President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Don]

I'm not looking at this as a left or right issue. I'm looking at who is the best man on the ground in Afghanistan. We know our allies are going to be bailing sooner or later. I think a change in leadership by us hastens that decision for some which means more weight on our own troops and more deaths.

[Rockindeano]

And if he doesn't respect Obama, he should have stepped down, like Colin Powell did when Bush and Rice were busy lying to the UN under the guise of Resolution 1441.

I wish Powell took such a noble high road. Instead, they used his credibility for the WMD sales pitch, and then fired his ass. Read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00106.html

That is a remarkable read. The White House sending his resignation letter back to him because of a typo? What assholes! Bush never spoke to him in his last days...let's Card be the one to make the call. Sounds like a rock band I know of.

[portland]

And if he doesn't respect Obama, he should have stepped down, like Colin Powell did when Bush and Rice were busy lying to the UN under the guise of Resolution 1441.

I wish Powell took such a noble high road. Instead, they used his credibility for the WMD sales pitch, and then fired his ass. Read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00106.html

That is a remarkable read. The White House sending his resignation letter back to him because of a typo? What assholes! Bush never spoke to him in his last days...let's Card be the one to make the call. Sounds like a rock band I know of.

LMAO

[Rockindeano]

I'm not looking at this as a left or right issue. I'm looking at who is the best man on the ground in Afghanistan. We know our allies are going to be bailing sooner or later. I think a change in leadership by us hastens that decision for some which means more weight on our own troops and more deaths.

You certainly make a good argument for keeping him. Obama actually considered retaining him. However, where does it stop? Who's to stop the next general from running his piehole, criticizing the president? As for allies in Afganistan, doesn't the US have it's two best friends there, in the UK and Canada? They're not leaving anytime soon. This conflict is a justified one, unlike Iraq, and they'll remain on board, especially since the troops are coming home next year in July.

[Rockindeano]

And if he doesn't respect Obama, he should have stepped down, like Colin Powell did when Bush and Rice were busy lying to the UN under the guise of Resolution 1441.

I wish Powell took such a noble high road. Instead, they used his credibility for the WMD sales pitch, and then fired his ass. Read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00106.html

That is a remarkable read. The White House sending his resignation letter back to him because of a typo? What assholes! Bush never spoke to him in his last days...let's Card be the one to make the call. Sounds like a rock band I know of.

LMAO

Nothing funny about it at all. Just proof what that sleazy administration did and to a good man and faithful public servant. Disgusting.

[portland]

And if he doesn't respect Obama, he should have stepped down, like Colin Powell did when Bush and Rice were busy lying to the UN under the guise of Resolution 1441.

I wish Powell took such a noble high road. Instead, they used his credibility for the WMD sales pitch, and then fired his ass. Read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00106.html

That is a remarkable read. The White House sending his resignation letter back to him because of a typo? What assholes! Bush never spoke to him in his last days...let's Card be the one to make the call. Sounds like a rock band I know of.

LMAO

Nothing funny about it at all. Just proof what that sleazy administration did and to a good man and faithful public servant. Disgusting.

I was laughing at your analogy....not the situation at hand.

[donnaplease]

Obama actually considered retaining him.

Haha, you make it sound as if the two of you discussed it, and he shared his thoughts with you...

I guess they could've had a beer summit or something. Obama should certainly understand people sticking their size 12 in their mouth.

[7 Wishes]

For the first time in seven months, FactFinder has cited a non-partisan, non-right-wing-lunatic fringe source for actual factual information!

[7 Wishes]

This is an IRS issue. And they did fuck this one up royally.

[Don]

BBC World Affairs Editor John Simpson, who knows both Gen Stanley McChrystal and the man who will take over his duties, Gen David Petraeus, looks at what Gen McChrystal's sacking reveals about the Obama administration.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and ... 400347.stm

US President Barack Obama is lucky to have a general as good as David Petraeus to put into the job vacated by Stanley McChrystal. It means there should be no great problem keeping US policy in Afghanistan on track.

The trouble is that policy was starting to be questioned even before Gen McChrystal's mild indiscretion brought his career to an abrupt end.

And the manner of President Obama's reaction to a few remarks quoted in Rolling Stone magazine is already being interpreted as showing the president's weakness, rather than his strength.

A stronger, more self-confident president would have given Gen McChrystal a public roasting, then told him in as many words to get on with the job and keep his mouth shut in future

Even though Gen Petraeus is a remarkably safe pair of hands, Gen McChrystal will be sadly missed in Afghanistan.

