Gates vs Obama

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Sinatra, Oct 20, 2009.

  1. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    Defense Secretary Robert Gates can now be added to the list of those indicating President Obama would do well to act vs continued deliberation regarding the worsening conditions in Afghanistan...
    __

    U.S. decision can't wait for Afghan legitimacy: Gates

    ABOARD A U.S. MILITARY AIRCRAFT (Reuters) - The United States cannot wait for problems surrounding the legitimacy of the Afghan government to be resolved before making a decision on troops, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said.

    Gates, speaking to reporters on board a plane traveling to Tokyo, described the situation in Afghanistan as an evolutionary process that would not improve dramatically overnight, regardless of what course is taken following the country's flawed August election.

    "I see this as a process, not something that's going to happen all of the sudden," Gates said.

    "I believe that the president will have to make his decisions in the context of that evolutionary process."


    Gates said he did not need to wait for a U.S. decision on troops to speak to NATO allies about McChrystal's resource request, saying "the reality is that this is an alliance issue."

    "We ought to do this in a way that if General McChrystal has a set of needs, it should not be looked upon as exclusively the responsibility of the United States to respond," he said.

    "So I think that having a discussion of that and the fact that this is a continuing shared responsibility makes it entirely appropriate to have that conversation in Bratislava, before decisions are made by the United States."


    ___

    What we have here folks is a Secretary of Defense now siding with General McChrystal and attempting to coordinate increased troops in Afghanistan without having to wait for the Commander in Chief to do so. Gates is weighing his words carefully here - but the message is clear - Obama needs to act sooner rather than later, and Gates is not entirely certain that is going to happen. What we are witnessing is an increasing fracture between the military - including the CIA, and the White House.

    Going Rogue indeed...


    U.S. decision can't wait for Afghan legitimacy: Gates | Reuters
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. ddye
    Offline

    ddye Moderate extremist

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Messages:
    75
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Williamsburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +27
    As a contrast to the 2000-2008 Cabinet's unquestioning loyalty to anything out of the Bush/Cheney White House, I would hope that Obama encourages differing viewpoints in his administration.

    I have thought about this too, and I understand the dilemma of pledging support to a government whose legitimacy might collapse at any moment. But I have heard from many people who should know that Obama is NOT going to withdraw from Afghanistan.

    Doug
     
  3. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005

    Indicating what he is doing then is not as Commander in Chief but as a politician - and more and more are dying because of his inaction. Either go all in or get the hell out.

    The military is turning on Obama...
     
  4. Sherry
    Offline

    Sherry You're not the boss of me Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    21,494
    Thanks Received:
    8,798
    Trophy Points:
    960
    Location:
    some beach
    Ratings:
    +11,085
    Gates and McChrystal had better watch their step. Having a perspective that doesn't match Obama and his inner circle means that they are in jeopardy of having their military credentials called into question. I hope the rest of the military is paying attention so that they don't follow their lead.
     
  5. Shorebreak
    Offline

    Shorebreak Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    395
    Thanks Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +102
    Gates is a member in good standing of the ruling Council on Foreign Relations, along with Obama's most senior foreign policy advisor - Zbigniew Brzezinski - who published our current Central Asia policy back in 1998.

    If you follow the policy planning, there is 100% certainty that we will not only ramp up our presence in Afghanistan, but we will further encourage confrontation between Iran and Pakistan. The goal will be to draw Russia into a proxy war in support of Iran, and against Georgia, as we continue to build our military presence in other Central Asian nations.

    If the global banks can continue to build our military presence in the region, we will ultimately prevent Russia from rebuilding it's power base. Therefore, the global economic system can be structured to benefit the private institutions who have created the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, and the system of regional economies, like NAFTA, the EU, MEFTA, ASEAN, the African Union, and the MERCOSUR in South America.

    If you look at the invasion of Central Asia as an isolated circumstance - without taking in the broader global geopolitical and economic construct and the events/players that are moving the pieces into place - then you cannot discern what to expect or why certain things are happening. If you follow the media's approach of categorizing everything as a mish-mash of unexpected issues, unrelated crises, and individual boxes that have no central direction, you are sure to be lost as you try to examine events and issues.

    In reality, when you examine policy prior to examining the news, you begin to see that all of your initial perceptions and boxes begin to fade away as you see how the media spins elements of a single policy into a left/right framework in order to create a dialogue that has no impact whatsoever on the policy activities.

    For example, the media spin right now for Afghanistan is Hamid Karzai and his election. Do you think the media forgets that Karzai co-authored a book with Condi Rice when they were co-workers at Rand? I highly doubt it, but they don't mention it now, do they?

    There's much more to this puzzle than meets the eye. The bottom line is that our policy is to achieve strategic control of Central Asia in order to prevent a re-emergence of Russia. Our presence in the region will grow.
     
  6. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    Interesting!
     
  7. Wicked Jester
    Offline

    Wicked Jester Libsmackin'chef

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    11,924
    Thanks Received:
    1,859
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    So. Cal, Malibu!
    Ratings:
    +1,859
    Obama is playing politics on this issue, pure and simple.

    He's more interested in protecting his standing within the base, than he is in going all out in this war.

    He needs to tell Biden and Pelosi to shut the fuck up, and give those troops the support they need.

    No more excuses, no more mulling it over. He's had more than enough time to make a decision. Either he shits, or he gets off the damn pot.

    He's proven to be quite good at throwing those who become political liabilities under the bus. Right now he's throwing our troops under the bus for nothing more than political gain amongst his far left cronies. It's wrong!

    This president is weak. His weakness is showing by the day. Instead of taking the war to our enemies, he's choosing to take his war against a media entity who is costing him politically. Unfortunately, our troops are left hanging.

    Sad really!
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2009
  8. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005

    Minus the colorful language, I agree completely. Politics at the cost of lives is what is going on here - and has been for months. The military is growing increasingly agitated against the president, as well as the CIA.

    Gates is applying as much pressure on the president as he can without outright insubordination - though this administration will likely take it as that already.
     
  9. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    The failings of the previous Administration are not an excuse for failings in the current Administration.

    Just sayin'.
     
  10. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    Good for Gates. I hope is CV is up to date, too.
     

Share This Page