Obama '08?

The FBI defines terrorism as "violent acts... intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government, or affect the conduct of a government", which is a precise description of the activities of SOA's graduates. But how can we be sure that their alma mater has had any part in this? Well, in 1996, the US government was forced to release seven of the school's training manuals. Among other top tips for terrorists, they recommended blackmail, torture, execution and the arrest of witnesses' relatives.

India stipulates that only a government hospital, registered facility, or medical practitioner with appropriate qualifications may perform an abortion. The reality, however, is that only about 15 percent of all abortions take place under such circumstances, according to the Indian Medical Association. About 11.2 million illegal abortions are performed each year off the record. Such abortions are often "female feticide," experts say.

When you come unhinged from sound principles

Gob1 writes: No, the evidence is to the contrary. Most involve deliberate abortions performed "for the mental health of the mother" or other like reasons.

Cycloptichorn asks:
Do you have a link to such evidence? I could have swore that such abortions were illegal in most places without life-threatening circumstances.

Gob1 replied: Evidently you prefer to evade the question. OK by me.

Gob1 had written: Well, as cicerone has so uncharacteristically researched for us,

The nazi analogy has to do with people hideing thier head in the sand even though they know that government decisions are wrong like the Bushs war with iraq that we americans did nothing about when we had a chance to throw them out of power on his second term. We let government stampede us into a stupid war even when a majority realized it was political bull shite.

Come on CI. I never said that american babies were more important than indian ones.

You must think back to 2003 or so and remember what the majority of people were thinking and feeling then. Those who were sure that it was a bad idea to invade Iraq were a small minority.

Obama Sees a ‘Complete Failure’ in Iraq

KANSAS CITY, Mo., Aug. 21. 2007 " Senator Barack Obama said Tuesday that even if the military escalation in Iraq was showing limited signs of progress, efforts to stabilize the country had been a “complete failure” and American troops should not be entangled in the sectarian strife.

“No military surge, no matter how brilliantly performed, can succeed without political reconciliation and a surge of diplomacy in Iraq and the region,” Mr. Obama said. “Iraq’s leaders are not reconciling. They are not achieving political benchmarks.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/us/politics/22vets.html?_r=1

Surge 'Suceeded Beyond Our Wildest Dreams,' Obama Now Says
Friday, September 05, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor

Obama not only opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, he also opposed the troop surge and predicted it would not work. . . .

On Thursday, O’Reilly urged Obama to admit he was wrong about the surge.

“I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated -- by the way, including President Bush and the other supporters. It has gone very well,” Obama conceded. But, he added, it still hasn’t been a total success.

“We have reduced the violence, but the Iraqis still haven’t taken responsibility, and we still don’t have the kind of political reconciliation -- we are still spending $10-$12 billion dollars a month,” Obama said.

Obama has said that as president, he would draw down U.S. troops in Iraq and send two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, which should have been the focus of the war on terror all along, he insists.

Obama’s Web site says that “immediately upon taking office,” Obama will order an end to the Iraq war. “The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government,” his Web site says. He envisions having most U.S. troops out of Iraq by the summer of 2010.
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=35226

Obama's Iraq Problem
By Dan Froomkin
02/27/2009

By President Obama's reckoning, we never should have gone into Iraq in the first place, but today -- even as he announced a timeline for the departure of American troops -- he more or less endorsed former president George W. Bush's possibly unattainable goals for the benighted country.

"This strategy is grounded in a clear and achievable goal shared by the Iraqi people and the American people: an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant," Obama said today at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. "To achieve that goal, we will work to promote an Iraqi government that is just, representative, and accountable, and that provides neither support nor safe-haven to terrorists. We will help Iraq build new ties of trade and commerce with the world. And we will forge a partnership with the people and government of Iraq that contributes to the peace and security of the region."

Obama's decision to remove all combat troops from Iraq in 18 months, while leaving as many as 50,000 troops there in non-combat roles until the end of 2011, will strike some observers as too fast and others as too slow. It's certainly a bit slower than what he said he would do on the campaign trail.

But I have to wonder: What happens when we leave? And who gets the blame if things fall apart?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/2009/02/obamas_iraq_problem/pf.html

Surge 'Suceeded Beyond Our Wildest Dreams,' Obama Now Says

“I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated -- by the way, including President Bush and the other supporters. It has gone very well,” Obama conceded. But, he added, it still hasn’t been a total success.