The government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai will miss him, because he understood the importance of winning the support of the Afghan people in fighting the Taliban - who, he said in an interview with the BBC some months ago, do not like the Taliban or want to have them back in power.

"It's not a popular movement, and so what we need to do is correct some of the ways we operated in the past," he went on. In particular, he has done everything he could to prevent the troops under his command from killing Afghan civilians.

His allies, particularly the British, will miss him too. Gen McChrystal is an anglophile with a Special Forces background. That tends to bring with it a closeness with and respect for the British special forces.

He was a particular favourite with the SAS, and not long ago was the guest of honour at a big dinner at their headquarters in Hereford.

Of course, it was unwise of him and his press advisers, who were experienced and able, to forget over a period of a fortnight that they had a journalist in their midst.

But the general's transgressions were pretty mild. Only a government as nervous as President Obama's about seeming weak and indecisive would have reacted so fiercely.

The problem is that the reasons for Gen McChrystal's irritation with Washington have not gone away.

There is a clear lack of decision about the way the war should be fought, and about whether and how there should be negotiations with the Taliban.

On Monday, this indecision cost the job of the most senior British diplomat in charge of Afghanistan, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles. He is now on "extended leave" for disagreeing with the latest views in Washington about how to deal with the Taliban.

The politicians and soldiers involved in directing US policy are fighting among themselves, and the battle can be vicious.

Gen McChrystal, one of the ablest commanders America has produced during the last few decades, has fallen victim to this in-fighting as much as to his own bluntness and lack of diplomacy.

He wanted a much more clear-cut approach, free from the lack of decision and the squabbling that has caused such problems in Washington.

He suffered last year as President Obama put off a decision for month after month before agreeing to follow Gen McChrystal's (and Gen Petraeus's) advice about the way forward in Afghanistan. And he was too straightforward to keep his feelings entirely hidden.

Gen Petraeus, his superior officer and mentor who will now take on his job, will not make the same mistakes. Gen Petraeus has views which are no less clear-cut than Gen McChrystal's, but he knows how to dress them up diplomatically.

(He is, incidentally, no less of an anglophile and an admirer of the SAS than Gen McChrystal.)

As a man with an interest in the classics, Gen Petraeus has always followed the Latin injunction Fortiter in re, suaviter in modo (be tough in your aims, but smooth in the way you put them into practice).

Fighting a war with a nervous would-be micro-manager back in the White House and a swarm of potential critics will require all the toughness and smoothness at his disposal.

But we can be sure Gen Petraeus will be too canny to let his hair down within the earshot of any journalist.

[7 Wishes]

Good Lord, Don. Even your own guys on this board think you're full of shit. If this had happened while Dubbya "I don't feel like serving in the Alabama National Guard" Bush was President, you would have called for his head.

What General Stan did violated (in no uncertain terms) the military code of conduct. Far lesser offenses have resulted in court-martials and dishonorable discharges.

Get a life.

[lights1961]

And if he doesn't respect Obama, he should have stepped down, like Colin Powell did when Bush and Rice were busy lying to the UN under the guise of Resolution 1441.

I wish Powell took such a noble high road. Instead, they used his credibility for the WMD sales pitch, and then fired his ass. Read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00106.html

That is a remarkable read. The White House sending his resignation letter back to him because of a typo? What assholes! Bush never spoke to him in his last days...let's Card be the one to make the call. Sounds like a rock band I know of.

LMAO

Deano... wouldnt you say then that Clinton was also going around lying to the public about WMD in the 90s Reno was out there and some of the others talking about the same issue....then... The weapons I feel were there... IRAQ just moved or sold em to Syria, while we werent watching... which in turned probably sold the WMDS to IRAN... just going back aways... everyone forgets esecially deano that Clinton and the UN were making Sanctions after sactions from 93 or so to when he left office against IRAQ... regarding WMDS...
he (Clinton) just didnt have the guts to confront the issue... after 9/11 everything was on the table to finally meet the issue head on... if another leader was in office, they would have done the same thing... would have had too, maybe not as quick as W did... but hindsight is easy on the left... when its after the fact...

[slucero]

What the General did was violate an unwritten code of conduct.... He didn't disobey any orders... or violate any military law... he did nothing that would constitute a "criminal" offense that he could be tried or discharged for...

[7 Wishes]

It IS a violation of military law.

