This is what you get when you elect a "Community Organizer-in Chief"

" The president concluded from the start that “I have two years with the public on this” and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. “I want an exit strategy,” he implored at one meeting. Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, “I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”

"As for Mr. Obama himself, the book describes a professorial president who assigned “homework” to advisers but bristled at what he saw as military commanders’ attempts to force him into a decision he was not yet comfortable with. Even after he agreed to send another 30,000 troops last winter, the Pentagon asked for another 4,500 “enablers” to support them.

The president lost his poise, according to the book. “I’m done doing this!” he erupted.

To ensure that the Pentagon did not reinterpret his decision, Mr. Obama dictated a six-page, single-space “terms sheet” explicitly laying out his troop order and its objectives, a document included in the book’s appendix."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/world/....html?_r=1

What a f*ckup this guy is.

What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

There are winners and there are those with an exit strategy.

Quote:“I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”

Nuff said.

(09-22-2010 07:56 AM)Paul M Wrote:  There are winners and there are those with an exit strategy.

Mission Accomplished.

(09-22-2010 04:02 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:56 AM)Paul M Wrote:  There are winners and there are those with an exit strategy.

Mission Accomplished.

Paul, is this what a winner looks like?

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":

Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.

Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".

The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Hey, lay about 10 B-61 nuclear "bunker busters" along the Tora Bora range and UBL wouldn't have escaped. The detonations would have been underground, collapsing the tunnels, and if he had lived, he would be walking through fallout and radioactive debris.

(09-22-2010 06:21 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Hey, lay about 10 B-61 nuclear "bunker busters" along the Tora Bora range and UBL wouldn't have escaped. The detonations would have been underground, collapsing the tunnels, and if he had lived, he would be walking through fallout and radioactive debris.

I said the same thing, except, I had decided that we need to test a new ICBM delivery system... say with 30 nukes... a few for Tora Bora, and the rest for other areas or interest.

(09-22-2010 06:24 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:21 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Hey, lay about 10 B-61 nuclear "bunker busters" along the Tora Bora range and UBL wouldn't have escaped. The detonations would have been underground, collapsing the tunnels, and if he had lived, he would be walking through fallout and radioactive debris.

I said the same thing, except, I had decided that we need to test a new ICBM delivery system... say with 30 nukes... a few for Tora Bora, and the rest for other areas or interest.

You don’t use ICBM’s.

ICBM launches from the Continental United States on trajectories to Afghanistan/Central Asia would been detected by both Russian and Chinese Early Warning Satellites and Radar and would cause a possible Russian “Launch on Warning Counterstrike” on the US since the warheads would be inbound over their territory.

Launching a missile strike from US Ballistic Missile Submarines would pose the same problem since the vector for the incoming warheads could be extended into Russian or Chinese territory.

You can load 10 B-61 nuclear “bunker buster” gravity bombs on 10 F-15E’s and bring them in for a coordinated time on target drop over the mountain range.

Boom.

Adios M….F……

(09-22-2010 08:47 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:24 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:21 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Hey, lay about 10 B-61 nuclear "bunker busters" along the Tora Bora range and UBL wouldn't have escaped. The detonations would have been underground, collapsing the tunnels, and if he had lived, he would be walking through fallout and radioactive debris.

I said the same thing, except, I had decided that we need to test a new ICBM delivery system... say with 30 nukes... a few for Tora Bora, and the rest for other areas or interest.

You don’t use ICBM’s.

ICBM launches from the Continental United States on trajectories to Afghanistan/Central Asia would been detected by both Russian and Chinese Early Warning Satellites and Radar and would cause a possible Russian “Launch on Warning Counterstrike” on the US since the warheads would be inbound over their territory.

Launching a missile strike from US Ballistic Missile Submarines would pose the same problem since the vector for the incoming warheads could be extended into Russian or Chinese territory.

You can load 10 B-61 nuclear “bunker buster” gravity bombs on 10 F-15E’s and bring them in for a coordinated time on target drop over the mountain range.

Boom.

Adios M….F……

lol, I know this now. I was a sophomore in HS then.... and to be technical, I think the US would warn Russia and China, since the ICBM's would overfly their territory.

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

(09-22-2010 09:43 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

And when you do decide to go to WAR...declare it so.

(09-22-2010 10:06 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 09:43 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

And when you do decide to go to WAR...declare it so.

I don't think we'll ever declare a war again. We can't get anyone to agree on anything anymore and half the damn Congress thinks it's our own fault when we get attacked.

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Trigger Happy? Try insane. Global Thermal Nuclear War is not a video game. "Joshua, what are you doing?"

(09-23-2010 02:19 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 07:46 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's wrong with wanting an exit strategy? I wish more president's thought this way. Before we go in, we have an idea how we are going to get out.

Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Trigger Happy? Try insane. Global Thermal Nuclear War is not a video game. "Joshua, what are you doing?"

That's fine then. Don't say you are for getting Osama and destroying the Islamic terrorists, if you aren't gonna DO WHAT'S NECESSARY. They you just sound more wishy-washy then John Kerry.

and 2-3 nukes ISN'T GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR.

(09-23-2010 02:31 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-23-2010 02:19 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:12 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2010 06:00 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  Why don't we start with this as the "Exit Strategy":
Kill Osma Bin Laden along with the Al Qaeda Shura Council, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
Then call a Loya Jurga and read the Riot Act to all tribes and all groups willing to assist Al Qaeda....Tell the Tribal Elders "You let Al Qaeda come back, you and your family's house will explode in the middle of the night".
The first time someone has Al Qaeda operatives in their village-- call in the Drones or the Bombers and take out every structure.

This should have been the plan in 2002. Or else we should never have gone in. Ever. Period.

Never fight a war you don't intend to win.

I got shouted down by my HS Gov't teacher for advocating the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. We are trying to get ride of our stockpile, right? Well, drop 2-3 on Tora Bora.... But, hey, I think we should have tested our chemical/biological weapons on Al Quieda too. Great way to find out how well they work on humans, eh?

(Yea, I'm a bit trigger happy right now.)

Trigger Happy? Try insane. Global Thermal Nuclear War is not a video game. "Joshua, what are you doing?"

That's fine then. Don't say you are for getting Osama and destroying the Islamic terrorists, if you aren't gonna DO WHAT'S NECESSARY. They you just sound more wishy-washy then John Kerry.

and 2-3 nukes ISN'T GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR.

Problem is, he's on the border with a nuclear-capable Pakistan. It would not turn out well.