From this moment forward I am categorically removing my support for President Obama. The tripling of troops in Afghanistan under his watch has absolutely destroyed my faith in him as an independent thinker, diplomat, and logical man, a president who has the best interest of the citizens of America in mind.
To me, it's obvious and simple, what else could President Obama do but what he did in Afghanistan and commit more troops? We are in two horrible wars. They were very poorly thought out wars and more abhorrently, we were lied to by the former administration. Bottom line we were put in a veritable no-win situation.
So now what to do? We know that people who wish us harm are in Afghanistan, in Pakistan and many other places. The military says we need to fight them. So President Obama is doing what anyone would do, he's giving the military enough rope to succeed or hang themselves. I don't think he even believes we'll succeed, but he knows there's a chance, albeit a small one.
And more importantly he gave OUR MILITARY a date he wants them to get out. I think that anyone in his position, learning what he must now know (that none of us know) such as the danger of nuclear attacks from terrorists, would have done the same. The difference with this President, is that he made the decision carefully, over time and came to a grim conclusion to proceed. That's not flag waving or hawkish behavior as was common with the last administration. That's intelligent behavior, no rallying cries. For him to be derided for being intelligent, for taking the time to make a careful decision is armchair quarterbacking, but unfortunately not about the triviality of sports, but regarding the importance of our very human existence on Earth which is threatened by terrorists.
We should "back off this man", he's doing his best. Being an armchair quarterback is embarrassing when one is talking about our nation and our world surviving this crisis. Save your armchair quarterbacking for football.
IN OUR OWN WORDS
A Collection of Stories and Photographs
From Military Families of the
Iraq and Afghanistan Wars
To our President and First Lady
On February 27, 2009, in his speech from Camp Lejeune, President Obama said, "…my strategy for ending the war in Iraq does not end with military plans or diplomatic agendas; it endures through our commitment to uphold our sacred trust with every man and woman who has served in Iraq.... And for you and your families, the war does not end when you come home. It lives on in memories of your fellow Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines who gave their lives…. You and your families have done your duty; now a grateful nation must do ours….”
“We also know that service does not end with the person wearing the uniform. In her visits with Military Families across the country, my wife Michelle has learned first hand about the unique burden that your families endure every day. I want you to know that Military Families are a top priority for Michelle and me, and they will be a top priority for my administration…. Each of you has your own story. And that story is now a part of the history of the United States of America..."
Recently, on a show from Walter Reed, Oprah talked about Military Families, reminding Americans that every day when we listen to the news, we hear another number, and we go on with our lives. Behind the statistics are real families. An injured service member at Walter Reed said, “No soldier comes back the same - it is a family process. Go to the floor upstairs where the injuries are not seen. They are just as injured as those with physical injuries."
As President Obama works to end the war in Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan continues, the faces and every day lives of Military Families who wait at home will remain at the center of the war and our stories will continue. During war, military family experiences are so much more than can ever be communicated in news reports, care packages, legislation, military or political strategies.
Our MYBO/OFA group, “Military Families Need Obama as We Share the Human Faces of War,” led by military parents and siblings, invites military spouses, children, grandparents, cousins, aunts, and uncles to be a part of "IN OUR OWN WORDS," a special collection of stories and photographs that will be presented to our President and First Lady.
"IN OUR OWN WORDS" will share the human faces of the consequences of war from the hearts and souls of those who live it everyday. It is intended to serve as a tribute to the lives of Military Families of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and will include both our inspirational and heart breaking experiences, with a special section honoring those service members who have been killed while at war. Together, Military Families will create "IN OUR OWN WORDS” with the hope that as we share our stories, it will lift us all up.
Stories and photographs will only be used in this project to be presented to our President and First Lady. They will not be distributed to any other group, organization, or the media. To learn more about how to participate in this project, please contact one of us:
Debbie: DebbieIngraham@gmail.com
Jessica: JessicaIngraham@gmail.com
Terry: Tdaniel333@comcast.net
I'm a bit saddened to notice that Cindy Sheehan hasn't been getting around much anymore. Now that we may need her more than ever!
AIR FORCE * ARMY * COAST GUARD * MARINES * NAVY
If you are going to be in Washington DC during the Inauguration you may want to attend the Blogfest event to Help Wounded Veterans. see http://www.usaservice.org/page/event/detail/4jqt3
Where were you when the world stopped turning?
“If you want to be important—wonderful. If you want to be recognized—wonderful. If you want to be great—wonderful. But, recognize that he who is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Ebenezer Baptist Church, 4 February 1968.
