Jump to content
IGNORED

Important Presidential Address tonight - Dec. 1

Firefight911

By Firefight911
in Riders Discuss Other Topics

Recommended Posts

Firefight911

Firefight911

Posted
Posted

I realize the potential implications of making this post, but, quite frankly, this is too important a topic to be worried about some uninformed individual turning it in to a political post. SO DON'T DO IT!!

 

After over 3 months of talks, deliberations, and whatever else, President Obama will reveal his intentions concerning Afghanistan and the level of troop involvement and strategy tonight.

 

8 PM Eastern, 5 PM West Coast.

 

It appears that somewhere around 30,000 more troops may be put in harms way. Regardless of your views on war, the President, Afghanistan, Iraq, Coke vs Pepsi, etc. you owe it to this country to listen in and get educated. You owe it to your freedom to support our troops as they move forth on to the field of battle.

 

This could be a pivotal moment in our current administration's foreign policy in this region and it WILL affect you.

 

I hope you tune in and I'd love to hear some thoughts, please remember the rules, on the topic.

 

This is one of those moments for me that rings up the memory of a movie that captured the mindset of the soldier as they went to battle for the first time. Mel Gibson in 'We Were Soldiers' - LINKY Let us hope we have a Hal Moore with our troops as they go in to harms way!

 

Link to comment
David

David

Posted
Posted

It reminds me again of "The Way We Get By," which I mentioned in a separate thread. This last weekend we watched it a second time, and it seems relevant when considering decisions like this.

Link to comment
pbharvey

pbharvey

Posted
Posted

I heard his speech is bumping Charlie Brown's Christmas program... Draw your own conclusion.

 

Seriously though, what our country needs is more people paying attention to important things and less people paying attention to Tiger Woods and the party crashers.

Link to comment
motoguy128

motoguy128

Posted
Posted
Keeping in mind that Afghanistan is called "Graveyard of Great Powers", it is an important inflection point.

 

That was my thought. The US is attempting to suceed where all other have failed not only in modern times, but I beleive going back thousands of years when other empires have attmepted to conquer the region. I think the best most accomplished, was to keep the local tribes and leaders netral and allow free trade and passage... but thye never suceeded in conquering them without brutal totalitarian rule. Unfortunately, in some regions, democracy/free republics don't work.

 

I only hope we can find some measures of sucess and that we're not throwing more good solidiers at a failed foreign policy.

Link to comment
Antimatter

Antimatter

Posted
Posted

I was listening to excerpts of LBJ's taped telephone calls where he is considering the question of expansion of the US role in Vietnam. I'm not trying to suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam, rather that the conversations in the Obama Whitehouse were probably very similar to those that happened during the Kennedy and LBJ administrations. It was worth hearing to understand the decision making process and how much political influence the Joint Chiefs of Staff had.

 

I probably won't watch the speech but will read the text tomorrow.

Link to comment
RightSpin

RightSpin

Posted
Posted

This decision has implications which will reverberate for generations. I genuinely hope that President Obama makes a good decision and finds success in Afghanistan. Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

Link to comment
tallman

tallman

Posted
Posted

Aldous Huxley:

The charm of history and its enigmatic lesson consist in the fact that, from age to age, nothing changes and yet everything is completely different.

 

Link to comment
Marty Hill

Marty Hill

Posted
Posted
This decision has implications which will reverberate for generations. I genuinely hope that President Obama makes a good decision and finds success in Afghanistan. Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

 

Steve, well said! Hope and/or pray for the guys and gals over there and about to be sent there.

Link to comment
Polo

Polo

Posted
Posted
This decision has implications which will reverberate for generations. I genuinely hope that President Obama makes a good decision and finds success in Afghanistan. Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

 

I cannot visualize success within this context.

Link to comment
philbytx

philbytx

Posted
Posted

quote

Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

unquote

 

Or NOT...I believe "We the People" are, and should continue to be, the final arbiter re: the direction of U.S. foreign policy!

Link to comment
philbytx

philbytx

Posted
Posted

 

Political? How so young sir :S

 

My statement was simply to point out that any decision our President makes does not, and should not, necessarily give him de facto support from both sides of the aisle.

 

We are not sheep, nor blind.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Matts_12GS

Matts_12GS

Posted
Posted
quote

Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

unquote

 

Or NOT...I believe "We the People" are, and should continue to be, the final arbiter re: the direction of U.S. foreign policy!

