How's Obama Doing?

Because you would say that we're "defending mmarsh" and that he obviously isn't capable of defending himself. Like you did the last time one of the "Obama faithful" answered a question not posed DIRECTLY to us... Even though the "Obama haters" are perfectly justified in ganging up one one "Obama faithful." Typical.
 
Chukpike said:
You are to funny.
Sales of GM up 4.1% over a year ago.
Ford Motor Co. reported its sales rose 3.1 percent, from the year before.

Of course October 2008 Ford and GM sales plunged about 45%. So your slight increase does what?
Click to expand...
Right now, any news is good news, and it seems to show that CfC may have been a catalyst for the rebound.

As for a response to your second statement, what we have accomplished in Afghanistan is one of the very few things Bush accomplished while in office: ousting the Taliban. They started to come back when we ignored them, now we're in a sticky situation eerily similar to the Soviet dilemma in the 1980s. How we get out is still in the works, but you have to agree that there is no easy answer as to what to do there.
 
Chupike: I think Mmarsh's point in the mission being accomplished is removing the Taliban and Al Qaeda from being the major force, or a viable force in Afghanistan.
Edit: yeah pretty much what TOG said.
 
How do I think Obama's doing? Well heres my honest opinion, Keep in mind I'm 46 and have seen a few presidents I lean toward Republican more than democrat although I claim neither.
President Obama is doing better than Former president Nixon did, and better than Jimmy Carter, and Billy Clinton, He's doing worse that President Regan and worse than President Bush (the 1st one)

I say he's better than Carter because all Carter did was sit back and let Iran take out people hostage and crash a few h53's in a poorly organized attempt to rescue them which totally failed and cost the lives of some of my fellow Naval personal. I say he's better than Clinton because I lived in Arkansas for a while, Clinton DID inhale, DID have sex with that woman, and a few others too. and between him and Hilary Arkansas' education system was 51'st out of 50 states! I saw not as good as Regan because as soon as Regan took the oath, the Iran hostage ordeal ended for teh simple fact Regan would have nuked them, and when Regan sent me to war I had the parts, supplies, training, and materials to do my job. Not as good at the first Bush cause he basically fixed the leftovers from Carter that Regan didn't have time to fix.
Do I think Obama could do a better job? Hell yea I think anybody could do a better job, if I was president everybody would say the next guy could do a better job its the same every time.
I don't like Obama, I don't like his denial of the muslim part of him that IS there, I think his health care plan is gonna kill my paycheck, and the next time he says the recession is over and the economy is getting better, I'd like to ***** slap him across the room and tell him to wake up stupid more peopel lose their jobs every day and nobody has any 401k left.
But there has only been one president that pleased most of the peopel and didn't screw up what the president before him did and that was George Washington, aAnd the only reason he didn't screw up what the guy before him did is the was the first, so there was nothing for him to mess with.
Do I agree with pulling out of Iraq? Yes I do, they wee so happy when we overthrew Hussein we weer the good guys, now all they do is kill us in the most cowardly way, so yea leave let them kill themselves and be taken over by the next tyrant thats waiting.
Afghanistan? ........well, I think the country has gotten a little off course in that country, weer looking for Osama Bin Laden, NOT playing democracy spreader there, I think Obama should tell Congress to either fully commit to that war or leave.
We haven't accomplished ANY mission in Afghanistan, we have accomplished NORTHING in either war until I see Bin Laden's head rolling down the street.
 
Wolfen, there's only one thing I'm going to mention from your statement, and that is that blowing yourself up for your cause is NOT cowardly.
 
Yeah that's for sure. Stainless steel balls.
Bad guys definitely but it starts to get funny when a guy who pushes a button is considered courageous and brave and a guy who has a bomb strapped to himself fighting against the world's best armies without an air force covering his ass is considered cowardly.
Courage isn't in short supply on our side either way.
It's like the Japanese of World War II. They were the bad guys but they were hard core as hell.
 
