Good reading

[Kelly the Dog]

A President with good forward-thinking judgment, historical perspective, and common sense would be nice.

 

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.

 

The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars.

 

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.

I don’t oppose all wars.

 

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s 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 don’t 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.

 

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

 

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

 

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

 

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. 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.

 

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

 

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s 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.

 

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

 

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

 

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

 

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

 

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

[/dev/null]

A President with good forward-thinking judgment, historical perspective, and common sense would be nice.

Let's see how many American troops are there in late 2011

[Kelly the Dog]

Let's see how many American troops are there in late 2011

Meaning what? I would bet anything that as of today, Obama has no idea how many American troops are there in late 2011. I would imagine there would still be tens of thousands but it's impossible to tell. I doubt General Patraeus and his successor could guess right now. It may be very few. It may be 10K, or 50K, it could even be a lot more.

[/dev/null]

Meaning what? I would bet anything that as of today, Obama has no idea how many American troops are there in late 2011. I would imagine there would still be tens of thousands but it's impossible to tell. I doubt General Patraeus and his successor could guess right now. It may be very few. It may be 10K, or 50K, it could even be a lot more.

But he said he would get us out of Iraq?

[Adam]

Let's see how many American troops are there in late 2011

As long as the government we set up there stands, we will be there. No ifs, ands or buts

[Boomer860]

Let's see how many American troops are there in late 2011

If they do not sign a security agreement by this Dec 31 it could put a whole new light on the situation.

First of all there will be no combat operations on out part, And very possibily have ot pull out. This I see as a very dangerous situation for our troops.

 

Good read on the subject:

 

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/10/ap_i...hdrawal_103008/

[Kelly the Dog]

But he said he would get us out of Iraq?

He's always said the same thing. He would start an immediate, slow withdrawal. The target date is 16 months but it will be determined by events on the ground. He has said he will be flexible, which he said repeatedly and promised General Patreus recently. He has no idea how the Iraqis will respond, be it in the military, police and public. He has always said we wouldnt leave irresponsibly (meaning too fast) and he has always said there would be troops that remain, either there, or close by.

[Boomer860]

He's always said the same thing. He would start an immediate, slow withdrawal. The target date is 16 months but it will be determined by events on the ground. He has said he will be flexible, which he said repeatedly and promised General Patreus recently. He has no idea how the Iraqis will respond, be it in the military, police and public. He has always said we wouldnt leave irresponsibly (meaning too fast) and he has always said there would be troops that remain, either there, or close by.

He says many different things ,whatever the situation calls for. Plain and simple Obama is a fraud by thet I mean a creation of the media , that should be obvious.

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

He says many different things ,whatever the situation calls for. Plain and simple Obama is a fraud by thet I mean a creation of the media , that should be obvious.

 

All politicians are creations of the media, at least to some extent. If Obama is a fraud for that reason, then McCain is a fraud as well. A candidate would NEVER survive a presidential race (or any other race for that matter) without the help of the media.

[/dev/null]

All politicians are creations of the media, at least to some extent. If Obama is a fraud for that reason, then McCain is a fraud as well. A candidate would NEVER survive a presidential race (or any other race for that matter) without the help of the media.

 

Well said

 

Obama = McCain = Bush < RJ

[Peter]

His stand against the decision to go to war is one of the things with which I agree with Obama.

[drnykterstein]

His stand against the decision to go to war is one of the things with which I agree with Obama.

 

I bet you'd also like his education policy.. money for public college if you do community service or serve in the military.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

A President with good forward-thinking judgment, historical perspective, and common sense would be nice.

 

 

Common sense? Historical perspective? Forward-thinking judgement? Or a political agenda that matches yours?

 

There's a difference, you know.

[swede316]

I bet you'd also like his education policy.. money for public college if you do community service or serve in the military.

What's the problem?..You have the GI Bill already..What's wrong with the other half EARNING some free college money?

[elegantelliotoffen]

 

Common sense? Historical perspective? Forward-thinking judgement? Or a political agenda that matches yours?

 

There's a difference, you know.

 

Check out McCain's "Forward-thinking judgement"!

 

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

wow, he really is the Messiah, he can see the future!

 

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.

 

[drnykterstein]

What's the problem?..You have the GI Bill already..What's wrong with the other half EARNING some free college money?

 

No problem at all. I'm just saying that I bet people will like that about Obama.

 

Faking a Roughing: Ya that is impressively accurate on his part.

[Adam]

I bet you'd also like his education policy.. money for public college if you do community service or serve in the military.

I can't argue against giving the people who fight for our freedoms anything

[Boomer860]

I can't argue against giving the people who fight for our freedoms anything

You are right ,The only thing Obama will give them is the shaft. He hates the military and all it stands for . So I say F this lying communist fraud Obama.

He wants to reduce the size of the miltary .He wants National Security Force . He is for change so if its change you want its radical change you will get commrade

He wouldnt even visit the toops in the Hospital in Germany because they would not let cameras in.

Biden says he will be tested . If he doent pass the test he fails ..and so do you

[GG]

A President with good forward-thinking judgment, historical perspective, and common sense would be nice.

 

Ok, then, he should have absolutely no problem with these issues:

 

Let’s 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.

 

...

 

Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

 

.....

 

Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

 

....

 

Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

 

How much time should we give him to win all those fights? 100 days? Two years? One term?

 

Should we put a wager on it?