Obama is Soft on Trrr

2 Feb

From Andrew Sullivan:

In a matter of months, both leaders of the Qaeda-allied Taliban in Pakistan have been targeted and killed by US drone attacks. The latest was in retaliation for the murder of CIA officials in a suicide attack by a double agent who turned on the US. If you add this record – and there are many examples of similar surgical strikes decapitating Qaeda figures in the last year – to the ramp-up of forces in Afghanistan and overhaul of strategy there, I think you can make a very solid case that in the war on Jihadist terrorism, Obama is proving far more effective – in both soft and hard power – than the Bush administration ever was.

The Republicans will not concede this, because their war is not really at this point on al Qaeda. It’s on Obama.

Remember that next time some Bush deadender tries to tell you that Obama is soft on terrorism.

Hi, Karl! Hi, Dick!

26 Responses to “Obama is Soft on Trrr”

  1. Jaquandor February 2, 2010 at 6:53 am #

    But he never says the word “Islamofascist” or “War on Terror” in his speeches! He didn’t mention the Awesome Threat of the Caliphate in his State of the Union!!!

  2. Dan February 2, 2010 at 8:10 am #

    Tell Andrew “You’re entitled to your own opinion, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.”

    The Taliban leader lives.

    A Terrorist shoots up an army base. Another one attempts to blow up an airplane. The first words they hear – “You have the right to remain silent…” He’s as tough on terror as he is on the deficit.

    • STEEL February 2, 2010 at 10:49 am #

      Yea! We should just stop giving people rights in this country. Except for the right to own guns of course. We gotta keep that one in case the government comes for us.

    • Jon Splett February 2, 2010 at 12:56 pm #

      Why do you hate America?

      I mean, clearly you have no respect for the Bill of Rights and have no faith in our system to punish these criminals the same way we punish other murders and attempted murders.

      Call me patriotic but I think we’ve done an above average job of justly enforcing our laws over the last few centuries and I’m not ready to throw away our justice system because you’re a big pussy afraid of some big, bad terrorists. We just managed to convict that scumbag terrorist who murdered Dr.Tiller while preserving due process, I’m confident the two fuckwads you mention will also be put away.

      (Oh and an attack on a military base is, by definition, not a terrorist attack so um, yea….)

      • Chris from OP February 2, 2010 at 1:17 pm #

        Everything Jon Splett just said.

  3. Ward February 2, 2010 at 8:10 am #

    Funny–I thought it was the military who launched these successful attacks–I didn’t realize ot was Barry who aimed the Hellfire missle and controlled the drone.

    Thanks for enlightening me, Pundit and Sullivan. Now, if we can only get Barry to stop bowing to the likes of the Mayoress of Tampa …

    • Alan Bedenko February 2, 2010 at 8:46 am #

      Yes, the nontroversy of the day for the retarded: bowing. Next up, Redstate refers to the Emperor of Japan as a”Third World potentate, totalitarian dictator, or terrorist leader”.

      • Ward February 2, 2010 at 12:03 pm #

        No–that would be the King of Saudi Arabia. That was a real good bow to that one.

      • Jon Splett February 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm #

        @Ward Didn’t Bush stick his tounge down the Saudi’s throat?

        Getting handsy with the Saudi’s comes with the office.

  4. Ethan February 2, 2010 at 9:34 am #

    As if, somehow, extrajudicial assassinations were a good thing? A far better point to make might have been that “being tough” on terrorism is much more a cause than a cure. This (or any admin) can lob Hellfire missiles into AfPak all it wants, it’s not actually helping at all; quite the opposite. Considering the “current leader” to collateral damage ratio, we might as well just open up a Taliban/Al Qaeda recruiting office in downtown Peshawar.

  5. RvrSide February 2, 2010 at 9:39 am #

    I bet he jams to War Pigs just like the rest of us. Seriously though, if BHO ends up capturing or killing OBL it will forever change the way people think of him. This is one case where I hope he succeeds.

  6. ike February 2, 2010 at 11:21 am #

    People still read andrew sullivan?

    He’s a complete nutter. I can’t wait for 2013 when he realizes that Obama wasn’t what he thought and then does a complete 180 and begins his next infatuation with the idea of the moment.

