I agree.
Last night I felt compelled to watch our Dear Leader’s speech to the brave and honorable cadets at the USMA at West Point. I thought the speech was a feeble attempt to portray himself as a strong, war-time leader. There are a few sections of the speech I will discuss below.
On Iraq
Then, in early 2003, the decision was made to wage a second war in Iraq. The wrenching debate over the Iraq war is well-known and need not be repeated here. It’s enough to say that, for the next six years, the Iraq war drew the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our diplomacy, and our national attention, and that the decision to go into Iraq caused substantial rifts between America and much of the world.
This appears to me as an underhanded and somewhat covert attempt to blame the current Afghanistan situation, as well as the state of our foreign relations, on the previous administration. Remember, most of the Congress was behind the War in Iraq (including Democratic leadership such as Hillary Clinton), and our intelligence as well as our allies’ intelligence showed that Iraq was a vital threat and was linked to Al-Qaeda shortly after 9/11.
Thanks to their courage, grit and perseverance, we have given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully leaving Iraq to its people.
This sentence seems to convey that it was the result of the current administration’s actions that the war in Iraq has been a success. Not so. It was President George W. Bush who initiated the surge in Iraq (which ironically is the basis for the new strategy in Afghanistan) that brought about the defeat of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
On the Delay
Now, let me be clear: There has never been an option before me that called for troop deployments before 2010, so there has been no delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war during this review period.
This doesn’t seem to be entirely true. General Stanley McChrystal’s assessment back in August made in clear that we had to turn things around in twelve months, or incur a high risk of losing the efforts in Afghanistan. If the deployments for additional support and troops wasn’t going to happen until January 2010, you would lose at least four months. There’s no way you can get the new deployments in, change strategy, and then start turning things around in just eight months. This is just another underhanded attempt to not take responsibility for “dithering”.
On Seeing the Wages of War
As president, I have signed a letter of condolence to the family of each American who gives their life in these wars. I have read the letters from the parents and spouses of those who deployed. I’ve visited our courageous wounded warriors at Walter Reed. I’ve traveled to Dover to meet the flag-draped caskets of 18 Americans returning home to their final resting place.
I see firsthand the terrible wages of war. If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.
This is where Obama’s narcissism comes out full-force. How dare the POTUS pat himself on the back - in front of cadets, no less — for doing what the CinC is supposed to do anyway? How dare he use our fallen as props? And, no, sir, you have not seen the terrible wages of war firsthand. For that you will need to go to the battlefield in Afghanistan. This part of the speech really angered me.
On the Withdrawal
After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home.
This really angered me as well. It’s a clear signal to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to just lay low for eighteen months, then we’ll leave so you can take back over. It never should be publicly advertised when we’re leaving: It emboldens the enemy and weakens the morale of our troops.
Furthermore, the absence of a timeframe for transition would deny us any sense of urgency in working with the Afghan government. It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in Afghanistan.
It’s not about an absence of a timeframe. It’s about publically announcing it. The DoD can have a timeframe in mind — not everything has to be publically broadcast. The only people who need to know a timeframe are those in command of the troops. The public doesn’t need to know an exact date.
On Being United
It’s easy to forget that, when this war began, we were united, bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again.
Make sure you tell your liberal friends this. They opposed everything Bush did, simply because it was Bush doing them. To this day, there is vehement hatred and vitriol spewed constantly toward those on the right. (And sometimes by a select few, to the left.) We can’t be united behind a common purpose when we’re being set up to fail.
What others are saying: