Carmella Bing In Vegas

Obama's Afghanistan speech reveals presidential confusion

If Barack Obama acting as commander in chief, as Commander-in-Chief, which is always surreal. The president is out of place, seems forced and tortured. A lack of credibility and authenticity is evident when he executes his smooth talking points. The long-overdue speech ("The Way Forward in Afghanistan [1]") on the strategy in Afghanistan was coolly received at West Point. She ended months-long delay and procrastination [2] in a time when NATO troops in Afghanistan risked their lives and were waiting for a clear commitment to a clear decision from Washington. The agreed increase of 30,000 troops is right. The absurdity of maneuvering between the President of obvious military necessity and the happiness of his leftist anti-war base will be significantly in two consecutive sentences of speech. One can read these sentences as a preventive capitulation statement or as a cynical quest for power.

"As commander in chief, I have decided that it is in our vital national interest to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months werden unsere Truppen nach Hause kommen.“

Ich schicke Soldaten, ziehe sie aber sofort wieder ab. Da spricht der ausgebuffte Militärstratege.

Die Nennung eines Abzugsdatums, kaum das die Truppen im Einsatz sind, ist ein Fehler. Die angekündigte Vorgehensweise ist widersprüchlich, unlogisch. Ob Obama wirklich glaubt, dass die zusätzlichen Soldaten in dem jetzt acht Jahre währenden Konflikt innerhalb weniger Monate ein erfolgreiches Ende herbeiführen können und ein verantwortlicher Abzug beginnen kann oder ob er zynisch „politics“ spielt, um seiner Anti-Kriegs-Basis ein paar Brocken hinwerfen zu können, bleibt offen.

Welche Botschaft kommt bei den Taliban an, bei the allies, with the troops and the Karzai government? The military takes Obama does not deny that he stands fully behind the mission, as Bush behind the surge in Iraq 2007th Even at that time Obama was in his assessment, the increase in troops in Iraq will do nothing spectacularly wrong.

Obama praises the army for success in Iraq. Rather than respect for the historic decision of the 43rd to express the President to increase the troops, Obama took every opportunity to discredit his predecessor. Why he means to need?

The Taliban now know what they have set themselves. Half years and then descend to the storming of Kabul . Retrofit Why fight now when the enemy withdraws to view? The European allies will do everything possible in this context to its treaty obligations to withdraw even further. Pakistan will set up a possible takeover by the Taliban in two to three years. The Karzai government to bring their sheep into the dry and sitting on packed suitcases.

Where do young Afghans to join the army, risking their lives to take the place of NATO troops, when announcing the U.S. to begin in July 2011 with the withdrawal, leaving an inadequately spiked force themselves and an enemy; she - is not up - yet? Men with intellect will do a devil. The

not dependent on local conditions, the withdrawal date demoralized Afghan partners, encouraging the Taliban and al Qaeda.

When Obama spoke in his speech, Pakistan once again came to the question of what kind of world the president actually lives:

"We are committed to partnership with Pakistan, based on common interests, mutual respect and mutual trust".

Not a word of it is true!

Afghanistan is now Obama's war.

America will soon have 100,000 troops in action. Half of which Obama has posted. If the next Congress in 2010 pending elections he can no longer hide behind George W. Bush.

Obama used more time to criticize Bush and the Taliban. Typically, this is usually followed immediately on the invocation of bipartisanship. A principle that is more and more transparent and contribute to the declining values \u200b\u200bObama's sympathy.

The speech was a fiasco. Not a word about the atrocities of the Taliban and al Qaeda. Not once was the word "victory", not once the announcement that they would fight the Taliban and destroy, like him still in the inaugural address was (And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that, 'Our spirit is broken and can not be stronger. You can not outlast us, and we will defeat you .'").

Obama: Empty Suit in the White House

When the going gets rough, the air is out of the man whom the English Spectator recently participated as a "empty suit" on its cover.

makes Instead, the president of the trillions for the nationalization of the banks and the auto industry uses, the more billions for the reform of health insurance plans to worry about $ 30 billion additional cost for the war in Afghanistan. Just a shake of the head remained, as the applause died down fade.

And the speech contains a few more tidbits:

"I have therefore made it a central pillar of my foreign policy to secure nuclear weapons from terrorists, to stop the spread of nuclear weapons."

Grotesk. See Iran.

"I've spent this year in order to renew our alliances."

questions once Gordon Brown or even better, Israel, Czech Republic and Poland. Maybe Obama but says even his soap of loyalty [4] to the Muslim world or the servants from the Saudi king or the Japanese emperor?

"We need every man, woman and child around the world, the dark cloud of tyranny under the live make it clear that America is on behalf of their human rights, speak out, facing the light of freedom, justice, opportunity and full respect for the dignity of all peoples. "

unload the Dalai Lama, President Clinton sent to North Korea for the photo session and the carnage in the streets of Tehran does not qualify just to watch one weeks speechless for that worn-out and from the mouth of Obama's totally implausible phrases.

Someone recently said Obama did not know how to be president. I think he has it started later than Tuesday at West Point to prove.


© Joachim Nikolaus Steinhöfel 2009