In Afghanistan, says our apologizer in chief.

Quote :

"President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview. "I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur," Obama told ABC News."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/23/obama-victory-necessarily-goal-afghanistan/

I bet the troops fighting there beg to differ Oh Glorious One. I think the term victory troubles him because he will just have to apologize for it later, since he cant seem to be proud of anything we do. Oh and last I checked, The Emperor never signed the surrender document on the USS Missouri.

7/24/2009 2:36:56 PM

Apologizer in Chief

Nice one, dude!

Quote :

"The enemy facing U.S. and Afghan forces isn't so clearly defined, he explained. "We're not dealing with nation states at this point. We're concerned with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Al Qaeda's allies," he said. "So when you have a non-state actor, a shadowy operation like Al Qaeda, our goal is to make sure they can't attack the United States.""

Pffft. Rationality, honesty and pragmatism FTL.

Quote :

"The Obama administration this year stepped up U.S. military operations in the country"

Just another example of Obama being weak on defending our freedoms and protecting us from terrorists.

Quote :

""We are confident that if we are assisting the Afghan people and improving their security situation, stabilizing their government, providing help on economic development ... those things will continue to contract the ability of Al Qaeda to operate. And that is absolutely critical," Obama told ABC News."

Unbelievable. Can't wait to hear how he apologizes for this.

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 2:55 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2009 2:37:54 PM

^^ haha, you are dumb.

7/24/2009 2:42:24 PM

LOL let's not hurt the terrorist's feelings.

7/24/2009 2:44:02 PM

^^^^ I'm sorry dude, but do you realize what "invokes the notion" means?
Although you do raise an interesting point that clear objectives need to be laid out. That was something that pissed me off so much about the Bush Regime was their ambiguous war policy.

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 2:44 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2009 2:44:32 PM

7/24/2009 2:44:45 PM

Quote :

"I bet the troops fighting there beg to differ Oh Glorious One."

What they think doesn't fucking matter.
Troops just follow orders. They are pawns.

7/24/2009 2:46:43 PM

if you can't have victory, then you can't have losers. with no losers nobody's feelings get hurt. with no feelings getting hurt you don't have to apologize to anyone.

Looks like Obama's just setting himself up so he doesn't have to apologize to another nation down the road.

7/24/2009 2:49:25 PM

^Dude, you're an idiot. He's the Apologizer in Chief. He lives to apologize to nations, idiot. He can't wait to apologize to the nation of Alqaedaban after we completely defeat them and their head of state Osama Bin Laden signs an armistice.

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 3:13 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2009 2:52:36 PM

Quote :

"Just another example of Obama being weak on defending our freedoms."

Look on bright side. He may be week on defending our freedoms, but he's great at taking them.

7/24/2009 2:53:22 PM

Quote :

"He may be week on defending our freedoms, but he's great at taking them. "

I think you are confusing Obama with the previous administration. Obama only wants to steal some of our monies to fund welfare queens.

7/24/2009 2:58:06 PM

Which freedoms have you lost so far?

7/24/2009 2:58:11 PM

Quote :

"Look on bright side. He may be week [sic] on defending our freedoms, but he's great at taking them."

110% agreed. I can't even begin to list all the freedoms he's taken from me.

Seriously, I can't list them

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 3:00 PM. Reason : ,]

7/24/2009 2:58:12 PM

Is the list of stolen freedoms so long that it's taking over 20 minutes to compile?

7/24/2009 3:09:03 PM

Quote :

"we must win VICTORY over the turrists they're freedom haters, they hate freedom ...... Mission Accomplished"

-Former President GWB

7/24/2009 3:11:59 PM

Quote :

"Oh and last I checked, The Emperor never signed the surrender document on the USS Missouri."

No one's saying he did.

7/24/2009 3:14:17 PM

I always find it humorous when someone with Republican in their username talks politics...lol

7/24/2009 3:14:58 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3MiD_U4CHQ

7/24/2009 3:17:42 PM

Republicans aren't allowed to talk about politics?

7/24/2009 3:17:42 PM

^ Republican18 used to be reasonable at one point.

It's only in the past 7 months or so, IIRC, that he has become Palin's understudy.

7/24/2009 3:17:56 PM

Quote :

"I think the term victory troubles him because he will just have to apologize for it later"

or maybe because he realizes that the last bumfuck president got us into two wars with absolutely no plan for getting out or with the foresight to see what kind of fucking mess they would turn into?

7/24/2009 3:23:15 PM

Why don't some of you stop attacking Republican18 and address his point? If victory isn't the goal, then what the fuck is?



BTW, the Japanese emporer didn't surrender, the foreign minister did. But it's Obama, right? Facts don't matter!

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 3:26 PM. Reason : ADDRESS THE OP!!!1]

7/24/2009 3:25:43 PM

Notions =/ facts.

7/24/2009 3:29:42 PM

it's not even clear what victory would be defined as, so its hard to get too upset about this. if it bothers you that much just rent a aircraft carrier and a hollywood producer and declare us victorious.

7/24/2009 3:29:57 PM

Quote :

"Why don't some of you stop attacking Republican18 and address his point? If victory isn't the goal, then what the fuck is?"

How can you define victory against a non-State entity? Is Osama or one Al-Qaeda's top officials going to sign a treaty? Are they going to lay down their arms?

This is all really semantics anyway.