That is a direct violation of Article 88 of the UCMJ.

Look it up and get back to me.

[slucero]

It IS a violation of military law.

That is a direct violation of Article 88 of the UCMJ.

Look it up and get back to me.

Try reading the definition of Article 88... then the RS article..

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitive ... /mcm88.htm

Text.
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element
(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

Explanation.
The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, ad-verse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.
Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not rdinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

Lesser included offense.
Article 80—attempts

Maximum punishment.
Dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

Above Information from Manual for Court Martial, 2002, Chapter 4, Paragraph 12

The article 88 definition excludes the following: "If not personally contemptuous, ad-verse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article."

I have read the full article... in fact he never really talks directly about Obama at all... and he says nothing in the RS article that is "contemptuous".. ... which is the definition for an Article 88...
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... how_page=5


"Look it up and get back to me"

[The_Noble_Cause]

Deano... wouldnt you say then that Clinton was also going around lying to the public about WMD in the 90s Reno was out there and some of the others talking about the same issue....then... The weapons I feel were there...

The inspectors who were on the ground and were pulled out, beg to differ. Bush said he would exhaust all possible non-military avenues. When your inspectors are saying "hold up, there's no WMDs" and you unleash shock and awe anyway, what does that tell you?

IRAQ just moved or sold em to Syria, while we werent watching...

But we were watching - all the time. Remember the satellite imagery of the mobile weapons labs? Just where do you think those came from?

....if another leader was in office, they would have done the same thing... would have had too, maybe not as quick as W did... but hindsight is easy on the left... when its after the fact...

This is pure fantasy. Would President Gore's administration have been swarming with PNAC neocons who had been banging the Iraq war drumbeat for years? Highly doubtful. Bush handed them the keys to foreign policy. If anything, Gore would have kept up air raids and sanctions, which had decimated the country.

[Saint John]

As for allies in Afganistan, doesn't the US have it's two best friends there, in the UK and Canada?

Canada ... . What the fuck did they send ... a goalie and a case of fucking Molson???

[lights1961]

Deano... wouldnt you say then that Clinton was also going around lying to the public about WMD in the 90s Reno was out there and some of the others talking about the same issue....then... The weapons I feel were there...

The inspectors who were on the ground and were pulled out, beg to differ. Bush said he would exhaust all possible non-military avenues. When your inspectors are saying "hold up, there's no WMDs" and you unleash shock and awe anyway, what does that tell you?

IRAQ just moved or sold em to Syria, while we werent watching...

But we were watching - all the time. Remember the satellite imagery of the mobile weapons labs? Just where do you think those came from?

....if another leader was in office, they would have done the same thing... would have had too, maybe not as quick as W did... but hindsight is easy on the left... when its after the fact...

This is pure fantasy. Would President Gore's administration have been swarming with PNAC neocons who had been banging the Iraq war drumbeat for years? Highly doubtful. Bush handed them the keys to foreign policy. If anything, Gore would have kept up air raids and sanctions, which had decimated the country.

BUT you dont know that really...its all speculation... about what GORE MIGHT HAVE HAD TO DO IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL SECURITY after 9/11...
and W I dont think would have gone after IRAQ if 9.11 never happened at least not to the degree he thought he had too..... he would have used the air force and bomb as well... but remember 9.11 changed all of everyone's thinking in DC and in the W administration and around the country...even your SIDE wanted IRAQ attacked... remember???






Rick

[The_Noble_Cause]

BUT you dont know that really...its all speculation....about what GORE MIGHT HAVE HAD TO DO IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL SECURITY after 9/11...

Family friends and close confidants, including Bush's own Treasury Secretary, said Bush was angling for a way into Iraq from jumpstreet. Gore was not carrying this axe to grind. He also would not have been surrounded by Nixon and Reagan neocons who had been urging military action. On many levels, there are NO differences between the two parties. This is the rare exception.

...but remember 9.11 changed all of everyone's thinking in DC and in the W administration and around the country...even your SIDE wanted IRAQ attacked... remember???

The agenda of invading Iraq did not arise organically from the ashes of ground zero. That was a policy set from the top down.
As for "my side"....like all politicians, the Dems are spineless. You either voted for Iraq or found yourself Rove-slimed as an unpatriotic brie-eating surrender monkey in the fall midterms.

[7 Wishes]

Under no circumstances would Gore have invaded Iraq. He has even said that in numerous interviews.

