February 20, 200917 yr http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/02/19/obama-awol-in-terror-war/#more-551 President Barack Obama’s record in battling terrorism has proven so weak that one wonders if he really takes the issue seriously. Since he has taken office, the president has: • Announced closure of Guantanamo. • Declined to prosecute the mastermind behind the USS Cole bombing. • Closed all overseas CIA interrogation centers. • Appointed an Attorney General and Justice Department officials on record as opposed to the use of “enhanced” interrogation techniques in terror investigations. • Granted Al Arabia television his first news organization interview and called Fatah Party leader and PA President Mahmoud Abbass in his first phone contact with any foreign leader. Now, with no strings attached, the president has allocated $20.3 million in “post-conflict humanitarian aid” to “Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza. The additional funds bring to $60 million U.S. aid commitments in Gaza. Of course, Gaza is totally controlled by the terrorist group Hamas which grabs any aid that arrives and uses it for its own purposes. In fact, on February 7th, the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) - the body charged with distributing the new U.S. aid - announced that it was suspending assistance in Gaza because ten lorries, laden with humanitarian supplies, were seized by Hamas members. It was the second time that week that Hamas has stolen aid destined for the UNRWA. Thoughts?
February 20, 200917 yr Thoughts? This is the best Dick Morris can come up with? The only point, out of the six cited, that has any worth is the dropped case against Abd Al-Nashiri. The rest are filler to feign strength for his unreasonable conclusion that Obama doesn't take terrorism seriously.
February 20, 200917 yr I agree with you on this one, Habib. In fact, that he called Abbas first sends a message to me that he regards the far more secular and peace-prone Fatah as the legitimate Palestinian authority as opposed to the far more radical Hamas. He called the person in charge of the West Bank while ignoring the party in charge of Gaza; that in itself sends a message as far as I'm concerned.
February 20, 200917 yr My initial thought is that LABS loves Dick Morris. :lol: Could be ! But the facts speak for themselves. Really sad IMO. If we don't get the holes plugged, this listing ship may go down. His offering of change is kind of like "here's your sign". Most of his appointees are Wacke jobs. You don't have to dig very far to confirm that. I was way way over the big O before he got elected.:isurrender:
February 20, 200917 yr Could be ! But the facts speak for themselves. Really sad IMO. If we don't get the holes plugged, this listing ship may go down. His offering of change is kind of like "here's your sign". Most of his appointees are Wacke jobs. You don't have to dig very far to confirm that. I was way way over the big O before he got elected.:isurrender: I'm no foreign policy expert but I'm confused as to what you are saying and how it relates to foreign policy.
February 20, 200917 yr I'm no foreign policy expert but I'm confused as to what you are saying and how it relates to foreign policy. In the original post you will find a list of things that have been done that I do not agree with. Closing Guantanamo. I don't want them in this country. $60 mil in aid that we have to borrow from China, I don't see it. Closing the CIA centers, I guess we'll get our information via carrier pigeons. Not wanting to use “enhanced” interrogation methods when those same people will behead our troops in a heart beat. Humanitarian aid wouldn't be so bad if our country was in better financial condition, but under current conditions we need to pull in the reins a little. I see no fault in his call to Abbas, but I doubt it will influence people in charge of Gaza. So far the only good thing I have seen done in dealing with any of our terrorists problems is to purpose to send more troops after the Taliban,(about 6000) and the only end to this one is to totally destroy them. I would like nothing better than to get our conflicts over and get all of our personnel back state side.
February 20, 200917 yr In the original post you will find a list of things that have been done that I do not agree with. Closing Guantanamo. I don't want them in this country. $60 mil in aid that we have to borrow from China, I don't see it. Closing the CIA centers, I guess we'll get our information via carrier pigeons. Not wanting to use “enhanced” interrogation methods when those same people will behead our troops in a heart beat. Humanitarian aid wouldn't be so bad if our country was in better financial condition, but under current conditions we need to pull in the reins a little. I see no fault in his call to Abbas, but I doubt it will influence people in charge of Gaza. So far the only good thing I have seen done in dealing with any of our terrorists problems is to purpose to send more troops after the Taliban,(about 6000) and the only end to this one is to totally destroy them. I would like nothing better than to get our conflicts over and get all of our personnel back state side. I thought the troop levels I heard were more like 17,000. Afghanistan has long been neglected and now is the time to make it THE priority of our military efforts. (As I wish it had from the begining.)
