The Bumbling Commander in Chief..

[namvet]

I would have killed more if it hadn't been for those god damned democrats.

 

[jillian]

Really?

That doesn't seem to be very much the case. He had about 52% of the vote... that's pretty much his approval rating.

Try again....

btw, I don't know a single person who voted for Obama who wouldn't have cut off their own arm before casting a vote that would have put sawwah anywhere near the big boys.

 

[Ame®icano]

Really?

That doesn't seem to be very much the case. He had about 52% of the vote... that's pretty much his approval rating.

Try again....

btw, I don't know a single person who voted for Obama who wouldn't have cut off their own arm before casting a vote that would have put sawwah anywhere near the big boys.

Patience. It's been only 8 months.

 

[rdean]

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen and General McChrystal are requesting more troops for Afghanistan.
Obama, says he needs more time but it's obvious, he doesn't know what he's doing.

Of course, we all knew that...!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/16

So what should he be doing?

(Theme from Jeopardy here)

Oh, that's right. You don't know.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's laughable that anyone who voted for Bush twice has anything to say about Obama.

I voted for Bush. Twice. I have plenty to say about Obama.
Why do you think this is laughable? And please use your own words and not the soundbites of the left wing media or Nancy Pelosi.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen and General McChrystal are requesting more troops for Afghanistan.
Obama, says he needs more time but it's obvious, he doesn't know what he's doing.

Of course, we all knew that...!

So what should he be doing?

(Theme from Jeopardy here)

Oh, that's right. You don't know.

He should be making decisions rather than trying to vote "present."

 

[jillian]

Really?

That doesn't seem to be very much the case. He had about 52% of the vote... that's pretty much his approval rating.

Try again....

btw, I don't know a single person who voted for Obama who wouldn't have cut off their own arm before casting a vote that would have put sawwah anywhere near the big boys.

Patience. It's been only 8 months.

No...there won't ever be anything to make it ok to an Obama voter to have voted for someone who talked about "pro-America parts of the country....

you'd have had to provide better alternatives.

most people i know who voted for him like him...just don't think he's punched the loons in the face enough,,, and he should.

 

[rightwinger]

That's right, he has to concentrate on winning a future election, not a current war. And if LBJ hadn't caved to (limited, vocal) domestic pressure and sent more troops when we had the NVA and VC by the short hairs we would have won. Go figure.

Some morons still think we could have won in Viet Nam "If only we had more troops"

Obviously you missed the point and know nothing of our tactical and stratigic postion after the Tet Offensive.

Oh really?

Explain the exit strategy where we would have "won" in Viet Nam??

 

[potter 58]

so Rabbi- Bush invades the country, then throws them to the wolves with 13000 troops and goes after what he considered his daddy's biggest f-u with 500,ooo and after 7-8 months Obama hasn't fixed the fiasco, go figure, can you say partisain hack

 

[The Rabbi]

WOuld you care to explain your point. Assuming you have one that is coherent and can be expressed.
The goal in Afghanistan was to get rid of the Taliban and deny them use of the country as a sanctuary for terrorism. It succeeded.
Obama has changed the goal to taking and holding ground. This is impossible, as Bush&Co knew. Every power that has tried it has had their butts handed to them, including the Russians, who live just across the border.
Where were you when this was being hailed as "the good war"??

 

[Ringel05]

Some morons still think we could have won in Viet Nam "If only we had more troops"

Obviously you missed the point and know nothing of our tactical and stratigic postion after the Tet Offensive.

Oh really?

Explain the exit strategy where we would have "won" in Viet Nam??

Exit strategy?? How does that have anything to do with my post?? Are you in any way or shape familiar with the military situation after Tet? They were beaten, destroyed and on the run. Westmoreland requested more troops to finish the job. LBJ caved to public/political pressure and replaced Westmoreland to implement the let's pull out strategy, i.e. we quit. The new "strategy" in combination with a draw down gave the NVA/VC a chance to reconstitute and rebuild in relative safety. If Westmoreland would have had his way the "exit strategy" would have been obvious, we weren't given the chance to finish the job.

 

[potter 58]

the goal was to get OSAMA , you do remember him asswipe and then when Bush got to Irag, he didn't care where here was, you fuckers reallly do have selective memmories- Oh and BTW Bush made a deal with the devil in Pakistain because he needed then but when it comes down to it, where are the terrorists now, who sold NK the tech to get the bomb, Bush's biggest ally pakistain

 

[potter 58]

so blowhard after 8 years of Bush's fuck ups , you expect everything thing to be hunky -dory after 8 months, can you say didg -dong because you certainly are one

 

[rightwinger]

Obviously you missed the point and know nothing of our tactical and stratigic postion after the Tet Offensive.

Oh really?

Explain the exit strategy where we would have "won" in Viet Nam??

Exit strategy?? How does that have anything to do with my post?? Are you in any way or shape familiar with the military situation after Tet? They were beaten, destroyed and on the run. Westmoreland requested more troops to finish the job. LBJ caved to public/political pressure and replaced Westmoreland to implement the let's pull out strategy, i.e. we quit. The new "strategy" in combination with a draw down gave the NVA/VC a chance to reconstitute and rebuild in relative safety. If Westmoreland would have had his way the "exit strategy" would have been obvious, we weren't given the chance to finish the job.

Oh yes...if only we had 100,000 more troops we would have sent them packing !
We built up to the levels we had because of Westmorelands delusions

What garbage revisionist history. We beat them back after Tet
They would have kept coming back till the last man. That is what became obvious to most intelligent analysts after Tet. Even Walter Cronkite recognized the obvious.

There was no winning strategy in Viet Nam

 

[Ringel05]

Oh really?

Explain the exit strategy where we would have "won" in Viet Nam??

Exit strategy?? How does that have anything to do with my post?? Are you in any way or shape familiar with the military situation after Tet? They were beaten, destroyed and on the run. Westmoreland requested more troops to finish the job. LBJ caved to public/political pressure and replaced Westmoreland to implement the let's pull out strategy, i.e. we quit. The new "strategy" in combination with a draw down gave the NVA/VC a chance to reconstitute and rebuild in relative safety. If Westmoreland would have had his way the "exit strategy" would have been obvious, we weren't given the chance to finish the job.

Oh yes...if only we had 100,000 more troops we would have sent them packing !
We built up to the levels we had because of Westmorelands delusions

What garbage revisionist history. We beat them back after Tet
They would have kept coming back till the last man. That is what became obvious to most intelligent analysts after Tet. Even Walter Cronkite recognized the obvious.

There was no winning strategy in Viet Nam

Revisionist history??? They would have come back at some later date but if we had been allowed to finish the job at hand it would have taken them five to ten years to recover. Besides I wasn't agruing that point dick head, I was specifically addressing the situation after Tet. So try reading as opposed to reading in next time. Besides which what the fuck does an engineer know about military tactics and strategy?

 

[jillian]

It's laughable that anyone who voted for Bush twice has anything to say about Obama.

I voted for Bush. Twice. I have plenty to say about Obama.
Why do you think this is laughable? And please use your own words and not the soundbites of the left wing media or Nancy Pelosi.

you have 10 posts here ... you don't know anything about how i'll answer/

try going light on the faux news sound bites.

psssst....it's laughable because you voted for an incompetent twice.

d'uh.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's laughable that anyone who voted for Bush twice has anything to say about Obama.

I voted for Bush. Twice. I have plenty to say about Obama.
Why do you think this is laughable? And please use your own words and not the soundbites of the left wing media or Nancy Pelosi.

you have 10 posts here ... you don't know anything about how i'll answer/

and when you stop giving me faux news sound bites.

psssst....it's laughable because you voted for an incompetent twice.

d'uh.

That's right. If I knew you would answer in the insulting manner you did I would have skipped it. Do you have something intelligent to say, something to defend your position?
Or is your position simply that George Bush is an idiot and so is everyone else who doesn't agree with you?

 

[jillian]

That's right. If I knew you would answer in the insulting manner you did I would have skipped it. Do you have something intelligent to say, something to defend your position?
Or is your position simply that George Bush is an idiot and so is everyone else who doesn't agree with you?

Hmmmmmmm....perhaps you're a reincarnation of another poster. *shrug*

and you must be awfully thin-skinned if you think my calling Bush the incompetent he was insults you. I can also assure you I have massive respect and regard for many people who disagree with me...just not for wingnuts who post stupidity like the anti-obama whining that's on this thread. perhaps if you actually posted something worth taking seriously?

why the nic, btw?

 

[rightwinger]

Exit strategy?? How does that have anything to do with my post?? Are you in any way or shape familiar with the military situation after Tet? They were beaten, destroyed and on the run. Westmoreland requested more troops to finish the job. LBJ caved to public/political pressure and replaced Westmoreland to implement the let's pull out strategy, i.e. we quit. The new "strategy" in combination with a draw down gave the NVA/VC a chance to reconstitute and rebuild in relative safety. If Westmoreland would have had his way the "exit strategy" would have been obvious, we weren't given the chance to finish the job.

Oh yes...if only we had 100,000 more troops we would have sent them packing !
We built up to the levels we had because of Westmorelands delusions

What garbage revisionist history. We beat them back after Tet
They would have kept coming back till the last man. That is what became obvious to most intelligent analysts after Tet. Even Walter Cronkite recognized the obvious.

There was no winning strategy in Viet Nam

Revisionist history??? They would have come back at some later date but if we had been allowed to finish the job at hand it would have taken them five to ten years to recover. Besides I wasn't agruing that point dick head, I was specifically addressing the situation after Tet. So try reading as opposed to reading in next time. Besides which what the fuck does an engineer know about military tactics and strategy?[/QUOTE]

An engineer who has worked for the Army for over 30 years

 

[Ringel05]

Oh yes...if only we had 100,000 more troops we would have sent them packing !
We built up to the levels we had because of Westmorelands delusions

What garbage revisionist history. We beat them back after Tet
They would have kept coming back till the last man. That is what became obvious to most intelligent analysts after Tet. Even Walter Cronkite recognized the obvious.

There was no winning strategy in Viet Nam

Revisionist history??? They would have come back at some later date but if we had been allowed to finish the job at hand it would have taken them five to ten years to recover. Besides I wasn't agruing that point dick head, I was specifically addressing the situation after Tet. So try reading as opposed to reading in next time. Besides which what the fuck does an engineer know about military tactics and strategy?[/QUOTE]

An engineer who has worked for the Army for over 30 years

Where did you go to Command Staff School?