Anyone else shocked at how many...

[SHRED]

...here on the DU are pro-war in Afghanistan?

Of course we outnumber them but holy cow.
:crazy:

[tabatha]

1. I am not pro-war.

For many years, after the start of the Iraq war, I would wake up sick to my stomach thinking about the innocent Iraqis - every day.
However, nukes are a problem. Without controlling that, there may be no more mornings to wake up to.
I am glad troops are leaving Iraq - which is unfortunately in tatters.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tabatha]

4. I think you are putting thoughts in their heads.

I really hate it when people decide how others think and feel.

Did you listen to Susan Rice last night?

[xiamiam]

29. remain unconvinced after listening to the interview with her..nt

[AndyA]

58. If you are refering to Rice's appearance on TRMS, yes I saw it.

I've also heard the solution in Afghanistan isn't a military one, it's a political one.

[tabatha]

62. And Obama is pursuing both.

[pampango]

20. "One more quote from Skinner:"

"Just as DUers should be able to support and defend Barack Obama here on DU without being attacked or having their motives questioned, DUers should also be able to share legitimate criticism of Barack Obama without being attacked or having their motives questioned."


That means that people who strongly agree with policy and actions from this administration shouldn't be called kool-aid drinkers, or whatever other insults there are. I've talked about administrative cheerleaders at times, and even that probably crosses the line.

On the other hand, its also not appropriate to shout about "ponies" to people that disagree. Or call them haters, or whatever else. Fair's fair, eh?

We both have a right to exist here and to raise our passionate concerns.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7095539

[laughingliberal]

78. This should be said more often nt

[Sukie]

32. Since you used the term, "saint" in describing Obama,

I am quite sure you are not an honest DUer.

[AndyA]

60. Everyone has an opinion.

Since you don't know me personally, you aren't really in a position to judge my honesty. :eyes:

[sharp_stick]

34. Not classy at all dude

"Saint Obama" "current Bushies"

I can disagree with people around here quite a bit but bush league name-calling like the above is just pathetic.

[AndyA]

59. Actually, they are the ones who started the name calling.

Just a quick search on DU will show virtually everyone who criticizes Obama is attacked.

[sharp_stick]

65. Not in this thread, you started it here

If you can point me to the single person who started the name calling and find a way to link it to this thread I'll retract my criticism. Saying someone did it first is a cheap cop-out.

I've seen a shitload of insulting stuff, far worse than anything you've done here but I'll use this just to make a point, on both sides of this "Obama is a Saint" "Obama is an Asshole" line of moronic idiocy since the primaries and I'm getting sick of it. I've been in my share of flame wars but I think this is getting pathetic, on both sides.

[AllentownJake]

3. No

If Barack Obama came to their house and slapped them in the face and told them to grab a mop, they'd run to their garage to get the literal mop.

[NightWatcher]

5. what kills me is when Bush did it, there was outrage, but Obama's cool

and I am/was/am??? a big Obama supporter. I worked for his team going back to early February. I worked in two states and multiple cities. I dont just turn off my criticism button because I voted for the guy. I knew at the time that he said Afghanistan was dangerous, but I still dont like ANY ESCALATION of war, either war. I really did not like his Bushisms and fearmongering about new attacks here and abroad.

[SHRED]

7. That is a disease

And here it is:

Partisan War Syndrome
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2354/


---

[chill_wind]

56. Partisan War Syndrome. . Sirota pegs the party again.

Excellent article. Thanks for remembering that one. He tells it like it is.

[sharp_stick]

35. I wasn't around here

when shrubbo went into Afghanistan, but I, and probably one hell of a lot more people here than are likely willing to admit it supported him on it.

My disgust for his policies didn't begin to form until he and his cabal of assholes decided to dump Afghanistan in the laps of NATO to go after his own personal demons in Iraq.

I happen to still support efforts in Afghanistan for two reasons.

1) The Taliban are scum, they have always been scum and will always be scum. They tortured and executed women for not wearing the proper ankle length burqa, tortured and executed kids that they "thought" might have homosexual tendencies and in general were completely without human decency in any meaningful way.
2) The Taliban were openly harboring Al-queda and they weren't about to stop. Shrubbo had his chance to stop them and allowed them to escape into the border regions with Pakistan. Shrubbo then continued to fuck up by not putting any pressure on his puppet in Pakistan Pervez Musharef (sp?) to go after them in the Swat valley area. This allowed Al-queda another new and free zone of control, which along with the lack of support in Afghanistan gave them de-facto government control of a massive number of people and a massive area.

