It was bound to happen sooner or later that President Obama's natural liberal hatered and loathing for all things military slipped out for all to see in a highly palpable and deadly way. Now all this attempt to denigrate General McChrystal is out there. The General has only made what might be considered an indirect appeal for his plan to be implemented. People should keep in mind that a Bush white House and an Obama White House are different creatures when it comes to attitude toward the military. Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, the usual liberal suspects.. have exhibited contempt, flagrant contempt..., for our military men and women attempting to achieve success in war during the Bush administration, and it was pure... politics. The military rank and file and the commanders know very well the disdain that liberal polticians hold for the military. It is clear, to everyone, that Obama is following personal political considerations in his choice of how to permit the war in Afghanistan to be waged. He has forced General McChrystal to make a public appeal because a private appeal only falls on deaf ears. If I was in his place , knowing that the lives of the men in women under my command are being lost daily due to... what is clearly a political tactic ..., of delaying what is needed to wage the war adequately, of rules of engagement that are handcuffing his troops. I would be outraged. As a citizen I "am" outraged over all of this, as are many in our nation.
 
There should be no Democrat party political motivations involved if Obama is interested in doing what is right to protect the country, if he has to take a hit politically, then so be it, he should be ready and able to take it.  Bush was slammed like hell by the press , the Democrats and even  moderates in his own party almost EVERY DAY that he committed to the war in Iraq.
 
Every time we get caught up in arguing about whether McChrystal leaked some of the info in his report, or made an indirect appeal for his stratregy, we are losing focus on the real engagement of the war, and getting caught in the minutia. There is far..., far too much time being spent on hand wringing and groaning over what McChrystal is doing to get his plan implemented and not enough outrage that Obama is putting the war, the country, and our reputation of military excellence in jeapordy every moment he delays in doing the right thing.  The villian is not McChrystal, and not Obama... it's the enemy we are trying to kill. BUT...we've got a weak, liberal socialist egotist for a President and a General who desperately wants to be able to make things happen without needing to have that liberal leftist's approval, and that just isn't going to happen.  Personally I'm torn, because it seems the only way McChrystal is going to get Obama to consider his plan at any level is for him to put on the Presidential kneepads and ..., well you get the idea.  And the thought sickens me. Our President is failing in his most important role, defense of the country.  On the other hand, we have to win this battle.  the consequences of losing are far too devastating. And pulling out... is losing. McChrystal is put in an impossible situation.   He has to try to complete the mission goal without employing the strategy he has developed to do that.  Obama is sticking his thumb in McChrystal's eye and treating him like a second stringer.  If I was a fighting man in Afghanistan in the Marines or Army or whatever branch, I would be wondering how much more of our own military's spilt blood the President needs to see on his hands before he does the right thing.

It's obvious that Obama lied heartily and thoroughly during his campaign when asked about his strategy on fighting terrorism.
 
Below are actual quotes of Barack Obama when asked about the war on terror during his campaign....;
 
* "The Afghan government needs to do more. But we have to understand that the situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus, the central front, on our battle against terrorism," ....
 
* "I think one of the biggest mistakes we've made strategically after 9/11 was to fail to finish the job here, focus our attention here. We got distracted by Iraq," he said.
"...troop levels must increase in Afghanistan."
* "For at least a year now, I have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three," ( he told CBS.) "I think it's very important that we unify command more effectively to coordinate our military activities."

Here is a source you can check for yourself for the above three quotes made by Obama... 
 
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/20/obama.afghanistan/
 

- Mike Silverman

President Obama, a man who loves to make his own country look as bad as he can, has approved of the release of documents detailing interrogation methods used on terror suspects. There are many good, decent, honest citizens living in our country with great respect for our land and the law.  Personally, I do respect the law, and strive never to break it, the worst I've ever broken the law is when I got a ticket for going through a red light, and I will admit to speeding anywhere from 5 to 10 miles an hour above posted limits.  While I always do my best to abide by the law..., if it comes down to having to make a choice ..., I would say that I love and respect the freedom and life of my fellow countrymen more than I love and respect the exact letter of the law of the land, and so my view is in that regard when it comes to interrogation of captured terrorists or suspects. For the sake of moving past the surface debate, I will concede the point of view of those who wish to call interrogation methods like waterboarding torture.  For me, it's irrelevent in that matter. For me, if it comes down to being the only remaining option then I don't care if our CIA or military have to skin the captured "combatants"  alive to get them to cough up information. And if they don't... and they die while being "tortured" ... then that's one less vile beast out roaming the wilderness who will try sinking its fangs into my neighbors and family or blow up one or more of our courageous soldiers on the battlefield. Should the law be changed to allow torture of captured terrorists if other methods of interrogation fail?  Absolutley. The sooner the better. Should torture be an option now to potentially be used on captured terrorists and terror suspects, while the law technically forbids it?  Absolutely, if that's what it takes. But those who do so while it is illegal, should be prepared to take the potential risk of being tried and imprisoned for breaking the law.  And I am certain the list of volunteers willing to take that chance would be long enough to encircle the globe. For his part, Obama at least did the right thing in saying there would be no prosecution of those who already engaged "torture" interrogations. Obama calls it a "dark and painful chapter in our history" while ignoring how it saved lives and that is was never the first option.   I have seen enough unclassified material on the results of intelligence gained through "torture" to feel confident it has worked enough times successfully, not in every case, but then we have experts in the field of interrogation who should be able to determine the candidate on whom it would work best and , of course,  it should only be used as a last resort.  When all other methods of gaining intelligence have failed, and only when there is substantive reason to believe the individual facing it has covert knowledge that can save our lives. And just to be very clear, this is in regard to captured "combatants" at Guantanamo prison who, in my humble opinion, do not, and should not,  fall under the protection of the US Constitution or the Geneva Convention. 
 

- Mike Silverman