This looks some objectives, though they aren't traditionally definable. Then again there aren't cities or ports to capture and map lines to cross...

Quote :

""We are confident that if we are assisting the Afghan people and improving their security situation, stabilizing their government, providing help on economic development ... those things will continue to contract the ability of Al Qaeda to operate. And that is absolutely critical," Obama told ABC News."

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 3:33 PM. Reason : x]

7/24/2009 3:31:51 PM

Victory = winning the crap out of the hearts and minds of Afghans?

7/24/2009 3:35:18 PM

Quote :

"Victory = winning the crap out of the hearts and minds of Afghans?"

That would be my guess. If there are no victory conditions why stay there at all?

7/24/2009 3:36:58 PM

Now if only we could quantify exactly how much crap is contained in the minds and hearts of Afghans, we'd be in business.

7/24/2009 3:40:54 PM

I thought Afghanistan was just a military jumping off point for Iran's oil fields anyway

7/24/2009 3:43:06 PM

Quote :

"Why don't some of you stop attacking Republican18 and address his point? If victory isn't the goal, then what the fuck is?"

Protecting our freedom and keeping us safe is the goal. This isn't a traditional war...this is no different than the war on drugs or the war on stupid.

7/24/2009 4:13:18 PM

thinking there is a way to win any of this is the problem.

7/24/2009 4:14:51 PM

^^ The goal is to stabilize the country so the people their can thrive. There is no single cohesive force we're fighting that we can claim "victory" for defeating. Our "victory" is the success of the Afghan people, through the defeat of the terrorist elements. And considering that Obama now polls higher than Bin Laden in the region, something Bush never managed, this goal is more achievable than ever.

It has nothing to do with not wanting to "offend terrorists" like our resident Helms cock-jockey claimed, or trying to "apologize" for anything like what Republican18 was trying to assert.

But I guess I can't really expect much thought from conservatives these days when their leaders are people like Palin and Limbaugh.

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2009 4:22:58 PM

wow, obama has been polled to being more approved than osama in muslim countries than bush was polled over osama

who saw that coming?

c'mon, really?

7/24/2009 4:27:30 PM

^^uh...are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?

7/24/2009 4:28:49 PM

people would rather not be terrorists?

7/24/2009 4:28:53 PM

i would rather not

7/24/2009 4:30:30 PM

you would rather muslims like osama more than obama?

7/24/2009 4:40:21 PM

Quote :

"Protecting our freedom and keeping us safe is the goal"

makes me cringe every time I hear it.

7/24/2009 4:40:55 PM

Why are the anti-Obama threads always full of failure and stupidity?

There are good conservative arguments out there against Obama. This crap is just rehashed Hannity talking points.

7/24/2009 4:45:05 PM

^^I thought that was why your mighty leader bush went to war in the first place? *shrug*

7/24/2009 4:49:35 PM

Quote :

"Why are the anti-Obama threads always full of failure and stupidity?"

cause 90% of TSB is liberal so the OP never even gets a fair shake...he just gets ganged up on with lots of sarcasm and supposedly clever wit

The OP's ONE SINGLE POST does not comprise the fullness of this thread's failure and stupidity

7/24/2009 4:51:56 PM

^^Cringed then as well.

7/24/2009 4:53:27 PM

Ok Twista, here is your chance... what milestones can we reach that you define as victory in Afghanistan?

7/24/2009 4:54:21 PM

I don't know, but I'm sure the generals on the ground who know more than all of us have some milestones and objectives

He's probably avoiding the word 'victory' because he saw what happened last time a President claimed victory

or did the Bush banner on the battleship say "Mission Accomplished", i cant recall

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 4:57 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2009 4:55:39 PM

I bet Obama never talks to the generals on the ground. He hates the military.

7/24/2009 4:57:30 PM

Still though, it doesn't seem like the wisest choice of words in terms of affecting the morale of the soldiers fighting in Afghanistan.

Perhaps he "could've calibrated those words differently"

7/24/2009 4:59:13 PM

^ haha, are you kidding? Where do you get this from?

Obama isn't saying we aren't victorious, he's saying that victory in the sense that people like you are thinking can't happen, because of the nature of the fight. THat doesn't mean individual battles can't be victorious, or the overall endeavor can't be labeled as a success.

And in any case, the troops there know better than anyone else that the true victory is the empowerment of the Aghan people.

7/24/2009 5:22:31 PM

OP: Explain exactly to me who you expect to surrender to Obama on bended knee, should the occasion arise. This should be interesting.


...I really wish that people would criticize the many substantial flaws of Obama's policy, instead of constantly bringing up non-issues. Seriously, are you guys just playing decoy or what?

[Edited on July 24, 2009 at 6:06 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2009 6:04:43 PM

i never used the word surrender, i said he said VICTORY was not a goal. Victory does not equal surrender. Victory means crushing our opponents and winning.

7/24/2009 11:12:58 PM

Again then, what exactly marks a discrete condition of "victory?" It's plenty easy to do that for a state-level actor, with organized forces. There are official channels for this.

How exactly does one extract definitive "victory" from irregular forces operating under no particular government? Seriously, do have a fixed number of kills, or days between armed conflicts, or what?

This doesn't exactly strike me as the same as a traditional armed conflict, where victory is a discrete condition. It's more like counter-insurgency or the like - there is no discrete "victory" condition so much as one where attacks wane in strength and frequency to the point of relative stability.

7/25/2009 2:07:46 AM