  7. Jon Splett February 2, 2010 at 12:46 pm #

    I’ll be impressed when he starts winning the war on poverty. Being too poor for health insurance is killing a fuckload more Americans every year than terrorism is.

    • RvrSide February 2, 2010 at 1:34 pm #

      “I’ll be impressed when he starts winning the war on poverty. Being too poor for health insurance is killing a fuckload more Americans every year than terrorism is.”

      How is it possible to target poverty when BHO is taxing the death out of middle America??? The poor already have free healthcare anyway. Since I work I noticed my insurance is just over $14000 – that’s crazy man. The only way to lower this number is by having more companies offer a more competitive alternative, instead I have 3 choices.

      • Eric Saldanha February 2, 2010 at 4:09 pm #

        @RvrSide: would you like health insurance for you and your family for life for much less than you’re paying now without any possibility of losing it?

  8. Ward February 2, 2010 at 1:01 pm #

    Tough on terrorism.
    So, was he right or wrong when he said the 9/11 terrorists must be tried in New York City?
    Is he right or wrong now to say the trial should be moved out of New York City?
    Or, did he just decide to stop being Geoffrey Holder’s sock-puppet?

  9. Starbuck February 2, 2010 at 1:04 pm #

    The hasty decision to Mirandize the non-citizen Christmas Day Bomber instead of continuing interrogation would be inexcusable no matter who the president is.

  10. Ethan February 2, 2010 at 1:14 pm #

    As is, you know, driving.

  11. STEEL February 2, 2010 at 3:40 pm #

    Of course the security system ion place is the system Bush developed over his 8 year tenure. I guess you could fault Obama for not changing it immediately upon entering office but most if not all the warnings about the military base killer came on Bushes watch

  12. Ward February 2, 2010 at 4:42 pm #

    Tough on terror. I guess that’s why the FBI’s High-Value Interrogation Group was not called in to question the Christmas Bomber–because President Tough-on-Terror never actually set it up for business after signing an executive order on January 21, 2009. And why did the executive order gave the Group jurisdiction over foreign interrogations only? –Because nobody ever wondered if they might have to interrogate a terrorist here.
    These people need to get serious on terror. It’s not enough that you merely convince Andrew Sullivan and Buffalo Pundit.

    • Eric Saldanha February 2, 2010 at 5:58 pm #

      Pants-Wetter on the ground, pants-wetter on the ground….lookin’ like a foot wetting your pants on the ground!

  13. Ethan February 2, 2010 at 6:37 pm #

    oh, Atrios; so dark but LOL-funny…
    “at some point it became clear that the consensus of official Washington, including many Democrats, the scribblers at Kaplan Test Prep Daily, the Great Minds at Very Serious Think Tanks, and guests at Sally Quinn’s table dancing parties, is that torture is awesome, the rule of law only applies to Al Gore, Bill Clinton’s penis, and all people who don’t have important DC jobs, and all it takes to nullify the constitution is to call someone a terraist. I don’t know how to change this, and electing the Hopey Changey guy didn’t help much. I think they’re playing Calvinbill a bit more fairly, but they’re still playing it.”

  14. Carl February 2, 2010 at 9:27 pm #

    Not to mention that the detainees from Gitmo that were released to head back to their countries(and return to terrorism)happened on Bush’s watch. Not Obama’s.

    So why are the Republicans arguing against all evidence and, in effect, helping the terrorists?

  15. Ward February 3, 2010 at 11:57 am #

    Small wonder that this item was bumped to the “older entries” page on the same day it was posted. Andrew Sullivan and Pundit slobbering over Barry being tough on terrorism–not their proudest moment.
    Clueless, perhaps–even disinterested, calling the al Quaeda trained Christmas bomber an “isolated extremist”–but not “tough”.

    • Eric Saldanha February 3, 2010 at 11:06 pm #

      Why, Ward, are you such a pants-wetter, when your patron saint, St. George of Imbecilia, gave Richard Reid, the 2001 “shoe-bomber,” the same Miranda protection and criminal trial? Didn’t he protect you from “terra” or are you only squealing now because there’s a Democrat in the White House?

Contribute To The Conversation

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: