Obama’s fourth war intensifying

[targus]

"The New York Times has revealed what it calls “the Obama administration’s most closely guarded secret”, that is the fact that the US is not only launching a covert war in Yemen, but intensifying it now..."

"...the Yemeni situation tears away all the masks Obama was trying so hard to put on when dealing with Libya. He has tried hard to present the Libyan operation as an entirely European affair with limited and forced assistance from Washington. But now it is becoming clear that such attempts were meant entirely for local consumption in the US. In fact, Obama is only too eager to launch a third war in Libya and a fourth one in Yemen.

The question is who will be the target of the fifth Obama’s war?"

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/06/09/51510820.html

So where is the anti-war crowd now?

BTW far more of our young men in uniform have died under Obama in three years than under Bush's eight.

 

[Max Fenster]

BTW far more of our young men in uniform have died under Obama in three years than under Bush's eight.

This is a bombshell of a claim. Where can I verify it?

 

[Robert Snow]

This is a bombshell of a claim. Where can I verify it?

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[carpro]

This is a bombshell of a claim. Where can I verify it?

Remember how very important the liberals and Bush-haters thought it was to tell us every day how many soldiers had died “Because of him?” They chanted their stupid “Bush Lied! People Died” and marked each “milestone” in the death count with news releases and celebrations. Each time the number grew, it gave them more “ammo” and hatred for President Bush. 3/6/9 UPDATE: Some of them continue their Bush Death Counts to this day! UPDATE 10/19/9: Rush Limbaugh said on his show today that democrats “reveled in the number of deaths, trumpeted it, made it sound like it was the first time we ever had a death in war.”

Over 60% of the deaths in Afghanistan have occurred under Obama in his only 2 years in office and he is on pace to exceed the death toll under Bush in his 8 years.

1206 americans have been killed under Obama in Afghanistan without a peep out of the anti war left. When the count in Iraq reach 1000 under Bush , it was front page news all over the country.

Leftist hypocrisy knows no bounds.

 

[InTheLight]

U.S. widens air war on al-Qaida in Yemen

The Obama administration has intensified the U.S. covert war in Yemen, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, U.S. officials said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015269394_yemen09.html

 

[InTheLight]

This is a bombshell of a claim. Where can I verify it?

http://icasualties.org/oef/

 

[exscentric]

the attacks were reported on national news last night but it was as though nothing was out of sorts - just part of the news as though everyone knew it was going on.

 

[dwmoeller1]

BTW far more of our young men in uniform have died under Obama in three years than under Bush's eight.

This is a false claim. While it's true that the Obama years accounts for 61% of the deaths in Afghanistan, or 983 vs 630 (which is a debatable "far more" both in absolute and relative terms), it is totally false when one includes Iraq.

There the deaths are 4221 (Bush) vs 239 (Obama). The totals together are 1222 or ~20% (Obama) vs 4851 (Bush). So the "far more" deaths claimed are in the opposite direction.

And they have the gall to use this false claim to criticize Obama's hypocrisy?!

And even if one focuses only on the Afghan war it's still just as misleading:
1. The increased deaths in Afghanistan only approach the numbers of the best year fir Bush
2. Obama only campaigned against the Iraq war, not the Afghan war. In fact Obama's campaign statement was that he would send *more* troops to Afghanistan.
3. Afghanistan was ever only a sideshow under Bush. It's only under Obama that we begin to have a realistic chance of "victory"

So yeah, there are more afghan deaths but to use this fact to call Obama a hypocrite is misleading at best.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Btw all stats are pulled from
http://icasualties.org/

 

[dwmoeller1]

... he is on pace to exceed the death toll under Bush in his 8 years.

Another claim which is, at best, misleading. I suppose if you really fudged the numbers and assumed the worst you *might* be able to reach this conclusion...although I have yet to figure out how. You would certain have to ignore some important facts, such as:
- Bush was not in a war for all eight years. 5.5 in Iraq and a little more than 7 in Afghan.
- In the main theatre of war the fatalities reached a plateau almost immediately.
If ones calculations ignore things like this then one would be comparing two relatively dissimilar things.

But even if we ignore the above even the numbers as they stand can't reasonably lead to this conclusion. In 2.5 years, fatalities under Obama are only 1/4th as much as under Bush. That puts Obama on track for being less than Bush's total even if we assume he will be at war for the full 8 years.

1206 americans have been killed under Obama in Afghanistan without a peep out of the anti war left.

The number for Afghanistan is less than 1000 for Obama as of June. Your figure must be for something else. Total for Obama maybe?

Leftist hypocrisy knows no bounds.

This is what is known as irony.

 

[targus]

dwmoeller1, you totally missed the point of the OP which is Obama's illegal and unauthorized covert war in Yemen.

Care to comment on that?

 

[dwmoeller1]

dwmoeller1, you totally missed the point of the OP which is Obama's illegal and unauthorized covert war in Yemen.

Care to comment on that?

Sorry, had to deal with the blatant falsehoods first. Plus I thought the real point was about the hypocrisy if Obama. That may be true but my point was that the right can be just as bad.

