Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
In my opinion whether you agreed with him or not the Bush agenda was clear. Obama seems to be all over the place and is not sending clear messages. Many complained about Bush's rhetoric, which appeared to some to be unsophisticated, but Obama's nuances don't work in a war. Obama is not even close to Bush regarding the execution of war. Bush had clear goals and objectives for Iraq and treated prisoners of war like prisoners of war. We don't even know what Obama's objectives are in Afghanistan, do we? But he is escalating the war. Do we know who are we fighting? What political goals we are trying to achieve? Are the people we are fighting the enemy or are they people needing help? Are we in a secret war in Pakistan? One thing we did know in February was Obama's intent on treating Afghanistan detainees in a manner similar to the Bush administration, while being highly critical of Bush's policy in Gitmo.
|
this is a joke, right? If not, what were Bush's clear objectives? And please, don't insult our intelligence by ignoring the several different objectives he set up. And how was Bush's execution of the war much better? Last I checked, Iraq was a mess for at least 4 years, Rumsfeld had to resign over it, and Afghanistan was slowing drifting back into Taliban's hands. And shouldn't all those questions be asked of who started the wars? And are you seriously saying that he "treated prisoners of war as prisoners of war?"
Of course I would rather see Obama reverse a lot of his decisions on these matters, but I don't see how anyone can sustain a position that at the same time criticizes Obama for continuing some Bush policies and attacks him for not being enough like Bush with a straight face.