Ah Clinton Military Nostalgia…

Posted: September 22, 2009 in opinion/news, war
Tags: , , , , ,

The wonderful memories:

September 2007

But Clinton not only couldn’t bring herself to criticize it, she also attacked Petraeus’ honesty: “The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief,” she huffed to the general Tuesday.

And she slammed him (and Ambassador Ryan Crocker) as “de facto spokesmen for a failed policy,” pointedly refusing to criticize the ad – which called him an outright liar who’d “betray” his nation.

Sept 2009:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed back against the US military’s blunt warning that the battle against insurgents in Afghanistan would likely be lost within a year without more US troops.

Clinton’s comments in an interview with PBS television late Monday came amid reports that the Pentagon has asked General Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, to delay a request for more troops.

Clinton expressed “respect” for McChrystal’s assessment that the United States would likely lose the war in Afghanistan within a year without more US forces.

“But I can only tell you there are other assessments from very expert military analysts who have worked in counter-insurgencies that are the exact opposite,”

Well at least she said it with a bit less venom.

Let’s hope this president gives Mrs. Clinton opinion the same weight that it was given the last time.

What is this thing with generals? Next thing you know she will be going after General Hospital.

The real sad thing is the politics of it all:

There’s this anonymous quote from one observer: “He can send more troops and it will be a disaster and he will destroy the Democratic party. Or he can send no more troops and it will be a disaster and the Republicans will say he lost the war.” Isn’t this extraordinary? Obama will roil the Democratic party by sending more troops to fight the war that Democrats have said for years is the “necessary war” (in Obama’s words), the central war in the fight against terror, etc., etc. It’s hard to imagine a starker demonstration of bad faith on an important issue of national security.

No sign of the idea of WINNING the “formerly necessary war“! Maybe they didn’t mean it. It was so bad like that on Morning Joe where they were saying the problem was the people stuck on the idea of winning I had to change the channel.

That’s liberals for you. Pass Obamacare and put the cost on our children and grandchildren, Concede defeat and pass the danger and the risks on to our children and grandchildren.

It is for this reason more than any other that Glenn Beck is all wet when it comes to McCain v Obama. He might have been poor on domestic issues but he damn well wouldn’t sell out the country when it comes to the war. We wouldn’t have to worry about defense being ignored period.

2010 & 2012 can’t come soon enough for me.

Update: I’ll wager Baldilocks would have given anything to not be able to take this victory lap

Comments are closed.