When should Obama stop blaming Bush?

[billvon 2,991]

>I also think now would be a good time to stop blaming Bush and make
>a Presidential decision on how to move forward.

He did. Your dislike of it does not change it.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Some of the stuff that Bush and his government did is inexcusabvle.... so, on some subjecta, the answer must be never.

I'd like to remind everyone here that it was not Bush's government. It was the government of the american people. It was our government.

Naively idealistic perspective. The way it was run, it most certainly was Bush's government. The government of the people in many ways was co-opted to the point that it ceased being the government for the people.

ideal perhaps, but what did you do about the situation? If nothing ... so you were OK with it too??

--
Rob

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Some of the stuff that Bush and his government did is inexcusabvle.... so, on some subjecta, the answer must be never.

Some of the stuff your incredibly arrogant ugly ass queen has done, is very, what was that word again, imperialistic, and I don't see you whinning about it? Hell, the mess in the middle east still has British signatures all over it. Pakistan, Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, etc, etc.

Like I said before: You really need some assistance in English skills

Even America was one of the British favourite colonies, they obviously failed to put some proper education on it. But, it's never too late. Just try. Even for the Caribbeans, there is a chance to enjoy some good education in the USofA.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Shipping out of Tripoli tons of sulfur mustard was immediate (e.g., “now-ism”) and something that could be shown to Congress as evidence of progress/success. It’s hard to measure, or in today's OSD-parlance ‘put a metric on’, success in a counterinsurgency.

Difficult in an "elephant repellant" sense, or in the sense that levels of violence aren't expected to decrease in a time frame on the order of the attention span of civilian leadership (regardless of whether someone, somewhere believed things were getting better?)

A little of the latter - successful counterinsurgencies, on average, take 12-15 years. But more that measuring the success of a counterinsurgency is just hard. One is trying to measure relatively intangible things or things that can have multiple variables, like confidence in government. Rarely is it counting a physical thing, which is easy.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

>I also think now would be a good time to stop blaming Bush and make
>a Presidential decision on how to move forward.

He did. Your dislike of it does not change it.

Really? What was it? Maybe I missed something.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

When should Obama stop blaming Bush?

Is it blaming or just stating the facts?

Bush did start two wars, and take a record surplus and turn it in to a record deficit. Just to mentione a few things.

Record means more then ever before so yea I think he can blame Bush all he wants.

We have already seen how soon people forget right on these forums. So yes I can see why he would need to remind people specially ones with such selective memories.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

From your cite:

Quote

"This was underresourced, underfunded, undermanned and ignored for years," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Well, since he's telling the truth, I don't see the problem.

What's your opinion? When can Obama take full responsibility for success and/or failure in Afghanistan?

Since the day President Obama received General McChrystal's recommendations.

"It's been more than two months since the recommendation went to the president. And Gen. McChrystal is talking about a 12-month time frame," Kyl said. "So clearly time is of the essence here."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/26/obama-says-rush-decision-afghanistan-strategy-troop-levels/

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

When should Obama stop blaming Bush?

Is it blaming or just stating the facts?

Bush did start two wars, and take a record surplus and turn it in to a record deficit. Just to mentione a few things.

Record means more then ever before so yea I think he can blame Bush all he wants.

We have already seen how soon people forget right on these forums. So yes I can see why he would need to remind people specially ones with such selective memories.

I think we could stop blaming him when he and his handler Dick Cheney get in front of the World Court and recieve the judgement of that court for the crap they perpetrated on the world.

[DanG 1]

I agree that two months seems like a long time to make a decision on troop levels. On the other hand, do you really think the day after McChrystal makes his recommendations for moving forward, everything that happened up to that point is now Obama's fault? Or that he needs to ignore the history of how we got where we are? That really doesn't make sense.

On the timeline issues, how long was it between Petreaus's recommendations and when Bush announced the surge? Was it the next day? I really don't remember. I'm not saying, "Bush did it first," I'm just trying to see if two months of internal dialouge is out of the ordinary for something like this.

- Dan G

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I agree that two months seems like a long time to make a decision on troop levels.

Not when he needs to essentially reevaluate the entire war, its effectiveness, and how it has been handled up to this point.

Troop levels are something of a catch-22, anyway. To implement a COIN strategy, there needs to be more troops. If a COIN strategy is to be successful, it will require support of the local population. The Afghani civilians are not in favor of increased troops.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

I agree that two months seems like a long time to make a decision on troop levels. On the other hand, do you really think the day after McChrystal makes his recommendations for moving forward, everything that happened up to that point is now Obama's fault? Or that he needs to ignore the history of how we got where we are? That really doesn't make sense.

On the timeline issues, how long was it between Petreaus's recommendations and when Bush announced the surge? Was it the next day? I really don't remember. I'm not saying, "Bush did it first," I'm just trying to see if two months of internal dialouge is out of the ordinary for something like this.

Actually I'm not criticising Obama's patience at all. I have confidence he will not allow it to get in the way of McChrystal's proposed timeline. If not then I'd have something else to complain about regarding Obama. He does have some folks inside the White House which believe the recommendations are just McChrystal's opinion and that does concern me.

Also I'm not disputing the dire situation in Afghanistan is Bush's fault. However with McChrystal's recommendations, the ball is now officially in Obama's court in my mind. Any failures/successes after that point are Obama's.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

When can Obama take full responsibility for success and/or failure in Afghanistan?

Since the day President Obama received General McChrystal's recommendations.

Quote

I agree that two months seems like a long time to make a decision on troop levels.

Curious … because I’ve been thinking about this for the last week or so, why do you both (or anyone else) think Pres Obama has not publicly acted? What’s your thinking behind that reasoning?

In February, Pres Obama authorized the deployment of 17,000 more combat troops (Marines and soldiers) to Afghanistan almost immediately after he received GEN Petraeus’ request through the SecDef and another 4000 in late March. He's authorized 13,000 “support troops” (civil affairs, engineers, medical personnel, intelligence, and military police) as well. All of that has not got much attention.

If one -- which I'm not implying either of you are or would ... or not -- argues that Pres Obama can’t/won’t make a decision or change w/r/t Afghanistan, does one explain those authorizations as anomalies, along with his decision to change leadership?

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

why do you both (or anyone else) think Pres Obama has not publicly acted? What’s your thinking behind that reasoning?

I don't. I posted that quote because it was the closest I could find to the date of McChrystal's recommendations. I should have been more clear.

Quote

In February, Pres Obama authorized the deployment of 17,000 more combat troops (Marines and soldiers) to Afghanistan almost immediately after he received GEN Petraeus’ request through the SecDef and another 4000 in late March. He's authorized 13,000 “support troops” (civil affairs, engineers, medical personnel, intelligence, and military police) as well. All of that has not got much attention.

Ohhh maybe I should up my timeline however I'm more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and move it to the time he makes the decision.

Quote

If one -- which I'm not implying either of you are or would ... or not -- argues that Pres Obama can’t/won’t make a decision or change w/r/t Afghanistan, does one explain those authorizations as anomalies, along with his decision to change leadership?

I would say those were easy decisions based on promises he made during his campaign. Obama hired McChrystal so accepting or denying McChystal's recommendations most certainly makes it Obama's war.

www.FourWheelerHB.com