>To refresh your memory one of the keystones of Obama's campaign >was getting >us out of Iraq/Afghanistan as soon as possible.
Refresh your own memory. Obama opined that Iraq was the wrong war and that Afghanistan is the war we should be fighting. He said it many times. I guess you missed it. >Obama is not a General, are you suggesting he should be telling >the Generals >what to do? Obama is the COMMANDER IN CHIEF. Do you know what that means? When commanders in the war zone request more troops, guess who they request them from, bright boy. Do you even listen to the news? On Sep 29, 6:07 pm, LimboIndo <[email protected]> wrote: > What exactly is "the issue" that is at hand? The fact that Obama > doesn't talk to his Generals on the ground? To refresh your memory one > of the keystones of Obama's campaign was getting us out of Iraq/ > Afghanistan as soon as possible. He doesn't want to "win" the war, he > wants the troops out. It doesn't take a daily briefing to say "don't > get more troops killed, hunker down until we get you home." > > What civil policies could Obama advocate that would impact the > Generals "on the ground?" What could our President do stateside that > would require 'detailed information" about the war? Obama is not a > General, are you suggesting he should be telling the Generals what to > do? > > Note* This reply was not directed at you Hollywood, you just happened > to be last post. > > On Sep 29, 4:47 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > How long do you think you can avoid the issue at hand by questioning > > the definition of every other word? > > > On Sep 29, 4:18 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Zeb, > > > > Guess that all depends on how you might wish to define "intimately, > > > now wouldn't it? > > > > On Sep 29, 10:28 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Its probably better for the President to be intimately involved with > > > > the war in Afghanistan than it is for him to dally with the Olympics > > > > or appearances on Leno and Letterman. > > > > > On Sep 28, 8:02 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > Good. A President is NOT micro-managing the on-site CO and letting him > > > > > do his job. This is how it should be. President Obama does not have a > > > > > military background, remember? > > > > > > On Sep 28, 5:06 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > in 70 days... So much for giving the commander a direct uncensored > > > > > > access to the President... Seems to me, a leader would want to > > > > > > direct communication with such a key commander in Afghanistan... > > > > > > >http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/back-story/2009/sep/28/us-comm... > > > > > > > >>> "I’ve talked to the president, since I’ve been here, once on a > > > > > > >>> VTC [video teleconference]," Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS > > > > > > >>> reporter David Martin in a television interview that aired > > > > > > >>> Sunday. > > > > > > > "You’ve talked to him once in 70 days?" Mr. Martin followed up. > > > > > > > "That is correct," the general replied.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
