About Me

Name: MAXINE
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Barack Obama And His Perfect Storm Of Peace In Iraq

Senator Barack Obama and Terry Moran of ABC News - "I've always reserved the right, uh, to say---let's say that ethnic, uh, ethnic fighting broke out once again---I've reserved the right to say---I don't--I'm not going to stand idly by if genocide is occurring.”, said Barack Obama. Image Credit: ABC News via my.barackobama.com

Barack Obama And His Perfect Storm Of Peace In Iraq

In an interview with ABC’s Terry Moran for Nightline (July 21, 2008), Barack Obama showed why he really isn’t ready for “Primetime” let alone “Nightline”.

Junior Senator Barack Obama will not say he was wrong about his assessment of the Bush Administration’s implementation of the military operation that has become known as “The Surge”. This is the operation where an additional 30,000 or so United States soldiers were placed in Iraq in order to stop the strengthening growth of anti-Iraq insurgent (Al Qaeda) combatants and provide security for the newly elected government of Iraq to begin to operate.

Eighteen months ago, it was estimated that there were 12,000 armed combatants working throughout the country to disrupt the newly formed government of Iraq. Today, the estimate is that there may be 1,200 armed combatants holed up in the western provinces of Iraq. One year ago in June 2007, we lost over seventy soldiers to violence and IED roadside bombs throughout Iraq … June 2008 saw that number drop to five.

Moran noted that Obama had claimed that the surge "would not make a significant dent in the violence."

Barack Obama insists that the reason the violence is down in Iraq is due to a convergence of factors that he could not anticipate happening … OH, and some “terrific work by our troops”.

The Perfect Storm of factors the junior Senator sites are disturbing ---

“… but the Sunni awakening in which a whole host of Sunni tribal leaders decided that they had had enough with Al Qaeda, in the Shii’a community the militias standing down to some degrees. So what you had is a combination of political factors inside of Iraq that then came right at the same time as terrific work by our troops. Had those political factors not occurred, I think that my assessment would have been correct.”

Sorry Barack, the Sunni tribal leaders could not have “had enough” and say so if the additional 30,000 troops were not on the ground to provide security and combative strength. The Shii’a community mailtias would not have stood down if there wasn’t a very capable and ready force (bolstered by 30,000 United States military troops on the ground) aligned against their violent power grabbing agenda.

Further, Barack Obama had this to say as it relates to what HE would do if he were President and the military was pulled out of Iraq … and the violence began to increase inside the country ---

"But," asked Moran,"if the country had pursued your policy of withdrawing in the face of this horrific violence, what do you think Iraq would look like now?"

Obama said it would be hard to speculate. "The Sunnis might have made the same decisions at that time. The Shii’as might have made some similar decisions based on political calculation. There was ethnic cleansing in Baghdad that actually took the violence level down," he said.

Obama also told Moran that there were circumstances under which he could revise his instruction to U.S. generals to begin withdrawing combat brigades at the pace of one-to-two per month.

"I've always reserved the right, uh, to say---let's say that ethnic, uh, ethnic fighting broke out once again---I've reserved the right to say---I don't--I'm not going to stand idly by if genocide is occurring. I'm not going to stand idly by if vital United States interests are at stake. Um, so in that sense yes, I retain the flexibility anyone who in the job of commander in chief is constantly reassessing facts, risks, and so forth."

--- So, basically Barack Obama advocates that our military go back to Iraq and start a third war insde Iraq.

This scenario actually would be an insult to Jimmy Carter and the suggestion that a Barack Obama presidency would result in a second term for the Carter Administration.

Actually, a Barack Obama Administration would be of a greater failure than a Carter’s Second Term.

By the way, the "Surge" has ended.
Resources Here, Here, and Here>>

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The “I”- “Me”, uh, Barack, uh, Oba, uh, ma

Barack Obama sits down to speak with the editorial board of The Military Times. Image Credit: YouTube Account, pe11201 - Video by M. Scott Mahaskey / Military Times Staff

The “I”- “Me”, uh, Barack, uh, Oba, uh, ma

Somebody please ask junior Senator Barack Obama what he means when he says that contract worker support of our war effort should be just used for kitchenwork and automobile repair. Does Barack Obama actually know what kind of invaluable service outfits like Blackwater perform in the support of our efforts in ferreting out zeolots who want to do harm to the Iraqi citizens we are trying to liberate?