Obama's plan to stabilize Afghanistan has a shot, I think we owe it to the people of Afghanistan to give them a shot. Leaving now will give the country back to the Taliban which is something that should haunt us forever if it happens. Our only chance IMO is to try to stabilize the place and get out.

[tabatha]

63. +10

[xiamiam]

6. i think we're toast...they've got their talking points..

this is scarier than 2002...sorry, but it is.. at least then we were united ....i had such hope...its gone...

[SHRED]

9. I knew Obama was DLC oriented

I just didn't realize he was this far to the right.
.

--

[boston bean]

12. remember when the DLC had him listed as a member and then they

took it down, saying it was a mistake and obama denied being a member.

they now call themselves "new" democrats.

and as donna brazile has said, they don't need us to win. they don't want to fight for womens right, lgbt rights or lefty values.

[boston bean]

10. the party will be fractured and it isn't over war only.

The democratic party left lgbt, women, mainstreet behind.

Now they escalate war.

There will be those who are so centrist but not right, and they cannot win without us.

So we will have more years of conservative rule, but truly what is the difference?

the only way to get them to do what we want is to exert our power. let's not be like the progressive caucus, let's act more like the blue dogs (strategy wise)

[boston bean]

8. I saw one saying, who has been here quite a while, say

we must not know what obama knows and that's scary.

that comment was so shocking to me. felt like i was read freeperville and their reasoning for supporting bush.

[Oak2004]

30. To crap like that my response is:

"then that must mean we lack sufficient transparency to be a democracy."

[Dogtown]

37. "The mysteries of God are beyond human comprehension."

Yes, that sort of attitude, for *ANY* deity or personage, is very troubling. It suggests we're stupid children who should be fed at the "little table".

[RaleighNCDUer]

69. I think we know 99% of what Obama knows.

There are between 1-5 thousand members of Al Queda, the majority of the in Pakistan in the border regions where they are being sheltered by

20,000+ Taliban, who have an equal number in Afghanistan. While not devastatingly awful numbers, these are enough to destabilize the region, potentially toppling the Pakistan government. Even assuming the Taliban can't get control of Pakistan's nukes (I believe that if it was a real potential our special forces would seize those nukes, then after the fact say we were invited to keep them secure) a coup or two might be all it takes to spark a war between Pakistan and India - and the 5th Pakistan/India war would very likely go nuclear, as Pakistan would be too chaotic and militarily weak for a stand-up fight.

And THAT's scary.

What's the potential on this scenario? Can the Taliban topple a weak government? They did it Afghanistan. Could Pakistan have a coup? That is their NORMAL change of government. Could Pakistan and India get in a war? They've done it 4 times before.

Think about it.

[QC]

11. I'm not shocked at all. I would be shocked if it were otherwise.

I've spent the past two years here watching people who were once staunch liberals and progressives constantly shift their positions rightward to keep them precisely calibrated to Obama's.

Shocked? No. I'm not even mildly surprised. Disgusted, of course, but not surprised.

[SHRED]

17. and I have been shifting further Left

[QC]

23. It really is amazing how far--and hard--this place lurched to the right

once it became Obama Underground.

I used to feel like something of a centrist type here, but now I am a commie, yet my own beliefs haven't changed.

It's been amazing seeing people who once loved to play "More Progressive Than Thou" singing the praises of "pragmatism" (a word they have made me loathe) and banker bailouts. We have gotten a real education in personality cultism here these past couple of years.

[xiamiam]

31. "message discipline" probably as described in a thread here yesterday

re rahm's target of left leaning/progressive sites...move on just bailed after agreeing for months to participate..i have no doubt that there is a concerted effort here to move us more to the center as well .paid trolls not only from freepers ...i had suspicions..now i am sure of it..this place has changed and if you even mention it you are derided..i haven't changed ..

[QC]

76. That's a very Orwellian phrase, isn't it? n/t

[Skelly]

45. What do we vote for?

The person or the policies? I agree with you. I am now able to understand how conservatives who supported Bush continued to do so debacle after debacle. They had 'faith' in the person to do what was right, even in the face of him doing wrong. Are liberals any different? I'm sure some are, just like some who voted for Bush ended up disliking all that he did. But how many people voted for Obama because they had 'faith' in the man, not necessarily because of his policies? And the big question...is this so wrong?

[QC]

77. Many of us here vote for the person--the person who looks dreamiest in a swimsuit.

It's been an education, seeing how even otherwise smart people are subject to personality cultism.

[TacticalPeek]

36. Quite the metamorphosis, I agree.

It is sad, and does not portend well.

[Hepburn]

13. Yep....

...a thread I posted actually got UnRec's on the pictures of our war dead. Just like Bush and Dover...