The Other Guy said:
As for a response to your second statement, what we have accomplished in Afghanistan is one of the very few things Bush accomplished while in office: ousting the Taliban. They started to come back when we ignored them, now we're in a sticky situation eerily similar to the Soviet dilemma in the 1980s. How we get out is still in the works, but you have to agree that there is no easy answer as to what to do there.
Click to expand...
So they are still there, but we accomplished the mission?

the_13th_redneck said:
Chupike: I think Mmarsh's point in the mission being accomplished is removing the Taliban and Al Qaeda from being the major force, or a viable force in Afghanistan.
Edit: yeah pretty much what TOG said.
Click to expand...

Ousted, removed as a major or viable force?

So, General McChrystal is on drugs wanting more troops.

I am certainly glad, that with your help I now understand what a brilliant point mmarsh made. :roll:LOL

One little question.
Who are the people we will be running from? Who are these minor players still killing Coalition forces in record numbers?

BTW what happened to Bin Laden?

Seems like a number of people have their head in the sand if they are willing to claim Mission Accomplished in Afghanistan:lol:

Would have been a lot more honest to say, "time to cut and run".
 
No the General's not on drugs.
That's the number of troops it takes to secure the whole country and it's not just the Taliban that's attacking our troops. The key is Pakistan but I don't think there's ever going to be a green light for conventional troops to go there.
And I don't see Afghanistan turning into a viable democracy in the foreseeable future.

I also have this feeling that it's increasingly other elements other than the Taliban which are engaging the coalition troops. So in an essence, the war is shifting from one that was to defeat the Taliban to one where the coalition forces are fighting multiple factions that resist influence from Kabul.
 
Last edited:
the_13th_redneck said:
No the General's not on drugs.
That's the number of troops it takes to secure the whole country and it's not just the Taliban that's attacking our troops. The key is Pakistan but I don't think there's ever going to be a green light for conventional troops to go there.
And I don't see Afghanistan turning into a viable democracy in the foreseeable future.

I also have this feeling that it's increasingly other elements other than the Taliban which are engaging the coalition troops. So in an essence, the war is shifting from one that was to defeat the Taliban to one where the coalition forces are fighting multiple factions that resist influence from Kabul.
Click to expand...

That's exactly right. We arent fighting the taliban or al Qaeda anymore, we are fighting indigenous people who refuse to be ruled by Kabul. And thats exactly what got the Soviets into trouble. They supported a central government (friendly to Moscow) that was fighting a civil war against people who wanted to be LEFT ALONE from both foreign armies and the Government in Kabul. This Afghan civil war has been going on for 30 years, what are we doing getting caught up in it?

These people are not a danger to us, the real al-qaeda (those responsible for 9-11) have since moved to Pakistan and other countries. Our mission was to destroy the terrorist camps and kick al Qaeda out of Afghanistan -that's been done. Its not our mission to be spreading democracy to people who don't want it.
 
mmarsh said:
That's exactly right. We arent fighting the taliban or al Qaeda anymore, we are fighting indigenous people who refuse to be ruled by Kabul. And thats exactly what got the Soviets into trouble. They supported a central government (friendly to Moscow) that was fighting a civil war against people who wanted to be LEFT ALONE from both foreign armies and the Government in Kabul. This Afghan civil war has been going on for 30 years, what are we doing getting caught up in it?

These people are not a danger to us, the real al-qaeda (those responsible for 9-11) have since moved to Pakistan and other countries. Our mission was to destroy the terrorist camps and kick al Qaeda out of Afghanistan -that's been done. Its not our mission to be spreading democracy to people who don't want it.
Click to expand...

Mmarsh in declaring "Mission Accomplished in Afghanistan" I wish to present you with the George W. Bush "Mission Accomplished Award"

View attachment 729click for larger view.

Congratulations, You and President Bush do have a lot in common, you both make statements unsupported with actual facts!:lol:

I am sure the Afghan people appreciate that you will leave them "free" of the nasty Taliban or "real al Qaeda"(just some cheap imitation). I hope you at least let us nuke the Poppy crops to eliminate the income used to fuel insurgencies elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
the_13th_redneck said:
No, the American economy would actually collapse.
Why do you think we put trade sanctions on countries we don't like? It's because if they don't trade, they start to become extremely poor. America really is no exception.
Click to expand...