HELP WOUNDED VETERANSSource: David Apperson, LIFE CLOUD
http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/post/president/gGxFK9
In honor of military pigeons throughout history, I post on this Christmas Eve, information produced by Otto Meyer, U.S. Army (Ret), and supplied by the ARPU, on the American Hero “G.I. JOE” -
“G.I. JOE”American Hero
“G.I. JOE” is the most outstanding military pigeon in history and is credited with saving the lives of at least 100 British troops during World War II. The British 56th Brigade was scheduled to attack the city of Colvi Vecchia, Italy, at 10 a.m., October 18, 1943.
The U.S. Air Support Command was scheduled to bomb the city to soften the entrance for the British Brigade. The Germans retreated leaving only a small rear guard and as a result the British troops entered the city with little resistance and occupied it ahead of schedule.
All attempts to cancel the bombings of the city, made by radio and other means of communication, had failed. Little “G.I. JOE” was released with the important message to cancel the bombing. He flew 20 miles back to the U.S. Air Support Command base in 20 minutes and arrived just as our planes were warming up to take off. If he had arrived a few minutes later, it might have been a different story.
Gen. Mark Clark, Commanding the U.S. Fifth Army, estimated that “G.I. JOE” saved the lives of at least 100 of our British allies. In November 1946, “G.I. JOE” was shipped from Fort Monmouth, N.J. to London, England, where he was cited and awarded the Dickin Medal for Gallantry by the Lord Mayor of London. “G.I. JOE” is the only bird or animal in the United States to receive this high award.
“G.I. JOE,” a dark checker pied white flight cock, was hatched March 24, 1943, at the Pigeon Section in Algiers, Algeria, North Africa. Later he was taken to the Tunisian front, then to Bizerte, and from there to the Italian front.
After World War II, “G.I. JOE” was housed in the Churchill Loft, U.S. Army’s “Hall of Fame” at Ft. Monmouth, N.J., along with 24 other pigeon heroes. In March of 1957, the remaining pigeon heroes were placed with different zoological gardens throughout the U.S.A.
“G.I. JOE” was placed with the Detroit Zoological Gardens where he died June 3, 1961, at the age of 18. “G.I. JOE” was returned, mounted, and placed in the Historical Center, Meyer Hall, at Fort Monmouth, N.J.
--- Otto Meyer, U.S. Army (Retired)--- Former Commander of the U.S. Army Pigeon Service
I dedicate this inspiring story of courage and determination of the pigeon named “G.I. JOE” to the generations of troops that will secure the success of the 44th President of the United States.
May the message of peace come to The White House and spread throughout the land.
Merry Christmas Everyone,
David Apperson, Life Cloud Discussions
American Legion - memberARPU - lifetime memberVFW - life member
Source: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/post/president/gGxKt3
The war in Afghanistan can not be won by simply injecting more troops in the country and i believe many top officials would agree that it's a different sort war being fought. However it is clear that the troop levels need to be increased to provide reinforcements for some strategic outposts while readjusting the overall manner in which the war is being waged.
Two separate wars are being conducted and neither of them are having a positive effect for the people and government of Afghanistan. One being the war against the drugs the second being a war against Al Qaeda and other tribes. Both need to be realigned to arrive to a point where the Afghani people will be able to rule their own nation.
Civilian casualties have been a prolific result of the war being waged and that has played into the hands of Al Qaeda. Most of the civilian casualties have been a result of bomb campaigns committed by the United States or killings attributed to terrorists. The war becomes more complex given hostile nations surrounding Afghanistan that have been on the tip of the foreign policy's spear during the President Bush's administration and much of the other presidents. Troop levels are a small adjustment when looking at the overall picture and how the needs to be readjusted but troop levels is a thing that might need a slight increase especially if key allies are going to be pulling out.
Mr Barack Obama ran his presidential campaign on the short and moving title of Change can happen. Well, the change is finall here and we all, including those who are not Americans and are living far far away in the east, are now waiting with bated breath as to how the future would unfold for all of us.
Mr Obama is yet to come clear on what his policy towards the subcontinent would be. However, there is just one thing i want to take up right now and that is his statement regarding shifting American troops from Iraq and bringing them in to Afghanistan.
I, as a citizen of India and having been lived in close proximity of militancy, as is prevalent in Kashmir, I would like to let you know that more troops are not going to be the solution to the crisis that has engulfed Afghanistan and its neighbours, including Pakistan and India.
We all need peace, i guess and we have long been forced into believing that peace would come through more soldiers walking on the roads. Well, that is not happening. we have been having troops for the past almost two decades in Kashmir and it is not close to peace yet.