 

True, it is "We the People" who have elected representatives to voice our concerns. It is our duty to ensure that "We, the People" are as informed as possible and notifying our legislators of our opinions.

 

Arm yourself by informing yourself.

Link to comment
Ken H.

Ken H.

Posted
Posted
Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support.

Sorry I have to disagree. Decent is a core required principle for a successful society. Without disagreement there can be no progress. For without it the diversity of perspective that enables creativity to foster solutions cannot exist.

Link to comment
Hermes

Hermes

Posted
Posted

Given the old axium 'Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer' I would venture to guess/hope, the President will deploy significant additional forces and maneuver them close to the borders of Pakistan. I also hope, that Nato forces (including Canada) will see this mission thru. But foremost, I hope the President will outline a precise mission statement, with approx. time lines and measurable benchmarks as well as an exit strategy in the event of both, success and failure.

 

I fear, that as the U.S. is slowly reducing troop strength in Iraq, a flood of insurgents, jihadists and Al Quada will be scrambling to get to Afghanistan to join forces with their brothers currently sheltering inside the Pakistani border. Thus strengthened, they can collectively give a fair account of themselves to fight the infidel invaders.

I also fear for Iraq's future.

 

Tough times ahead, folks. Is the true mission worth it?

Link to comment
beemerman2k

beemerman2k

Posted
Posted
Tough times ahead, folks. Is the true mission worth it?

 

This is what I ask myself. On top of all the concerns you raise, I worry about our economy and the future of our children. War is terrible even when victorious, but it is also very expensive. Where is the money coming from to pay for it? We're already in debt up to our ears to China, is this only going to bury us deeper?

 

Sometimes I wonder if the strategy of those radical forces is simply to chip away at the West, slowly over time. As we dump billions into containing those who would terrorize the innocent, we are potentially weakening our overall strength.

 

Ultimately, what can we do? 9/11 cannot happen again. So let's support our troops -- if not our political leaders -- and give them everything they need to get the job done. And then let's welcome them home and give them everything they need to resume their dreams and their lives.

Link to comment
RonStewart

RonStewart

Posted
Posted
Political? How so young sir?

 

Well, Steve says you your president's policy deserves broad bipartisan support, and you disagree. Both opinions are political, so this is a political argument.

Link to comment
philbytx

philbytx

Posted
Posted

"9/11" was/is happening everywhere in the world and cannot be stopped by simpl force of arms!

And supporting our politicians and troops will do nothing to stop such acts.....

Link to comment
russell_bynum

russell_bynum

Posted
Posted
Political? How so young sir?

 

Well, Steve says you your president's policy deserves broad bipartisan support, and you disagree. Both opinions are political, so this is a political argument.

 

At this point, this discussion is within the bounds of what is acceptable.

Link to comment
Dave in Doodah

Dave in Doodah

Posted
Posted

As a Patriot Guard rider who attended another funeral for a fallen hero just two days ago, I agree with the OP - please pay attention to these developments, regardless of your politics, and support our troops and our country.

Link to comment
Motodan

Motodan

Posted
Posted
I was listening to excerpts of LBJ's taped telephone calls where he is considering the question of expansion of the US role in Vietnam. I'm not trying to suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam, rather that the conversations in the Obama Whitehouse were probably very similar to those that happened during the Kennedy and LBJ administrations. It was worth hearing to understand the decision making process and how much political influence the Joint Chiefs of Staff had.

 

I probably won't watch the speech but will read the text tomorrow.

 

Certainly agree there seems to be a lot of similarity ... then the world was watching and if we didn't stand our ground all would fall to the Communists, not just Vietnam, but all of SE Asia...and our way of life would be in jepardy. Well, it fell and may be the nation did lose its soul and all, because the last few clothing articles I've purchased at US department stores were made in Vietnam. Tell me again, what is the point of war in these countries?

Link to comment
Couchrocket

Couchrocket

Posted
Posted
this is too important a topic to be worried about some uninformed individual turning it in to a political post. SO DON'T DO IT!!

 

 

 

I hope this isn't political. Isn't mean to be "partisan" at least. I like UAV's. Why not leave. Then cover the place with armed UAV's. Guys and gals in lounge chairs in Nevada doing the flying. Something moves we don't like. Stop it. End of story. They don't like it? Too bad, so sad. Be nice, we don't have to "stop" anything. Same goes for Pakistan. Ignore the border.

 

 

 

mq1b_simulator_20091116.jpgmq9_afghanistan_20071108.jpg

 

Take all the troops, send them to Darfur for about a month on their way home and stop that ugliness once and for all.

 

I'm sorta kidding, but not by much.

 

One thing the speech will illustrate very clarly is that the view is different on the inside than it is when you're sure you "know it all" from the outside. This being equally true for both pitiful parties.

Link to comment
Skywagon

Skywagon

Posted
Posted

I will be watching, hoping the advisors and the Prez make the best possible decision.

 

If it is to send more troops, may they have the best possible equipment and be as safe as possible. The men and women in uniform will deserve the very best we can give them and they will always have my support.

Link to comment
RightSpin

RightSpin

Posted
Posted

I’m a little surprised at some of the comments generated by my first post. Maybe a little clarification is in order.

 

Having been deployed to a combat theater myself, and having spent endless days and nights worrying about my oldest son while he was deployed twice, I think I have earned a position at the table of opinion on this matter. There are two things which are absolutely crucial here: Upholding the honor and dignity of our country, and, more importantly, bringing as many of our fine young men and women back alive as possible. Nothing else really matters.

 

We only have one Commander in Chief at a time. Unless someone here has a spare hidden up their sleeve, President Obama is that person. Whether we like it or not, he is the leader of our military forces, duly elected as prescribed by the Constitution. Personally, he’s not my pick, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that we rally around ALL of our military and provide them the best support possible. This includes the Commander in Chief.

 

Trying to discredit or cause Obama to stumble does nothing to help the guys on the ground. In fact, it hurts them. I watched that spectacle unfold for six years during which time my son was deployed twice in very dangerous locations in Iraq and lost a lot of respect for several friends and members right here in BMWST because of this. I promised myself that I would never fall into the same hateful trap were the roles reversed. This isn’t a game. People’s lives are at stake here. It really saddens me to think that some people harbor such hatred for someone that they would rather see our military fail, and people die needlessly, than support the ‘other’ guy in a time of national need.

 

No matter what your politics are, this is a time to come together for the common good of our nation and her military. Now is the time to stand up and support ALL of our military in a clear and unified voice. It matters to the guys and gals on the ground, and it will make a difference in the outcome of the war.

 

Link to comment
ghaverkamp

ghaverkamp

Posted
Posted
No matter what your politics are, this is a time to come together for the common good of our nation and her military. Now is the time to stand up and support ALL of our military in a clear and unified voice. It matters to the guys and gals on the ground, and it will make a difference in the outcome of the war.

 

The problem is, you said, "Whatever his decision, as Commander in Chief his policy deserves broad bipartisan support." However, what I think you're saying here is that the President as Commander-in-Chief deserves broad bipartisan support.

 

I don't feel that policies, in and of themselves, command or otherwise automatically deserve respect. We've had some hideous "wartime" policies in our nation's history -- even in true wars -- and I haven't seen evidence that opposition to them at the time weakened the nation.

Link to comment
David

David

Posted
Posted

I don't think you're making a distinction--which I think you should--between supporting the Commander in Chief and the troops and supporting the policy of sending another 30,000 troops.

 

I'm not saying where I stand on that latter issue, but it's ridiculous to think the policy itself cannot be disagreed with, and vehemently so. That's sort of the point of "freedom of speech."

Link to comment
RightSpin

RightSpin

Posted
Posted

Greg and David,

 

What I said is what I meant. Military decisions are not made by committees or referrendums, they are made by commanders. Since there is only one Commander in Chief at a time, the policy that the President sets out is his, and his alone, to make. Whether we like the policy, or not, doesn't matter - especially when troops are on the ground. In these important times, we should all rally to support the policy, the president, and the military. There will be plenty of time to arm-chair quarterback the decision once the troops are out of harms way.

 

Link to comment
yabadabapal

yabadabapal

Posted
Posted

Thank you for the reminder. My only comment that I will make after listening to every word tonight from President Obama is this.

I am very proud and grateful to live, work, and serve in my capacity in our great country and equally or more so proud and grateful of those abroad and at home for their service to our country.

Link to comment
David

David

Posted
Posted

Sorry, Steve. I feel absolutely no duty to "rally to support the policy," whether I agree with it or not. In fact, I find that idea ludicrous.

 

Although I have not served in the armed forces, our family has a very strong history of doing so and I am proud of all of them. And I also recognize and support the President's role in making those decisions.

Link to comment
MattS

MattS

Posted
Posted
Having been deployed to a combat theater myself, and having spent endless days and nights worrying about my oldest son while he was deployed twice, I think I have earned a position at the table of opinion on this matter.

Actually, the beauty (or ugliness, as the case may be) of representative democracy is that you have no more earned a position at the table of opinion as anyone else, regardless of experience.

Link to comment
Mike

Mike

Posted
Posted

I get what Steve is saying and, while I don't agree 100%, I respect his point. This is what I'll add to the mix: there is absolutely no one in a better position to make informed decision on military strategy than the President of the United States, whoever she may be at the time. While not perfect, having at one's disposal the enormous resources of our military and intelligence communities enhances the chances of making the "right" decisions. Not that it always happens, of course.

 

What does get to those in the military is the pusillanimous pontification of pointy-headed "experts" in the media who are always willing to criticize the military's perceived lack of progress, when they--the troops on the ground--know better. Unfortunately, a large number of Americans, unable or unwilling to learn the truth of the matter accept these sloppily-drawn sound bites as the gospel.

 

For those troops who toil in the real world, facing life and death decisions on a daily basis, and coming face to face with the reality of the situation, to hear these uninformed criticisms is more than a bit demoralizing. It can also be infuriating.

 

Informed dissent is something quite different. Sometimes it comes from those very troops . . . or their commanders. Other times, it is the result of well-reasoned and informed analysis. But there will be those who, in their quest to prove the Commander in Chief a fool, will criticize for the sake of criticizing. That crap demoralizes the troops and amounts nothing more than egotistical self-aggrandizement at their expense.

 

So, talk to the troops. Tell them you care and that you respect their service. Those other guys? Kick 'em in the groin. Hard.

Link to comment
bayoubengal

bayoubengal

Posted
Posted
I think it is a riot these gUys still wear flight sUits... mUst be in case their compUters catch on fire...

 

 

Flight suit is the standard utility uniform for AF flyers, flying or not. Just like the ECS (Expeditionary Combat Support) troops wear cammo (BDUs/ABUs) daily. Hiding from no one. I wear mine daily. Haven't flown the C-5 in a while. I fly a Dell...

Link to comment
azkaisr

azkaisr

Posted
Posted
I get what Steve is saying and, while I don't agree 100%, I respect his point. This is what I'll add to the mix: there is absolutely no one in a better position to make informed decision on military strategy than the President of the United States, whoever she may be at the time. While not perfect, having at one's disposal the enormous resources of our military and intelligence communities enhances the chances of making the "right" decisions. Not that it always happens, of course.

 

What does get to those in the military is the pusillanimous pontification of pointy-headed "experts" in the media who are always willing to criticize the military's perceived lack of progress, when they--the troops on the ground--know better. Unfortunately, a large number of Americans, unable or unwilling to learn the truth of the matter accept these sloppily-drawn sound bites as the gospel.

 

For those troops who toil in the real world, facing life and death decisions on a daily basis, and coming face to face with the reality of the situation, to hear these uninformed criticisms is more than a bit demoralizing. It can also be infuriating.

 

Informed dissent is something quite different. Sometimes it comes from those very troops . . . or their commanders. Other times, it is the result of well-reasoned and informed analysis. But there will be those who, in their quest to prove the Commander in Chief a fool, will criticize for the sake of criticizing. That crap demoralizes the troops and amounts nothing more than egotistical self-aggrandizement at their expense.

 

So, talk to the troops. Tell them you care and that you respect their service. Those other guys? Kick 'em in the groin. Hard.

 

Laura and I had this discussion as well about what the President has at his disposal. We have differing opinions but we both agreed that the talking monkey's on after the speech were horrible. The only one I thought was worth listening to was the crazy Aussie on CNN but I know that the majority of people listening weren't grasping his point. It quickly turned to politics as usual. Sad really

Link to comment
David

David

Posted
Posted
Informed dissent is something quite different.

 

Yes, and that's exactly the sort of dissent I'm talking about.

 

In the documentary I keep asking people to watch, the three troop greeters all disagreed with the POLICY of the war, but they supported the office of President (is that supposed to be capitalized?) and the troops themselves.

 

What I appreciate about the current approach to Afghanistan is that (at least as it appears to me on the surface) there appears to be more openness and thoughtful deliberation. I heartily commend that.

 

I honestly don't know if I support the war in Afghanistan. From my own research, I have some questions (for another thread). Regardless, I feel absolutely no duty to support that particular policy, though I respect the President's right to make that decision and I support our troops.

 

When we hear people telling us what it means to be patriotic, we should go into high alert mode and test the admonishment for other motivations.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...