This is what Barack said to The Military Times, July 2, 2008:

There is room for private contractors to work in the mess hall, providing basic supplies and doing some logistical work that might have been done in-house in the past. I am troubled by the use of private contractors when it comes to potential armed engagements... I think it creates some difficult morale issues when you've got private contractors getting paid 10 times what an Army private's getting paid for work that carries similar risks…

Does Barck even understand what Blackwater does ... they are NOT mercenaries. They do not replace the activity of our armed forces but actually complement the effort through special tasks best left to security professionals.

But Barack continued:

… When it comes to our special forces, what we've seen is that it's a potential drain of some of our best-trained special forces, and you can't blame them if they can make so much more working for Blackwater than they can working as a master sergeant. That, I think is a problem.

Q: Blackwater would argue that they're a bargain: that you get a higher level of ability, that they can put people there, they can keep top-level talent there perpetually.

A: I am not arguing that there are never going to be uses for private contractors in some circumstances. What I am saying is if you start building a military premised on the use of private contractors and you start making decisions on armed engagement based on the availability of private contractors to fill holes and gaps that over time you are, I believe, eroding the core of our military's relationship to the nation and how accountability is structured. I think you are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is a monopoly on violence. And to set those kinds of precedents, I think, will lead us over the long term into some troubled waters.

Barack Obama doesn’t know… what he doesn’t know. What does he mean when he says I think you are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is a monopoly on violence. WHAT?!

War is war and to be truthful, there is no monopoly of violence when bullets start flying or when people are strapping bombs to themselves to blow innocent citizens up. What does exist is an environment where specialized talents are placed into use to enable our effort to push back and win more efficiently and effectively. This is not much different than how American Rules football is put together, where specialized talent helps to move the ball down the field.

The same interview showed that Barack also does not understand the difference between an ally and an enemy.

He continued, And if you look at costs and benefits and if you look at the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, overall I think it was a bad decision on the part of our commander in chief.
----
Those are the kinds of decisions that are going to be coming up in the future.

We're going to have to make decisions about Iran, we're going to have to make decisions about Pakistan.

The capacity of the next commander in chief to forge alliances so that we can, when we act militarily, act in the ways that we did during the first Gulf War, a war in which, not only were our casualties kept low, but it effectively cost us almost nothing in terms of taxpayer dollars.

For us to think in a forward-looking way about energy, and understanding the strategic geopolitical implications of our failure to implement a serious energy strategy in this country.

Our ability to engage the Muslim world in a serious way so that we are tamping down anti-American sentiment even as we recognize that there is always going to be an element of extremism that can only be dealt with militarily.


Pakistan is an ally … Iran is an enemy. Also, what happened to Mr. Negotiation when he now comes out and says - Our ability to engage the Muslim world in a serious way so that we are tamping down anti-American sentiment … is this type of comment an example of his famous promise of “CHANGE”?

I must add that Barack has become increasing difficult to listen to . He used the “uh” transition filler eleven times in a single 90-second segment of this interview (as observed by Hugh Hewitt on his program this afternoon). I do not care if this becomes Obama's first term or Carter's Second Term if Barack gets into office ... four years of listening to him alone without a teleprompter will ruin the country.

The audio of this interview is very telling as to the level of what the junior Senator Barack Obama does NOT know.

Additional proof on how hard it is to listen to Senator Barack Obama - he says "uh" nine, or ten times in this fifty-five second clearification of his position on Iraq (some would say flip-flop).

Video Credit: YouTube account 3873uj201, added July 07, 2008
 

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

“Facts Don’t Matter” Says The “Leftosphere”

AARP's Divided We Fail Mascot - Please notice which political animal symbol ... and part of the political animal symbol mascot (the head, with brain) has its feet firmly planted on the ground [just the facts]. - Image Credit: AARP
 
“Facts Don’t Matter” Says The “Leftosphere”

Facts Don’t Matter!
- A stunning revelation stated almost in emphatic unison from three of the most respected and read political weblog posters presenting at Blogworld & New Media Expo. This bold announcement came out at a lightly-attended conference module held as part of the “Political Track” at Blogworld last week.
 
Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (MAXINE)
 
The module held Friday, November 9, 2007, in a Las Vegas Convention Center conference room was entitled “Right vs Left: Who’s Winning The Battle Of The Blogosphere?” It featured a discussion panel of six political commentators (three from the conservative viewpoint and three from the liberal, uh, progressive viewpoint).
 