So, please do not bring more troops to Afghanistan, bring development, employment and governance, if you must.
We are also told that troops are necessary in Afghanistan because Laden has to be found. but for the past seven years now, no amount of allied forces have been able to search him out.
I have a suggestion to make: If you bring real peace to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, you will not have to search for Laden, people will search for him themselves and bring him to justice, as they should.
Please give it a thought because we have had enough wars now.....
On John McCain's website, under his strategy for "victory" in Iraq, McCain says:
The United States must also bolster its regional military posture to make clear to Iran our determination to protect our forces and deter Iranian intervention.
Unbelievable! It sounds like he's asking for a troop increase. What else is a military "posture?"
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/FDEB03A7-30B0-4ECE-8E34-4C7EA83F11D8.htm
The Link to this statement on McCain's Website
That's the link.
There is a song and video inspired by Obama that was done by recording artist Donny B. Lord on YouTube. It is very well done and the music and lyrics are powerful and haunting. It could be Obama's inauguration song.
Feel free to share with other groups and friends.
Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFTe1dMQvPM
In recent presidential debates, Senator John McCain has said things like, "I know the veterans. I know them well. And, I know that they know that I'll take care of them." It was stunning, because nothing could be further from the truth. It's something that our friend Charlie Fink even made an issue of in his new video at Lunatics and Liars.
A lot of you have asked VoteVets.org to explain why Senator McCain gets consistently low ratings from veterans groups. Below is a full list of votes, statements, and positions of Senator McCain's, which shows that Senator McCain has consistently bailed on troops and veterans.
It's a very long, but comprehensive list. I encourage you to take a look and pass it around. An even more robust list, complete with video, can be found at VetVoice.com, as well.
Sincerely,Brandon FriedmanIraq and Afghanistan War VeteranVice Chairman, VoteVets.org
Senator John McCain’s Record on Troop and Veterans’ Issues
Voting Against Veterans
· Veterans Groups Give McCain Failing Grades. In its most recent legislative ratings, the non-partisan Disabled American Veterans gave Sen. McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans’ issues. Similarly, the non-partisan Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a "D" grade for his poor voting record on veterans’ issues, including McCain’s votes against additional body armor for troops in combat and additional funding for PTSD and TBI screening and treatment.
· McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)
· McCain Voted At Least 28 Times Against Veterans’ Benefits, Including Healthcare. Since arriving in the U.S. Senate in 1987, McCain has voted at least 28 times against ensuring important benefits for America’s veterans, including providing adequate healthcare. (2006 Senate Vote #7, 41, 63, 67, 98, 222; 2005 Senate Votes #55, 89, 90, 251, 343; 2004 Senate Votes #40, 48, 145; 2003 Senate Votes #74, 81, 83; 1999 Senate Vote #328; 1998 Senate Vote #175; 1997 Senate Vote #168; 1996 Senate Votes #115, 275; 1995 Senate Votes #76, 226, 466; 1994 Senate Vote #306; 1992 Senate Vote #194; 1991 Senate Vote #259)
· McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)
· McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)
· McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)
· McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)
· McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)
· McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)
· McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)
· McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)
· McCain opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)
· McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)
· McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)
· McCain Opposed the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Was Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would "encourage more people to leave the military." (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)
· Disabled American Veterans Legislative Director Said That McCain’s Proposal Would Increase Costs For Veterans Because His Plan Relies On Private Hospitals Which Are More Expensive and Which Could Also Lead To Further Rationing Of Care. "To help veterans who live far from VA hospitals or need specialized care the VA can’t provide, McCain proposed giving low-income veterans and those who incurred injury during their service a card they could use at private hospitals. The proposal is not an attempt to privatize the VA, as critics have alleged, but rather, an effort to improve care and access to it, he said. Joe Violanti, legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, a nonpartisan organization, said the proposal would increase costs because private hospitals are more expensive. The increased cost could lead to further rationing of care, he said." (Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/08)
Lack of Support for the Troops
· McCain co-sponsored the Use of Force Authorization. McCain supported the bill that gave President George W. Bush the green light--and a blank check--for going to war with Iraq. (SJ Res 46, 10/3/02)
· McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)
· McCain voted against holding Bush accountable for his actions in the war. McCain opposed the creation of an independent commission to investigate the development and use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. (S.Amdt. 1275 to H.R. 2658, Vote 284, 7/16/03)
· McCain voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)
· Senator McCain opposed efforts to end the overextension of the military--a policy that is having a devastating impact on our troops. McCain voted against requiring mandatory minimum downtime between tours of duty for troops serving in Iraq. (S.Amdt.. 2909 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 341, 9/19/07; S.Amdt. 2012 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 241, 7/11/07)