They become extremely poor because they can't get a piece of the American market which is the largest market by far!! Let's look at history. When was America's heyday? Most would argue the 40's, 50's, and even 60's. Jobs were everywhere, people had money, and life was good. Why? No global market is why. Companies that wanted to sell to Amercians set up shop in America and American's supported those companies well. All the global market does is put all countries on a level playing field. The idea was that it would allow weaker countries to catch up to the powerhouses. Instead it is dragging the powerhouses down to the level of the weaker countries. You don't have to agree with me though. Just sit back and watch how things go.
 
Chukpike said:
So they are still there, but we accomplished the mission?
Click to expand...
We accomplished our mission of ousting the Taliban. That was one mission, however Bush's re-direction of attention to Iraq cost us our chance at mission two, that being destroying the Taliban and catching Bin Laden. Now, we can't leave, because if we do the Taliban will return and we'll be in the same situation we were in 15 years ago. So, we either have to crush the Taliban, prop up Karzai and get out, or get out now and wait & see what happens.
John Lydon said:
They become extremely poor because they can't get a piece of the American market which is the largest market by far!! Let's look at history. When was America's heyday? Most would argue the 40's, 50's, and even 60's. Jobs were everywhere, people had money, and life was good. Why? No global market is why. Companies that wanted to sell to Amercians set up shop in America and American's supported those companies well. All the global market does is put all countries on a level playing field. The idea was that it would allow weaker countries to catch up to the powerhouses. Instead it is dragging the powerhouses down to the level of the weaker countries. You don't have to agree with me though. Just sit back and watch how things go.
Click to expand...
The reason the powerhouse American companies failed was because of their Oligopoly on sales. They had no real competition, so they had no reason to update factories or methods of production. So, when the Japanese came up with a superior method to produce steel, for example, the US was left flat-footed. The reason life was good was because the US was the only major world power that didn't have its resources flattened or destroyed during WWII. But instead of continuing to innovate, the US chose to rest on its laurels, which had the unfortunate side effect of everyone else on earth catching up with and them surpassing them.

And actually, a level playing field ensures greater market success; that's Economics 101.
 
He'd be doin better if he wouldn't give "shout outs" Prior to speaking about dead and wounded soliders.

He'd be doing better if he knew the difference between the Medal of Honor and the Presidental Medal of Freedom.
 
He was scheduled to address a Native American Summit and his staff decided to fold his addressing the Nation about Hood into this appearence...okay whatever
He started very up beat and threw a " Shout out" to Dr. Joe Medicine Crow " a medal of honor winner".

He eventually got around to Ft Hood but he gave me the perception he was in major disconnect mode as he generally is when dealing or discussing the military, very little discernable emotion.

Firstly I believe the address concerning Ft Hood should have been seperate and stand alone.

Second While Dr Medicine Crow and elder in the Crow Nation and a decorated veteran indeed deserves recognition he has never been awarded the Medal of Honor. He has been awarded the Presidental Medal of Freedom..a civilian award the highest civilian award.

Third One does not win the Medal of Honor. One is awarded the Medal of Honor, one is presented the Medal of Honor, one receives the Medal of Honor.

Seems to me POTUS and staff could research crap like this a bit.
 
03USMC said:
He was scheduled to address a Native American Summit and his staff decided to fold his addressing the Nation about Hood into this appearence...okay whatever
He started very up beat and threw a " Shout out" to Dr. Joe Medicine Crow " a medal of honor winner".

He eventually got around to Ft Hood but he gave me the perception he was in major disconnect mode as he generally is when dealing or discussing the military, very little discernable emotion.

Firstly I believe the address concerning Ft Hood should have been seperate and stand alone.

Second While Dr Medicine Crow and elder in the Crow Nation and a decorated veteran indeed deserves recognition he has never been awarded the Medal of Honor. He has been awarded the Presidental Medal of Freedom..a civilian award the highest civilian award.

Third One does not win the Medal of Honor. One is awarded the Medal of Honor, one is presented the Medal of Honor, one receives the Medal of Honor.

Seems to me POTUS and staff could research crap like this a bit.
Click to expand...

Personally I think there should not have been ANY shout outs and the speech about Ft Hood should have come first, I do agree however with the flag being lowered until Veterans day. Even though I'm in Virginia, my flag went to half mast as soon as I saw the news.
 
I also agree with placing the flags at half staff.

But everytime he speaks about the military or too the military IMHO theres a disconnect there.

Don't even get me started on the 0400 photo op at Dover.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top