As for Article 88, slucero...read it. You're wrong. Stanely DID break the law.

[treetopovskaya]

As for allies in Afganistan, doesn't the US have it's two best friends there, in the UK and Canada?

Canada ... . What the fuck did they send ... a goalie and a case of fucking Molson???

HAHA! }:C)

[RossValoryRocks]

Under no circumstances would Gore have invaded Iraq. He has even said that in numerous interviews.

Yeah after the fact...and after it became a hot potato issue. Plus he is a politician...wtf did you EXPECT him to say? I mean REALLY? You expect the truth?

Just like I am SURE he was always faithful to Tipper...

As for Article 88, slucero...read it. You're wrong. Stanely DID break the law.

Well as a former MP (That's a military police officer for all you civilians) I can tell you under no circumstances did he violate the UCMJ...He would have been prosecuted...the military is not prone to laxity on article 88...EVER...no matter WHOM it is...

HOWEVER...

What he did was violate an unwritten rule about criticizing the civilians who actually are in charge of things...

And Obama was right to fire him...

[slucero]

Under no circumstances would Gore have invaded Iraq. He has even said that in numerous interviews.

Yeah after the fact...and after it became a hot potato issue. Plus he is a politician...wtf did you EXPECT him to say? I mean REALLY? You expect the truth?

Just like I am SURE he was always faithful to Tipper...

As for Article 88, slucero...read it. You're wrong. Stanely DID break the law.

Well as a former MP (That's a military police officer for all you civilians) I can tell you under no circumstances did he violate the UCMJ...He would have been prosecuted...the military is not prone to laxity on article 88...EVER...no matter WHOM it is...

HOWEVER...

What he did was violate an unwritten rule about criticizing the civilians who actually are in charge of things...

And Obama was right to fire him...

Guess that makes YOU WRONG eh 7?

[RossValoryRocks]

A top aide to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he believed Barack Obama knew of Blagojevich's plot to win himself a presidential Cabinet post in exchange for appointing Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate.

John Harris, Blagojevich's former chief of staff, testified Wednesday in the former governor's corruption trial that three days after the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, the ex-governor told Harris he felt confident Obama knew he wanted to swap perks.

FF...I gotta say...it's one scumbag politican trying to deflect attention by INSINUATING that the President was involved in some impropriety.

I actually DON'T believe it...because it would be completely stupid that well...I just don't think ANY President (or this case President-Elect) would even THINK about it...now...Rahm???

Well...

[treetopovskaya]

A top aide to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he believed Barack Obama knew of Blagojevich's plot to win himself a presidential Cabinet post in exchange for appointing Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate.

John Harris, Blagojevich's former chief of staff, testified Wednesday in the former governor's corruption trial that three days after the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, the ex-governor told Harris he felt confident Obama knew he wanted to swap perks.

FF...I gotta say...it's one scumbag politican trying to deflect attention by INSINUATING that the President was involved in some impropriety.

I actually DON'T believe it...because it would be completely stupid that well...I just don't think ANY President (or this case President-Elect) would even THINK about it...now...Rahm???

Well...

yeah... that rahm guy is swarmy.

[7 Wishes]

Wow, that really is incriminating.

Rahm is beginning to come across as a self-absorbed, petulant, narcissistic asshole, though.

[AlteredDNA]

Wow, that really is incriminating.

Rahm is beginning to come across as a self-absorbed, petulant, narcissistic asshole, though.

???

[7 Wishes]

Guess that makes YOU WRONG eh 7?

Nope. Not at all. READ IT. It meets all the requirements without fail. Had he not voluntarily tendered his resignation he would (or could) have been court-martialed. That would have been a terrible PR move for this Administration.

Text.
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.” CHECK

Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces; CHECK
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article; CHECK
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; CHECK and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. CHECK

[RossValoryRocks]

Guess that makes YOU WRONG eh 7?

Nope. Not at all. READ IT. It meets all the requirements without fail. Had he not voluntarily tendered his resignation he would (or could) have been court-martialed. That would have been a terrible PR move for this Administration.

Text.
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.” CHECK

Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces; CHECK
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article; CHECK
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; CHECK and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. CHECK

It was about as voluntary a resignation as Nixon's was...and you are wrong about the article 88...period. What he said doesn't rise to the level you suggest...or wish?...it did...

[7 Wishes]

Stu, with all due respect, how can you possibly even suggest that? It's plain as day. There is no subjective interpretation of this one.