· McCain announced his willingness to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for decades--a statement sure to inflame Iraqis and endanger American troops. McCain: "Make it a hundred" years in Iraq and "that would be fine with me." (Derry, New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, 1/3/08)
· McCain voted against a ban on waterboarding--a form of torture--in a move that could eventually endanger American troops. According to ThinkProgress, "the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding." McCain voted against the bill. (H.R. 2082, Vote 22, 2/13/08)
· McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center--outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a "disgrace." (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)
· Senator McCain has consistently opposed any plan to withdraw troops from Iraq--a policy that has directly weakened American efforts in Afghanistan. Senator McCain repeatedly voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. (S.Amdt. 3876 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #438, 12/18/07; S.Amdt. 3875 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #437, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.3164 to H.R. 3222, Vote #362, 10/3/07; S.Amdt. 2898 to S. Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #346, 9/21/07; S. Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R.1585, Vote #345, 9/21/07; S.Amdt.2 087 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #252, 7/18/07; S.Amdt. 643 to H.R. 1591, Vote #116, 3/27/07; S.Amdt. 4320 to S. 2766, Vote #182, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766, Vote #181, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 2519 to S.1042, Vote #322, 11/15/05)
· McCain said it’s "not too important" when U.S. troops leave Iraq. This exchange occurred on NBC’s Today Show with Matt Lauer:
LAUER: If it's working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that's not too important.
(NBC, Today Show, 6/11/08)
Cheerleading for War with Iraq--While Afghanistan was Unfinished
· McCain suggested that the war in Iraq could be won with a "smaller" force. "But the fact is I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past. But I don't believe it's going to be nearly the size and scope that it was in 1991." (CBS News, Face the Nation, 9/15/02)
· McCain said winning the war would be "easy." "I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women." (CNN, 9/24/02)
· McCain also said the actual fighting in Iraq would be easy. "We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies." (CNN, 9/29/02)
· Continuing his pattern, McCain also said on MSNBC that we would win the war in Iraq "easily." "But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily." (MSNBC, 1/22/03)
· McCain argued Saddam was "a threat of the first order." Senator McCain said that a policy of containing Iraq to blunt its weapons of mass destruction program is "unsustainable, ineffective, unworkable and dangerous." McCain: "I believe Iraq is a threat of the first order, and only a change of regime will make Iraq a state that does not threaten us and others, and where liberated people assume the rights and responsibilities of freedom." (Speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2/13/03)
· McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s rationale for going to war. McCain: "We're going to win this victory. Tragically, we will lose American lives. But it will be brief. We’re going to find massive evidence of weapons of mass destruction . . . It’s going to send the message throughout the Middle East that democracy can take hold in the Middle East." (Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03)
· "But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators." (NBC, 3/20/03)
· March 2003: "I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short." (NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03)
· McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s talking points that the U.S. would only be in Iraq for a short time. McCain: "It’s clear that the end is very much in sight . . . It won’t be long . . . it’ll be a fairly short period of time." (ABC, 4/9/03)
Staunch Defense of the Iraq Invasion
· McCain maintained that the war was a good idea and that George W. Bush deserved "admiration." At the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain, focusing on the war in Iraq, said that while weapons of mass destruction were not found, Saddam once had them and "he would have acquired them again." McCain said the mission in Iraq "gave hope to people long oppressed" and it was "necessary, achievable and noble." McCain: "For his determination to undertake it, and for his unflagging resolve to see it through to a just end, President Bush deserves not only our support, but our admiration." (Speech, Republican National Convention, 8/31/04)
· Senator McCain: "The war, the invasion was not a mistake. (Meet the Press, 1/6/08)
· McCain said the war in Iraq was "worth" it. Asked if the war was a good idea worth the price in blood and treasure, McCain: "It was worth getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He had used weapons of mass destruction, and it's clear that he was hell-bent on acquiring them." (Republican Debate, 1/24/08)
Dangerous Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge
· When questioned about Osama bin Laden after the 1998 U.S. missile strikes in Afghanistan, McCain surmised that the terrorist leader wasn’t as "bad" as "depicted." "You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before." (Interview with Mother Jones magazine, 11/1998)
· McCain was unaware of previous Sunni-Shia violence before the Iraq War. "There’s not a history of clashes that are violent between Sunnis and Shias. So I think they can probably get along." (MSNBC, Hardball, 4/23/03)
· McCain said our military could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan. While giving a speech, McCain was asked about Afghanistan and replied, "I am concerned about it, but I’m not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I’d be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan." (Speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, 11/5/03)
· McCain stated that Sunni al Qaeda was "supported" by the Shia Iranians. (2/2008)
· McCain again confused Sunni Muslim al Qaeda operatives with Shi’a Muslim insurgents. The Washington Post reported of McCain: "He said several times that Iran, a predominately Shiite country, was supplying the mostly Sunni militant group, al-Qaeda. In fact, officials have said they believe Iran is helping Shiite extremists in Iraq.
"Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives ‘taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.’
"Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was ‘common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate.’" (Press conference, Amman, Jordan, 3/18/2008)
· Yet again, McCain demonstrated that he didn’t know whether al Qaeda was a Sunni or Shiite organization. While questioning General David Petraeus during a Senate hearing, the following exchange occurred:
MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.
MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi'ites overall?
PETREAUS: No.
MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else.
(Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, 4/8/08)
· McCain incorrectly thought General David Petraeus was in charge of Afghanistan. The Army Times reported: "Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
‘I would not do that unless Gen. (David) Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,’ McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.
"Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq." (Annual meeting of the Associated Press, 4/14/08)
· McCain credited the "surge" for the "Anbar Awakening"--even though the Anbar Awakening preceded the surge by nearly a year. (7/22/08)
· John McCain has also recently demonstrated either serious knowledge gaps in terms of foreign policy, or mounting confusion, when discussing an array of other countries: Spain: McCain refused to commit to meeting with the president of Spain, a NATO ally, after becoming confused about America’s relationship with Spain, its leader, and, possibly, exactly where Spain is located. (9/17/08)
Czech Republic and Slovakia: McCain referred to the two countries using the name "Czechoslovakia" several times--despite the fact that Czechoslakia split apart and hasn't existed since 1993. (7/15/08; (7/14/08))
Venezuela: McCain said that Venezuela was a Middle Eastern country. (9/30/08)
Obama and Biden each get a "B" grade.
McCain gets a "D".
Read it at: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/10/military_vets_congress_reportcard_100708/
Well, the report cards are posted, and on voting with Iraq Afghanistan Veterans Assoc. (iava.org), JOHN MCCAIN SCORED A D! Barack scored a B! Please tell everyone, especially military members and veterans!!! You can check scores at www.veteranreportcard.org
John McCain loves to talk about how much he supports our troops and veterans.
Unfortunately, McCain's record doesn't match his rhetoric.
The record doesn't lie...
All this BS about how great the "Surge" has been shows an amazingly narrow thinking and lack of memory about the failure to prepare for "post-war" Iraq (if that time ever comes?). Granted, very few believe invading Iraq was justified or in any way positive for the U.S., but allow a right-winger even that concession, and then tell him/her this:
If a reduction in casualties was the objective, removing the troops completely would have produced the biggest success. No troops there, no casualties. The surge was supposed to lead to Iraqis "standing up" and the govt getting its act together, neither of which has happened. However, the biggest and most overlooked travesty is this: George Bush repeatedly calls the “surge” of U.S. troops sent to Iraq a success because of the decrease in casualties. By implication, then, that means the chaotic violence that reigned in Iraq over the prior four years was a direct consequence of BUSH's failure to provide enough troops during that time. He was counseled by many, most notably Gen. Eric Shinseki, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to plan to send many more troops to oversee post-war Iraq. For four bloody long years Bush refused, deferring to the judgment of former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. While Bush stubbornly stayed the course, inadequate control over Iraq needlessly cost the lives of several thousand Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. If Bush wants to claim to have finally gotten it right in Iraq, he also has to accept blame for having gotten Iraq so wrong for so long.
Today I read in the AP , and here is the headline.
Bush to pull about 8,000 troops from Iraq by Feb.
Tonight on the local new station Fox 11 news it was announced that Bush is sending in more troops from WI again. MORE than has ever been sent since World War II.
So tell me, how does that add up? Seems to me he is just going to send so many troops in before February that it will only appear that he is reducing the amount of troops when he pulls 8,000 out in February. If in fact, he does pull them out.
If I had to predict an outcome to this I would say he is adding gas to an already rageing fire over there. This will make Barack Obama's job even harder when he does get in.
We need to take WI back from the Bush-McCain administration before it is way to late.
If anyone is listening.. I need a large road side sign in my yard. I am on a Highway and want to make the right choice stand out in full view of the 7400 cars that travel this road each day.