February 21, 200917 yr I thought the troop levels I heard were more like 17,000. Afghanistan has long been neglected and now is the time to make it THE priority of our military efforts. (As I wish it had from the beginning.) I had heard on news yesterday 5-6 thousand more to be sent. But 17000 would be even better as long as they get it done. I think Pakistan is riding the fence so hard on this one they may eventually end up giving some of the leaders up. I think they know where they are and they are more afraid of the US than the Taliban.
February 21, 200917 yr I had heard on news yesterday 5-6 thousand more to be sent. But 17000 would be even better as long as they get it done. I think Pakistan is riding the fence so hard on this one they may eventually end up giving some of the leaders up. I think they know where they are and they are more afraid of the US than the Taliban. Reporting from Washington -- President Obama ordered his first major deployment of U.S. combat troops Tuesday, authorizing 17,000 additional soldiers and Marines for Afghanistan in what he described as an urgent bid to stabilize a deteriorating and neglected country. The deployment will double the number of American combat brigades in the nation at a time of tension with Afghanistan's weak government over civilian casualties of the campaign against the increasingly bold Taliban, and concern over neighboring Pakistan's ability to fight Islamic militants based there. LAT
February 21, 200917 yr • Announced closure of Guantanamo. Agree with this. • Declined to prosecute the mastermind behind the USS Cole bombing. Not sure about this one. I'm searching for more info before deciding it was wrong. • Closed all overseas CIA interrogation centers.Hadn't heard this one. • Appointed an Attorney General and Justice Department officials on record as opposed to the use of “enhanced” interrogation techniques in terror investigations.Agree with this one. • Granted Al Arabia television his first news organization interview and called Fatah Party leader and PA President Mahmoud Abbass in his first phone contact with any foreign leader.Have no issues with this one.
February 21, 200917 yr Regarding the CIA The New York Times said the "orders would bring to an end a Central Intelligence Agency program that kept terrorism suspects in secret custody for months or years," and "also prohibit the CIA from using coercive interrogation methods." A revised version of the Army Field Manual was released in 2006, explicitly banning enhanced interrogation techniques such as beating, using dogs to intimidate, electric shocks and waterboarding, which critics say is tantamount to torture. Fox I agree with this one too.
February 21, 200917 yr Regarding the CIA Fox I agree with this one too. Rockmom, I'm not for torture either but I know this enemy will cut your throat in a heart beat. I don't have a good answer but the people we are fighting have no value of human life. This same CIA operates the drones that have saved many of our troops , so I would prefer they stay put. Closing Guantanamo will probably put those there in our Federal Prisons which are over crowded and under staffed. You may not realize that, but you probably have never witnessed a crowd of them chanting things I won't say here.
February 21, 200917 yr Rockmom, I'm not for torture either but I know this enemy will cut your throat in a heart beat. I don't have a good answer but the people we are fighting have no value of human life. This same CIA operates the drones that have saved many of our troops , so I would prefer they stay put. Closing Guantanamo will probably put those there in our Federal Prisons which are over crowded and under staffed. You may not realize that, but you probably have never witnessed a crowd of them chanting things I won't say here. I know what the enemy will do. I've had the opportunity to speak to some who have heard and seen first hand. However, I vehemently disagree with compromising or even pushing the limits of the Geneva Convention. IMO, it makes us no better than the enemy, or even worse, as we have sacraficed the integrity of what I consider one of America's greatest strengths-Justice. I also don't see where all CIA operations are ceased. The secret prisons are ordered closed.
February 21, 200917 yr Rockmom, I'm not for torture either but I know this enemy will cut your throat in a heart beat. I don't have a good answer but the people we are fighting have no value of human life. This same CIA operates the drones that have saved many of our troops , so I would prefer they stay put. Closing Guantanamo will probably put those there in our Federal Prisons which are over crowded and under staffed. You may not realize that, but you probably have never witnessed a crowd of them chanting things I won't say here. The same could have been said of the Japanese in WW II but I don't think we lowered our standards of prisoner treatment to meet theirs. (i.e. see Bataan Death March among many Japanese interment incidents.)
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.