:puke:

Out of sight...out of mind.

Disgusting...

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. Why would anyone be surprised? It is the official position of the Democratic Party

[xiamiam]

15. the unrec crew is already at it...this so pisses me off...has totally screwed up du..nt

[Hepburn]

16. My thread with pics of our war dead....

...got unRecs.

Absolutely disgusting. Support a war to the point that one must disrespect those who died.

:puke:

[RaleighNCDUer]

70. IMO, using pics of war dead to score political points is the ultimate disrepect. nt

[mix]

18. Shallow politics and ignorance of history

are a deadly combination, particularly for the countries we continue to occupy and destroy.

And remember, the USA isn't an empire.

[TomClash]

19. I wouldn't say they are pro-war

But many are conflicted between support for a Democratic President and the fact that some of the 30,000 will be needless casualties.

I was as surprised as you though.

[NJmaverick]

21. Unrec for the dishonest use of the term pro-war

Like I said yesterday this poster would have been posting nasty things about those pro-war revolutionaries in 1776

[xiamiam]

22. well..its mindless pro obama..giving up ones principles to support a personality

it might not be pro war but it is not anti war either..and
there is no friggin comparison between afghanistan and 1776 pro war revolutionaries

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hatchling]

42. If you keep comparing this 'war' with the revolutionary war...

..then you have to see that in this instance we are the "British".

[PA Democrat]

24. I got called a freeper yesterday.

I said I was too angry to watch a speech where soldiers were used as props to sell the escalation. It infuriated me when Bush and Cheney did it, but I am supposed to be supportive when Obama does the same thing? I thought I was actually being more objective by waiting to READ the speech after the fact without the visual of those soldiers forced to act as props. I WANT to support Obama on this, but I can't.

[unc70]

41. Even stranger, I was called a PUMA a few days back. Got a couple of unrec attacks

The rapid response with unrecs and cut-paste responses can be lightning fast. So fast that it would be impossible for anyone to have read the OP, much less any linked article.

[Junkdrawer]

25. Saw it coming from a mile away...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7088801

[Stinky The Clown]

27. I'm not so sure they're as much pro war as unwavering Obama fans

I also think there's a lot of denial and knee jerk defense of the guy they fawn over whenever anything not complimentary is said about him. I don't think this is a large number, but it is surely a vocal cadre. We all know who they are.

[rhett o rick]

33. I think some people dont know where to turn. After bush* they feel like who can they trust. nt

[frylock]

61. it's pretty much four people from what i can tell..

coupled with a handful of wannabes.

[Starry Messenger]

28. No. Not really.

What is surprising are the number of interesting ways they have for justifying it.

[Hepburn]

39. I just do not get it....

...what the hell is the difference between:

1. Supporting the wars under Bush...and...

2. Supporting the wars under Obama?

They are the same fucking wars! :shrug:

[Starry Messenger]

46. I don't get it either.

Evidently it is complicated. I've seen posters who were MIHOP/LIHOP suddenly claim that they want justice for 9/11 in Afghanistan. :crazy:

[Hepburn]

57. It's really wacked around here right now....

...I just cannot believe some of the "logic" I am seeing about how and why Obama's war is different than Bush's war.

:shrug:

[unapatriciated]

79. if they want justice for 9/11 maybe they should look to Saudi Arabia

since that is where the majority of the Hijackers hailed from.
It was wrong then and it is still wrong now.
Just because he is our guy doesn't mean I will change my mind on this.

[tjwash]

38. You're kidding right? Historically, Dems are the biggest war mongers.

Shit...you want proof? Just do a search on "Hiroshima" on these boards and see the huge amount of praise heaped upon President Truman (Dem) for giving the order to nuke Japan, and the circus-style twisting and contortion that they do to justify it all.

After a round of "Bush proves that the repugs are such war mongers that..." I pointed out that that Bush has a hell of a long way to go before he reached the body count of an LBJ, or has yet to nuke someone like a HST. After that I got flamed, put on ignore, fucked with, called a fucking pussy, had letter bombs sent to me, and spent a week constantly picking little turds out of my IM box. It did do a great job of showing the savage mentality that many D's have right under the surface. Internet anonymity does tend to expose the blackness in peoples hearts quit well.

Nope...the whole issue was, and always will be, that they did not hate the republican war machine...they were really pissed off that they were not in charge of it.

[Pisces]

40. I am shocked at your ridiculous post, no one except hidden freepers are pro war on this board.

[Hepburn]

43. That is what I would have thought....

...until I started seeing some of the posts on the DU.

Very sad day...:cry:

[Hatchling]

44. This is irony or sarcasm, right?

[Starry Messenger]

47. I guess we have a lot of hidden freepers then.

Although they are very crafty. They have been claiming that the anti-war posters are the freepers.

[Forkboy]

48. LOL...uh huh.

Good one!

[kiva]

49. Not shocked, but dismayed. n/t

[NNN0LHI]

50. There were very few of us here who were AGAINST going in over 8 fucking years ago

Bush had a 90% approval rating when he announced he was sending in the Calvary. I am pretty sure that included some DUers. Now all of a sudden its the in thing to be against it.

Even Dennis Kucinich voted for invading Afghanistan. Fuck, how do you think that made the few of us against it feel at the time?

I don't get it?

Whats changed with the people who were for it 8 years ago?

Don

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Nope. It's the DLC, triangulation, Scoop Jackson, wing of the party.

Some have been around since the inception of DU.

[NNN0LHI]

52. Dennis Kucinich voted for invading Afghanistan

Now its all the DLC's fault?

Come on now.

Don

[Individualist]

75. Exactly.

[beyond cynical]

53. Not at all...the leader of our party told us what we could expect.

You must not have listened to him before you voted for him.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_t ...

"As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO's efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations."

[Skittles]

54. no; it was evident during the campaign there were lots of swooners

[snooper2]

55. Why don't you go through the archives and look at some polls from say

October 7th, 2001, and on through the years...

[Vidar]

64. Yes.

[RaleighNCDUer]

66. Wow - started and ended the thread with a strawman. Good job. nt

[fascisthunter]

67. what "Straw Man"?

[RaleighNCDUer]

72. The idea that supporting a particular policy about an on-going war

makes a person 'pro-war'.

Ask the so-called peace advocates if they would defend their homes from a home invasion.

The polar opposite of 'pro-war' is 'pacifism'. Now, there are a few here who are genuine pacifists, but damned few. And frankly, I've not seen a single post that is 'pro-war' - though there have been numerous posts defending the necessity of some conflicts.

The rational withdrawal from Afghanistan that the president announced the other night is one of those necessary conflicts. Getting Bin Laden in the meantime would be a boon, as he was the only real reason for the war in the first place, but whether we get him or not we will start pulling troops out in 18 months, and be out before the end of 2012. During that time we will be securing areas from the Taliban for the Afghan government (which hopefully will be undergoing some reform itself, though I don't expect it) so as to leave them capable of resisting the Taliban. We cannot afford to have a resurgent Taliban overwhelming the government again as they did in '96, particularly as they are even more closely tied to Al Queda now than they were then.

An entrenched Taliban in Afghanistan will shatter Pakistan. A weakened government in Pakistan will not be able to control the radicals in their own country, allowing them to fuel the 60-year crisis in Kashmir. Kashmir exploding will - for the 5th time - cause a war between Pakistan and India, and this time, for the first time, they both have nukes.

So, my being 'pro-war' because I advocate a sensible withdrawal from Afghanistan is actually a rational attempt to prevent MILLIONS of casualties resulting from a nuclear exchange between Islamabad and New Dehli.

That's why 'pro-war' is a strawman.

[defendandprotect]

68. It's frightening because it's a reminder of how many can be motivated by FEAR campaigns . . .

which are basically right wing propaganda --

PLUS they also have to ignore that these wars have bankrupted our Treasury!!

And that's one of the fastest ways to knock out democracy . . . which is what the

right wing is after here.

It also is shocking how few understand that the US/CIA created the Taliban/Al Qaeda --

heavily financing it and using it to BAIT the Russians into Afghanistan . . . "in hopes

of giving them a Vietnam-type experience."


Further, not only was the right wing religious movement here in US created by GOP with

start up funding for the Christian Coalition but other wealthy GOP elites -- Scaife, etal --

financed Dobson's organization -- and Bauer's organization!

PLUS all the right wing think tanks they financed -- this week I've already seen the

Heritage Foundation TWICE on C-span!!!


Additionally, US/CIA created this insane/violent Islamic Fundy movement as well --

moving it into the Middle East to serve their imperialistic purposes. They were involved

in creating, writing, printing those very violent Islamic textbooks and shipping them into

Middle East.

None of this insanity happens by accident -- it's well planned!

[onenote]

71. ignoring the "pro-war" labelling, of course I'm not shocked

The voices on DU have always represented the full spectrum of Democrats.

[WeDidIt]

73. I'm much more shocked at the number of people who think Obama betrayed them

when he promised at EVERY debate he would do what he is doing.

[SHRED]

74. Doesn't he work for us?

The will of the people?


---