too much to waste their lives on a quest we will not finish.

What Danni said

We will not finish Danni because of people like you at home that will not support the military to see it through.

Think...it which situtation are you safer - if you have 20 guys with you and you surrounded by 150 enemy or if you have 200 guys and you face 150?

The issue now is we take territory - then we have to leave since we are thin to support some where else. If we have enough troops then we do not have to leave. This means we do not have to fight to retake it and we can stablise the situation..which is exactly what happened in Iraq.

Yes we will lose people in the field...but would you rather have that in the hands of the Taliban with training camps set up (as it was before we went in) trainging 4000 per year to attack us?

So we have to stay in Afghanistan until the Islamists decide killing is a bad thing? We will be there for 1000 more years..

Yes we will lose people in the field...but would you rather have that in the hands of the Taliban with training camps set up (as it was before we went in) trainging 4000 per year to attack us?

Actually most of the training camps for terrorists in Afghanistan prior to the US invasion/occupation weren't set up to attck the US at all.

The Pakistani Intelligence service were training terrorists to fight in Kashmir against Indian rule and there were some there being trained to fight in the various "stans" and there were even Uighurs who were training to be a thorn in the side of China.

All of this with American awareness, acceptance of the fact and, in some cases, actual support.

EM: In fact, you know, when the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, they claimed that there were over twenty 'terrorist training camps' as they called them, they were all training terrorists to go and attack America. Well, this is an absolute lie. One among many.

Most of the training camps, 90% of the people in the training camps were either Kashmiris being trained by Pakistani Intelligence Service, the ISI, with full American knowledge, to go an fight in Kashmir against Indian rule. That was the biggest group, and the second biggest group were people from Central Asia, mainly Uzbekistan and Khazakistan and Tajikistan who were being organized and trained to go and fight these dreadful communist regimes of Central Asia, again with full American knowledge.

And finally there were a group of Uighurs - Chinese muslims from Xinjiang province in Western China who were being trained by Bin Laden to go and fight the communist Chinese in Xinjiang, and this was not only with the knowledge, but with the support of the CIA, because they thought they might use them if war ever broke out with China.

lukery.blogspot.com

Sorry to burst yer bubble there.

Be Well.

On Topic?

Karsick has just proven himself to be just one more in a long series of illegitimate American-backed corrupt puppet rulers doomed to FAIL.

GL with that.

Be Well.

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable