Idle passing thought conspiracy theory re: President Obama

[Liability]

In the news this morning we were informed that in the darkness of the early morning, President Obama went to the Dover Air Force Base to personally "greet" the soldiers recently fallen in Afghanistan. The Associated Press: Obama visits Dover AFB to honor fallen soldiers

So as not to be too misunderstood, let me note one thing up front: I think his action of going there to officially be present upon the arrival of the remains of our fallen warriors is a perfectly proper and commendable thing for President Obama to do as Commander in Chief.

I thank him for it.

BUT, the conspiracy notion entered my head anyway, so I thought I'd toss it out there to see how others think:

Is it possible that his action was a bit too staged?

Is it possible that he is already thinking of just tossing up his hands, making the "tough" decision to walk away from Afghanistan altogether and using his trip to the Air Force Base as the "motivation" for his "decision" to just get out of Afghanistan?

In that vein, what do you think the President is going to decide with regards to sending more troops to Afghanistan ala the McChrystal recommendation?

 

[Si modo]

Yup. I'd say that is highly probable.

 

[manu1959]

when the us presidental ally in afganistan looses the run off election .... he will have his wag the dog moment and obama will pull the plug....and you will see his visit again....with a statement that he can not watch more of our boys come home like this .....

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I think he wants to walk away. I just wish he would act like a "decider in chief" on this matter for the first time in his presidency

 

[rightwinger]

I also commend any President who honors our fallen soldiers.

First, I think Obama will delay any announcement till after next weeks elections.
I don't think he will walk away, but will authorize fewer additional troops than requested

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I also commend any President who honors our fallen soldiers.

First, I think Obama will delay any announcement till after next weeks elections.
I don't think he will walk away, but will authorize fewer additional troops than requested

do you think authorizing fewer troops then the general commanding the action requests is the correct choice?

 

[Shorebreak]

Is it possible that he is already thinking of just tossing up his hands, making the "tough" decision to walk away from Afghanistan altogether and using his trip to the Air Force Base as the "motivation" for his "decision" to just get out of Afghanistan?

In that vein, what do you think the President is going to decide with regards to sending more troops to Afghanistan ala the McChrystal recommendation?

Absolutely not. During the Presidential campaign, Obama and Biden both committed to finish what Bush started in Central Asia. In addition, the man whom Obama chose as his most senior foreign policy advisor wrote an entire book on US policy that mandates complete US geostrategic domination of Central Asia via military force. That is what Bush started. Obama needs more troops to finish it.

Obama will step up and expand our occupation of Central Asia. It's part of his stated mandate, and it's the policy direction of his most senior corporate globalist advisors.

 

[Liability]

Is it possible that he is already thinking of just tossing up his hands, making the "tough" decision to walk away from Afghanistan altogether and using his trip to the Air Force Base as the "motivation" for his "decision" to just get out of Afghanistan?

In that vein, what do you think the President is going to decide with regards to sending more troops to Afghanistan ala the McChrystal recommendation?

Absolutely not. During the Presidential campaign, Obama and Biden both committed to finish what Bush started in Central Asia. In addition, the man whom Obama chose as his most senior foreign policy advisor wrote an entire book on US policy that mandates complete US geostrategic domination of Central Asia via military force. That is what Bush started. Obama needs more troops to finish it.

Obama will step up and expand our occupation of Central Asia. It's part of his stated mandate, and it's the policy direction of his most senior corporate globalist advisors.

Interesting view.

He does seem to have committed some serious political capital (albeit a while ago) to doing as you predict.

But whether he chooses to now (pardon this turn of phrase) "stay the course" is open to real doubt.

I guess we will find out in short order.

I think those who have suggested that he may await the "election" may have a good point.

 

[Si modo]

Is it possible that he is already thinking of just tossing up his hands, making the "tough" decision to walk away from Afghanistan altogether and using his trip to the Air Force Base as the "motivation" for his "decision" to just get out of Afghanistan?

In that vein, what do you think the President is going to decide with regards to sending more troops to Afghanistan ala the McChrystal recommendation?

Absolutely not. During the Presidential campaign, Obama and Biden both committed to finish what Bush started in Central Asia. In addition, the man whom Obama chose as his most senior foreign policy advisor wrote an entire book on US policy that mandates complete US geostrategic domination of Central Asia via military force. That is what Bush started. Obama needs more troops to finish it.

Obama will step up and expand our occupation of Central Asia. It's part of his stated mandate, and it's the policy direction of his most senior corporate globalist advisors.

Interesting view.

He does seem to have committed some serious political capital (albeit a while ago) to doing as you predict.

But whether he chooses to now (pardon this turn of phrase) "stay the course" is open to real doubt.

I guess we will find out in short order.

I think those who have suggested that he may await the "election" may have a good point.

I would have agreed that he would not cut and run several weeks back but the fact that he has waited SO long could be viewed as quite calculated. Hell, October was the deadliest month. Pretty shitty, if true.

 

[Liability]

Absolutely not. During the Presidential campaign, Obama and Biden both committed to finish what Bush started in Central Asia. In addition, the man whom Obama chose as his most senior foreign policy advisor wrote an entire book on US policy that mandates complete US geostrategic domination of Central Asia via military force. That is what Bush started. Obama needs more troops to finish it.

Obama will step up and expand our occupation of Central Asia. It's part of his stated mandate, and it's the policy direction of his most senior corporate globalist advisors.

Interesting view.

He does seem to have committed some serious political capital (albeit a while ago) to doing as you predict.

But whether he chooses to now (pardon this turn of phrase) "stay the course" is open to real doubt.

I guess we will find out in short order.

I think those who have suggested that he may await the "election" may have a good point.

I would have agreed that he would not cut and run several weeks back but the fact that he has waited SO long could be viewed as quite calculated. Hell, October was the deadliest month. Pretty shitty, if true.

Indeed. VERY Shitty if true.

I'd pos rep you for that one, but am obliged to spread it around first.

 

[manu1959]

Absolutely not. During the Presidential campaign, Obama and Biden both committed to finish what Bush started in Central Asia. In addition, the man whom Obama chose as his most senior foreign policy advisor wrote an entire book on US policy that mandates complete US geostrategic domination of Central Asia via military force. That is what Bush started. Obama needs more troops to finish it.

Obama will step up and expand our occupation of Central Asia. It's part of his stated mandate, and it's the policy direction of his most senior corporate globalist advisors.

Interesting view.

He does seem to have committed some serious political capital (albeit a while ago) to doing as you predict.

But whether he chooses to now (pardon this turn of phrase) "stay the course" is open to real doubt.

I guess we will find out in short order.

I think those who have suggested that he may await the "election" may have a good point.

I would have agreed that he would not cut and run several weeks back but the fact that he has waited SO long could be viewed as quite calculated. Hell, October was the deadliest month. Pretty shitty, if true.

he can acomplish his central asia mandate and not be in afganistan......high body count...photo op....a different election result.....he is out of there....

 

[rightwinger]

I also commend any President who honors our fallen soldiers.

First, I think Obama will delay any announcement till after next weeks elections.
I don't think he will walk away, but will authorize fewer additional troops than requested

do you think authorizing fewer troops then the general commanding the action requests is the correct choice?

Best I can answer is ....How the hell do I know??

I haven't seen an exit strategy, haven't seen achievable milestones and timetables. All I have seen is a vague "we need to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people" BS

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama used the arrival of the honored fallen as a photo op. He is, after all, the Commander-in-Chief. I remember another C-i-C standing on an aircraft carrier deck with a hugh "Mission Accomplished" sign strung up behind him. So let's be real here, boys and girls.

 

[Liability]

Obama used the arrival of the honored fallen as a photo op. He is, after all, the Commander-in-Chief. I remember another C-i-C standing on an aircraft carrier deck with a hugh "Mission Accomplished" sign strung up behind him. So let's be real here, boys and girls.

I don't object to his going for a photo op. Using our fallen as stage props would be unseemly if that is what he was doing. But he has the right all the same.

Our former President got irrationally screwed by the biased and dishonest leftards in the media (and elsewhere) for declaring an accomplished mission to be "Mission Accomplished." But that's not on par with using our fallen warriors as stage props in any event.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I disagree with your dishonest analogy here, Liability, and will let it go at that. Have a nice day. And, by the by, your mission is not accomplished.

 

[Liability]

I disagree with your dishonest analogy here, Liability, and will let it go at that. Have a nice day. And, by the by, your mission is not accomplished.

My analogy? I made no analogy, ya dipstick.

You have a nice day, too,

And, I don't have a mission.

If you meant to suggest that the "Mission "which the banner declared "Accomplished" was not accomplished at that time, you'd be wrong in that. Not surprising.

 

[Shorebreak]

he can acomplish his central asia mandate and not be in afganistan......high body count...photo op....a different election result.....he is out of there....

You make an excellent point. If we can maintain control the Afghan government, we can maintain strategic dominance without risking further US lives.

The question then becomes:

"How do we maintain control if we don't have boots on the ground, when the "insurgents" and the "Taliban" are only insurgents and Taliban because they want to remove the puppet government that was placed by the foreign invaders?"

Here's how I would do it if I was a morally unscrupulous and ethically challenged globalist corporation who controls the US government:

I'd betray the leadership that I had placed in Kabul, perhaps by using my mainstream media to associate him directly or indirectly with US intelligence. I'd have my hand-selected replacement waiting in the wings, so that when my existing puppet is removed or assassinated, the Afghan people would believe that THEIR representative is now in charge and ready to represent THEM, rather than representing foreign corporate interests.

I's orchestrate my own coup d'etat, and I'd place my own representative in office. And I'd instruct the US media to place all the blame on the US President (who is on board with the plan), so the US people believe that Obama pulled us out of Afghanistan, and the Afghans believe that they are in control of their own government. Yet I'm the one pulling all of the strings and pushing all of the buttons.

Just like we did when Jimmy Carter helped place Chavez in Venezuela. The corporate globalists get a South American economic merge that never would have happened under the FTAA because the South American nations didn;t trust our corporate controlled leadership. Jimmy Carter helped place a guy in Venezuela who we demonized as an enemy, who then did what the FTAA could not accomplish.

I'd play the same game in Afghanistan. The only people who would have any clue are the ones orchestrating it, and the folks who spend lots of time looking for the connections behind the scenes, and understanding what plays and players were conveniently omitted from the media and the history books.

 

[geauxtohell]

I am not going to entertain the conspiracy theory, but I certainly think it is the role of the Commander In Chief to render honors to the fallen.

However, call me old fashioned, but it still annoys me to see the President saluting any soldier. That used to not be done. I think it (ever so slightly) undermines the concept of civilian control of the military.

I believe Reagan started this. I just personally disagree with it.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Now that Mr Obama has delayed his additional troop decision for about 60 days, he thinks we will all forget about it because he went out at Midnight to honor the dead? Sorry Mr Obama but it just doesn't work that way. This is your war now and your decision to change the "Rules of Engagement"; perhaps that is even the reason some of those troops were honored.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I am not going to entertain the conspiracy theory, but I certainly think it is the role of the Commander In Chief to render honors to the fallen.

However, call me old fashioned, but it still annoys me to see the President saluting any soldier. That used to not be done. I think it (ever so slightly) undermines the concept of civilian control of the military.

I believe Reagan started this. I just personally disagree with it.

I wouldn't mind any President saluting a soldier, as long as they had also worn the uniform at some point.