As to Yemen, the war powers of the president are so broad that it essentially boils down to this: It's only illegal if congress complains. You would be hard pressed to find a president in the last 50 years who hasn't taken actions like this (Bush's actions in Pakistan for instance). I agree it's a problem but it's by no means unique to Obama.

As to hypocrisy, I find it no worse than the many promises Bush "broke" after 9/11.

 

[carpro]

Where is the outrage of the antiwar left?

Americans had to endure daily counts in the Iraq war with an almost never ending trumpeting of the 1000th death in Iraq.

Why not now?

Leftist hypocrisy is the only answer and there is no explaining it away.

 

[billwald]

How many threads against the war would you like for me to initiate? <G>

 

[dwmoeller1]

Where is the outrage of the antiwar left?

Americans had to endure daily counts in the Iraq war with an almost never ending trumpeting of the 1000th death in Iraq.

Why not now?

Leftist hypocrisy is the only answer and there is no explaining it away.

The left, for the most part, has reserved it's critique for the Iraq war. Hence why Obama promised to get out of Iraq at the same he promised to be more involved in Afghanistan. Those who have been critical of war in general still, for the most part, are.

As to the trumpeting of the 1000 death, it hasnt happened for the reasons the 2000, 3000 and 4000 death. It reflects war weariness. That and the fact that the huge deal was made over the 1000 mark in *Iraq*. It has been the Iraq war that has consistently received the bulk of criticism. Virtually no media source has seriously criticized our presence in Afghanistan other than to note how bad a job we were doing in winning.

In short, there is no real hypocrisy on this issue - the general message has consistently been pro-Afghan war (relatively speaking) and anti-Iraq war. Only a very few have been critical of both wars and and a good portion of them are libertarians. I challenge you to find a significant person or organization which was critical of being in Afghanistan under Bush but now approves under Obama. I am sure they exist but I would bet they are few and far between.

 

[dwmoeller1]

And FWIW there was a bit of media noise made about the 1000 in Afghanistan.

 

[carpro]

The left, for the most part, has reserved it's critique for the Iraq war. Hence why Obama promised to get out of Iraq at the same he promised to be more involved in Afghanistan. Those who have been critical of war in general still, for the most part, are.

As to the trumpeting of the 1000 death, it hasnt happened for the reasons the 2000, 3000 and 4000 death. It reflects war weariness. That and the fact that the huge deal was made over the 1000 mark in *Iraq*. It has been the Iraq war that has consistently received the bulk of criticism. Virtually no media source has seriously criticized our presence in Afghanistan other than to note how bad a job we were doing in winning.

In short, there is no real hypocrisy on this issue - the general message has consistently been pro-Afghan war (relatively speaking) and anti-Iraq war. Only a very few have been critical of both wars and and a good portion of them are libertarians. I challenge you to find a significant person or organization which was critical of being in Afghanistan under Bush but now approves under Obama. I am sure they exist but I would bet they are few and far between.

Nice try.

But there really is no explaining it away.

It's simply the hypocrisy of the left at work, just as there is no outcry from the left concerning Obama's wars of choice, the completely illegal action in Libya, and now Yemen.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Nice try.

But there really is no explaining it away.

It's simply the hypocrisy of the left at work, just as there is no outcry from the left concerning Obama's wars of choice, the completely illegal action in Libya, and now Yemen.

Go ahead and show me where the left has been critical of the Afghan war before you try and dismiss my explanation. It's absurd to proclaim hypocrisy for the left not being critical of something they have consistently supported, or at least refrained from being critical of before Obama. And as a general rule the left hasn't been antiwar for a couple decades now. Under Bush it was merely anti-Iraq war after it became clear there were no WMDs.

So far all of your claims oh hypocrisy on this thread are based on false or misleading claims. That or simple innuendo with no supporting facts. Go ahead and show where the left has been anti-war under Bush before handwaving away alternate explanations.

And I notice you are shifting your response away from your last question about the 1000 deaths...I am guessing since my response explained it quite nicely - it was always about the Iraq war.
Or is that just an example of the hypocrisy of the right to conflate the two wars?

 

[targus]

Go ahead and show me where the left has been critical of the Afghan war before you try and dismiss my explanation. It's absurd to proclaim hypocrisy for the left not being critical of something they have consistently supported, or at least refrained from being critical of before Obama. And as a general rule the left hasn't been antiwar for a couple decades now. Under Bush it was merely anti-Iraq war after it became clear there were no WMDs.

So far all of your claims oh hypocrisy on this thread are based on false or misleading claims. That or simple innuendo with no supporting facts. Go ahead and show where the left has been anti-war under Bush before handwaving away alternate explanations.

And I notice you are shifting your response away from your last question about the 1000 deaths...I am guessing since my response explained it quite nicely - it was always about the Iraq war.
Or is that just an example of the hypocrisy of the right to conflate the two wars?

One more try...

This is thread is about Obama's illegal covert war in YEMEN.

 

[dwmoeller1]

One more try...

This is thread is about Obama's illegal covert war in YEMEN.

I was just answering the direct questions put to me.

As the illegal war in Yemen, please demonstrate how it is illegal.