The “Right vs Left: Who’s Winning The Battle Of The Blogosphere?” panel moderated by Hugh Hewitt. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (MAXINE)
 
The members of the panel included on the Right - John Hinderaker (Powerline), Dean Barnett (contributor to TownHall.com, Weekly Standard, & National Review), Henry Copeland (Pressflex, Blogads), and on the Left, Jeralyn Merritt (TalkLeft), Joe Sudbay (AMERICAblog), and Jerome Armstrong (MyDD). Moderating the discussion panel was radio talkshow host, Hugh Hewitt. He conducted the session using a question / answer approach that allowed panel members to answer each question in rotation. The subject matter was very interesting, the questions posed by Hugh Hewitt were very probative, and the panel members responded with surprising candor. Midway through the event, audience participation was encouraged intermittently, with questions and additional comments coming from the floor.
 
Daily KOS Logo - Image Credit: Daily KOS via Wikipedia
 
Even though the audience for the “Right vs Left: Who’s Winning” session was lightly attended, the members in the audience included some of the most notable political players in the “Blogosphere”, including representatives from Red State and contributors to Pajamas Media. Perhaps the most outspoken audience figure was Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, founder of Daily KOS, who assumed a bit of a role as frequent “admonisher of the moderator” and additional spokesperson for the left.
 
Pajamas Media podium logo used at the Blogworld & New Media Expo tradeshow floor. Image Credit: Edmund Jenks (MAXINE)

Among the more interesting topics discussed:

1. New Media (NM) and Mainstream Media (MSM)
- How can new media superstars be brought together with mainline old media? Or are we looking at an Echo Chamber VS. Monopoly situation? During this discussion, it was unanimously observed that the Left has a distinct edge over the Right. With only four (4) Rightist bloggers in Washington D.C. and thirty (30) Leftist bloggers, panelists agreed that the Leftist bloggers are better organized and more collaborative, helping the Left to widely communicate its positions. The New Media portal strength of the Drudge Report was also seen as a factor in limiting the growth of Rightist bloggers in D.C. Panelists seemed to agree that activities of the new media world are distinct, and pointed to the social impact of “blog swarms”, “action alerts” and eventual movement of new issues from the new media world over into the mainstream media world. It was never made clear who the initiator of the message really is … MSM or NM.
Image Credit: Townhall.com & Hugh Hewitt
 
2. Media’s Treatment of the War in Iraq – A question from the audience was asked, “What about the recent facts on the ground in Iraq? What happens if developments in Iraq go well? Do these facts change or color the effort to pull all of our troops out when it appears we might become victorious for the hearts and minds of the people of Iraq?” The responses to this question from the audience member were shocking. First to respond, Jeralyn Merritt stated, in unequivocal terms “Facts Don’t Matter!” The questioner from the audience interjected, “What? Facts don’t matter?” Merritt responded again, “That’s right. Facts Don’t Matter. We want our troops home. Until they are home, the war was just a mistake.” Hewitt then asked the other members on the panel who were representing the Left, “Do facts matter in Iraq?” Not only did the other two panelists from the Left (Sudbay and Armstrong) repeat the phrase in agreement, “No, the facts don’t matter”, but Daily KOS founder Markos Zuniga (from the floor) weighed in by repeating the phrase loudly, to the surprise of a few of us in the room. “No. The Facts Don’t Matter.” The unison was stunning in its word-for-word declaration. This is more than just a talking point. It is a template. Leftist parties present (on the panel and from the audience) repeatedly stated that 70% of the American populace want the troops out of Iraq and that the US should end the war there now without regard to any other issue.
 
Image Credit: BlogAds
 
This event was eye-opening for us at MAXINE. We suspect that the real reason the opinion weblog sites on the Left operate in unison lies in the fact that Mainstream Media is firmly based in promoting Left-of-center political viewpoints. With the MSM as a powerful and centering force, the “Leftosphere” is able to act as an unfettered and undisciplined subset, “MSM.2”. Further, there is no such thing as an echo chamber for opinions from the Left but with this union, it is more like a megaphone or P.A. effect. The same thoughts and opinions broadcasted and then re-broadcasted through the different mediums. One of the most disturbing developments of this POV is that on-air news personalities now feel they have to jump into blogging in order to remain relevant. This is a mistake if the MSM news outlets want to be perceived as (just the facts) Real News Outlets! If this catches on, the MSM will become a subset of … your guessed it … ITSELF!
 
Image Credit: AMERICAblog.com website
 
The above “Facts Don’t Matter” incident stands as a glaring example of the unfettered and undisciplined nature of the Leftosphere. With this template that “Facts Don’t Matter”, it makes one wonder what other issues that affect our safety, our culture and our lives is this applied to? It is time to think about the next election, and it is time to think about it with this “Facts Don’t Matter” template as a backdrop. Original Posting>> http://maxine-log.blogspot.com/2007/11/facts-dont-matter-says-leftosphere.html
 
 
 

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »