Obama Fiddles As Kabul Burns

“His plan comes up short. There’s not enough troops, not enough resources and not enough urgency. What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the War on Terror is not in Iraq and never was. The central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan where the terrorists who hit us on 9-11 are still plotting attacks seven years later.”

Barack Obama
Campaign Speech
September 9, 2008

Here’s a reminder of what tough-talking Barack Obama said about “the central front in the War on Terror” during the campaign:

But that was last year during the campaign.

Now Barack Obama says the future of American support for Afghanistan will depend on whether or not the fledgling Afghan government is a “true partner” with the United States or not.

The BBC reported:

The White House has said that it will take no decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until it determines the new government is a “true partner”.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN TV it would be “reckless” to take such a decision without a thorough analysis of the new government.

Washington is debating a request for 40,000 more troops in Afghanistan.

Results from an investigation into fraud claims in the presidential poll are due in the next few days.

It is expected to reveal that incumbent President Hamid Karzai did not achieve more than the 50% of votes needed to avoid a second round.

But wasn’t Afghanistan supposed to be the central front on the War on Terror?

What could have possibly changed since last year?

#1 October 19, 2009 at 4:58 am
Ginger commented:

You LIE
#2 October 19, 2009 at 5:00 am
Ginger commented:

Someone get Barry a wheel barrel because he lie’s so much his nose is dragging the ground.
#3 October 19, 2009 at 5:01 am
President Mop commented:

Platitudes and sound bites work well when you’re campaigning, but not so much when governing. Expect zero to remain in campaign mode ad infinitum, blame the previous administration in perpetuum, and whine ad nauseum.
#4 October 19, 2009 at 5:02 am
Redwine commented:

Argghhhhh…
What on earth does the legitimacy of the Afghan election have to do with sending more troops? Our fighting men and women need more boots on the ground urgently. I suppose that Dear Leader, Kerry and McCain would like to see more body bags first.

Shame on them!

#5 October 19, 2009 at 5:30 am
NeoKong commented:

Oh come on….
We knew last year when he made that speech that he didn’t mean a word of it. Obama can’t even take on Fox News and we’re supposed to believe he can be a competent CIC…?
What a joke. That’s why we have the smartest man in the Senate, Joe Biden as VP. He was supposed to bring all that sweet sweet international street cred to the table.

Even some peasant in Afghanistan feeding a camel knows that Barack Obama ain’t no CIC. He’s a state senator that hustled his way into the White House. He has never been responsible for anything other than his own family for his entire political career so how the hell is he going to successfully run the war in Afghanistan.

Please…..
#6 October 19, 2009 at 5:35 am
kelley in virginia commented:

but he is in a damn rush to bring our country to socialism.
#8 October 19, 2009 at 5:40 am
SkullScratcher commented:

It’s almost like they WANT this to turn into Vietnam II. Don’t pull our forces out, but don’t give them backup… Come out and say we can work with the enemy (Taliban)… Next our men & women won’t be allowed to return fire when attacked.
My cynical side questions their motivations.
#9 October 19, 2009 at 5:42 am
Sequoia commented:

Doesn’t the Johnson Administration still have serious questions about the legitimacy of the South Vietnamese Republic?
I think a wait and see attitude is just what this situation calls for.
p.s. Can’t we just start bombing Pakistan?
#10 October 19, 2009 at 5:46 am
eaglewingz08 commented:

So we can negotiate with the illegitimate governments of Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, but not with our allies? WTF?
#11 October 19, 2009 at 5:50 am
D Axlerod commented:

Give him a break. He’s only been POTUS for 9 months and had so many things to do. Hell, before he could address Afghanistan, he had to appear on Letterman, 5 Sunday talk shows, numerous prime time addresses to the public, fund raisers for his fellow commies, go to Sweden to push for the Olympics, go to Egypt and apologize for America, give countless blow jobs to the Muslims, etc, etc, etc…

In another couple of months, he’ll take a few minutes to think about the troops in Afghanistan before he abandons them altogether.
#12 October 19, 2009 at 5:53 am
squeaky commented:

“He’s a state senator that hustled his way into the White House…” and he hustled himself into that spot as well.
#13 October 19, 2009 at 6:08 am
plainslow commented:

I thought one of the reasons we are fighting there in the first place, is because they were not a true partner with us. If they gave us Osama, we would’nt be there.
#14 October 19, 2009 at 6:46 am
olm commented:

Obama runs into the same problem over and over. I have to say, it is usually is funny and indicative of the liberal lies but in this case it makes me sick.

He is caught between two groups of his supporters and like with gay issues, he’s trying to give in to everyone, works on the campaign trail but it is a huge loser for him in war.

What a moron. Troops are dying and the empty suit in the WH is playing tiddly winks.
#15 October 19, 2009 at 7:11 am
TheScribbler commented:

Maybe it wasn’t such a good idea to let the media photograph service people in caskets coming home from war, huh? Isn’t it high time that we start holding Obama accountable for each and every one of them? I know it’s high time that he takes responsibility for something. The “blame Bush” era is OVER.

His ‘being held accountable and transparency’ rhetoric is getting just as old. He’s a disgrace and not one more person should die under his command, while he sits for months trying to make a decision.
#16 October 19, 2009 at 7:31 am
Blacque Jacques Shellacque commented:

The White House has said that it will take no decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until it determines the new government is a “true partner”.

Excuses, excuses.
#17 October 19, 2009 at 7:43 am
olm commented:

Seems to me the “true partner” question should apply to Obama.
#18 October 19, 2009 at 7:56 am
Baxter Greene commented:

So according to the White House, we will not fight to defeat the jihadist and keep our country safe in countries that don’t have a stable,honest government.

So the jihadist don’t have to defeat us on the battlefield, all they have to do is bring in ACORN and corrupt an election and we will stop fighting.

So are the democrats saying that when the Senate voted overwhelmingly to go to war in Afghanistan that they thought the government there was ethical and stable.

All the years that Obama and the democrats called for more resources in fighting the war in the Afghanistan/Pakistan region, were they under the impression that the government and the other elections were free of corruption.
When was this time that Afghanistan was so free of corruption?

What the he!! has changed in Afghanistan since March of 2009 when Obama put his own General in charge and laid out his “smart power” strategy?
A corrupt election….increase in violence.

Afghanistan has always been corrupt.
Obama never said that we will fight to defeat the jihadist only if the government is stable.

The whole idea of what McCrystal is trying to implement is providing security so that the people will feel safe enough to start trying to live normal, free lives and have a representative government.

How does refusing to give the military what it needs to secure this country help defeat the corruption in the Afghanistan government?

Iraq was not free of corruption when we implemented and succeeded with the surge.

McCrystal has not even gotten the resources yet to implement the strategy that Obama laid out in March.

First we start hearing from the White House that the Taliban are all of a sudden “not dangerous”.

Now the White House will not give the military what it needs until the government is free of corruption and scandal.

Obama is doing nothing more than trying to “surrender with style”, cut and run with the least amount of political damage as possible because political power is all they care about anyway.

I would like to see Obama hold his tax cheating,ACORN supporting,corrupt mortgage payoff,union payoff,lying administration to the same standards that he is holding Afghanistan’s to.

To lose the war in Afghanistan would not only be catastrophic to America, but to the world….and it will be on Obama’s watch.
The buck stops at the Presidents desk.

What an absolute coward.
#19 October 19, 2009 at 8:41 am
Jean commented:

The Emperor has no clothes.
#20 October 19, 2009 at 9:14 am
aprilnovember811 commented:

He doesn’t care about the troops or the war. He is not American, and Congress knows it. Soldiers are dying at the hands of a Kenyan!
#21 October 19, 2009 at 9:42 am
Pat the First commented:

The last President who twiddled their thumbs like this we got Islamic Radicalism in Iran. We have a more dangerous Jimmah Cahtah. We seem to be unable to repeat mistakes in this country.

I just read about Karzai’s history, the rise of the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan and Slick Willy’s deaf ear that caused the atmosphere for 9/11. If we don’t respond to the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, we will see a repeat of the terrorist control installed again.
#22 October 19, 2009 at 9:52 am
Make it Happen commented:

Obama will continue to vote present on Afghanistan as long as possible, and now the Afghan elections has provided him with the excuse to continue voting present.

Afghanistan burns and Obama fiddles. What a disgrace and a weakling.
#23 October 19, 2009 at 10:19 am
ar05075 commented:

Now now, let’s be accurate, Obama does’nt fiddle, he golfs.
Fiddling invlves talent and dedication.

BUCK OFAMA.!
#24 October 19, 2009 at 10:19 am
ar05075 commented:

sorry, involves
#25 October 19, 2009 at 11:13 am
Pat the First commented:

We seem to be unable “to learn and we keep repeating” mistakes in this country.
#26 October 19, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Matthew commented:

Baxtar,

Lets be very clear, the deterioration of Afghanistan has been tragically a bipartisan effort. This slide has been going on for years and there really is no easy solution. A major problem is that the Taliban operates with impunity in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Bush tried for years to get Musharef to cooperate, but there is not enough political will to take on the Taliban from Pakistan’s rulers. There is also support from the ISI for the Taliban to be used against percieved Indian threats to Pakistani interests. While I am intended to agree with Gen. McChrystal about troop levels, I have read where other generals favor a draw down (or at least threat of one) to get Karzai inline. The draw down would also create instability as the Taliban would likely set their sites on centeral gov’t and to increase there area of influence.
#27 October 19, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Andreas K. commented:

Let me guess, next thing he’s going to say that a possible genocide in A-stan is no reason to keep/send US troops there, right?
#28 October 19, 2009 at 5:12 pm
antisocialist commented:

The Emperor has no clothes.

====================

I’ve been saying that for almost a year now.

Nekkid. Totally.