Isn’t it amazing how General Petraeus was vilified under George Bush but now he is the best choice to replace McChrystal.
Why do you suppose the change of heart? Obama was clueless in his partisan speech in 2007 and remains the same today. YouTube - Barack Obama Questions Petraeus in September 2007
The replacement of McChrystal was necessary as he broke some cardinal military rules and standards that show poor judgment. But the replacement with Petraeus (excellent choice) just shows how partisan the democrats really were under George Bush.
The Democrats had no desire to win the war in Iraq if it meant giving credit to the Bush administration or acknowledging the validity of the war.
Obama is a pathetic president and a pathetic administration.
In this recent editorial, Fouad Ajami: Petraeus, Obama and the War in Afghanistan - WSJ.com, one of the last statements is; “Nor can his mission end in success if our country isn't in this fight for real.”
Obama and the democrats have never been in the fight “for real” and we will lose more soldiers because of Obama.
This is the eighth Fest of Ales? Really?
4 hours ago
Would it not be true that the nonstop anti democratic party rhetoric on here is pathetic and very partisan? Or is there a separate set of standards for christian conservatives since they are the only true patriots?
ReplyDeleteI say that what this administration has done to this country in passing its socialistic agenda despite overwhelming opposition from the electorate is anything but patriotic. Placing today's huge debts onto the shoulders of future generations is anti-Christian and criminal.
ReplyDelete