• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Taliban: Obama Is Illogical

Mike

Well-known member
Obama being illogical - Taliban
Reuters via News.com.au | March 10, 2009

AFGHANISTAN'S Taliban today turned down as illogical US President Barack Obama's bid to reach out to moderate elements of the insurgents, saying the exit of foreign troops was the only solution for ending the war.

Mr Obama, in an interview with the New York Times, expressed an openness to adapting tactics in Afghanistan that had been used in Iraq to reach out to moderate elements there.

"This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical," Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, said when asked if its top leader Mullah Mohammad Omar would make any comment about Mr Obama's proposal.

"The Taliban are united, have one leader, one aim, one policy...I do not know why they are talking about moderate Taliban and what it means?

"If it means those who are not fighting and are sitting in their homes, then talking to them is meaningless. This really is surprising the Taliban."

In Iraq, the use of Sunni Muslim community leaders to employ their people to patrol their neighbourhoods has been credited as one of the main reasons behind sharp falls in violence.

Mr Obama did point out that compared to Iraq, the situation was more complex in Afghanistan, where nearly 70,000 foreign troops, 38,000 of them American, are due to be joined in coming months by another 17,000 US soldiers.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who has been leading Afghanistan since US-led troops overthrew the Taliban in an invasion in 2001, welcomed Mr Obama's proposal.

The number of foreign troops in Afghanistan has risen steadily since Taliban's ouster after they refused to hand over al-Qaeda leaders responsible for the September 11 attacks on the US.

So has the level of Taliban attacks against the Government and foreign forces, prompting Mr Obama to term

WE TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
"This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical," Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, said when asked if its top leader Mullah Mohammad Omar would make any comment about Mr Obama's proposal.

Finally, something the Taliban and most of us agree on! Illogical!
 

Steve

Well-known member
maybe he can use the carter tactic, that worked so well in Iran..

Jimmy Carter conveniently hides the fact that he is directly responsible for much of the turmoil we see in the world today. Carter began directly meddling in Iranian Affairs after he took office in 1977. On New Years Eve of that year, President Carter toasted the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, at a state dinner in Tehran, calling him "an island of stability" in the troubled Middle East. What the president also knew, but chose to ignore, was that the Shah was in serious trouble and his trip to Iran created anger toward the United States amongst the Iranian people.

When Carter became President he created a special Office of Human Rights which sent a letter to the Shah of Iran as a "polite reminder" of the importance of political rights and freedom. In response the Shah released over 350 Islamic fundamentalist prisoners who would later play roles in the Islamic Revolution and Iran Hostage crisis. Carter also ordered the Central Intelligence Agency to stop paying religious Mullahs over 4 million dollars in bribes. This monetary support was agreed upon, so the Mullahs would tone down their anti-Shah and anti-Western rhetoric.

The Shah ran a secular government and established excellent relations with the West, which included the recognition of the state of Israel. He also believed in the equality of woman which he expressed publicly in a Barbara Walters interview. These reasons were the heart and soul of the disdain the Mullahs had for him. The Shah was by no means perfect. His secret police force, SAVAK, was infamous for their torture methods. Ironically the fact the Shah ran his government as a dictatorship played a very limited role in his demise.

Facing an Islamic revolution, the Shah appealed to Carter for help. On November 4, 1978 U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski called the Shah and said the United States would "back him to the hilt." This would never be the case. Brzezinski insisted to Carter that the U.S. must encourage the Shah to "brutally suppress the revolution". State Department officials believed Carter should reach out to the Revolutionaries in order to smooth the transition to a new government. This was a deciding moment in world history. Carter decided not to take either recommendation and to this very day, the world is suffering the consequences of his indecisiveness.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
It was a gamble, a very risky gamble. It could go as far as to cease any progress that has been made over the past decade.

There was a possibility of positive results.

The real question is, does he realize the gamble he took?

The payoff gesture in Gaza was a terrible move on top of this.

He is essentially letting the terrorists be terrorists.

Hopefully he will see the light very soon.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Obama To Reach Out To Moderate Taliban

A "reclusive, pious and frugal" leader,[5] Omar only visited Kabul twice during the reign of the Taliban from 1996 to 2001, preferring to rule from his base in Kandahar.[citation needed]

On November 15, 2001, following the 9/11 attack on America and the American retaliatory attack on the Taliban, Omar talked in a BBC interview of the need for a "screening" of the Taliban for loyalty, which "is a big task;" and of "the destruction of America ... extinction of America" a plan for which "is going ahead and, God willing, it is being implemented." Asked about the possibility of representatives of "moderate Taliban" joining the new government, Omar proclaimed,

All Taliban are moderate. There are two things: extremism ["ifraat", or doing something to excess] and conservatism ["tafreet", or doing something insufficiently]. So in that sense, we are all moderates - taking the middle path.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
As I've offered before, my opinion is that he is Narcissistic. The media and those that fawn over him have created an "invincible' monster!

Narcissistic personality disorder is a condition characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, need for admiration, extreme self-involvement, and lack of empathy for others. Individuals with this disorder are usually arrogantly self-assured and confident. They expect to be noticed as superior. Many highly successful individuals might be considered narcissistic. However, this disorder is only diagnosed when these behaviors become persistent and very disabling or distressing.

Vulnerability in self-esteem makes individuals with this disorder very sensitive to criticism or defeat. Although they may not show it outwardly, criticism may haunt these individuals these individuals and may leave them feeling humiliated, degraded, hollow, and empty. They may react with disdain, rage, or defiant counterattack. Their social life is often impaired due to problems derived from entitlement, the need for admiration, and the relative disregard for the sensitivities of others. Though their excessive ambition and confidence may lead to high achievement; performance may be disrupted due to intolerance of criticism or defeat. Sometimes vocational functioning can be very low, reflecting an unwillingness to take a risk in competitive or other situations in which defeat is possible. Individuals with this disorder have special difficulties adjusting to growing old and losing their former ?superiority?.

http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis/p20-pe07.html
 

Mike

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
hypocritexposer said:
Hopefully he will see the light very soon.

We can only HOPE, but he seems to be a little too exhausted to put much effort into Foreign policy!

Either that or he is a complete idiot - beyond hope, thinking is some kind of fantasy.

What I fear as much as him is his supporters who cannot see the light and wonder "HOW" they can condone his actions........ :roll:

Surely the 50% of the people who voted his way in the U.S. are below average? :lol: :lol:
 

SMN Herf

Well-known member
The drudge reported this:

CHAVEZ CALLS ON OBAMA TO FOLLOW PATH OF SOCIALISM
Fri Mar 06 2009 17:13:48 ET

Caracas - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Friday called upon US President Barack Obama to follow the path to socialism, which he termed as the "only" way out of the global recession. "Come with us, align yourself, come with us on the road to socialism. This is the only path. Imagine a socialist revolution in the United States," Chavez told a group of workers in the southern Venezuelan state of Bolivar.

The controversial Venezuelan leader, who taunted the United States as a source of capitalistic evil under former president George W Bush, added that the United States needs a leader who can take it to a "higher" destiny and bring it out of "the sad role that it has been given, as a murderous, attacking power that is hated all around the world."

Chavez said that people are calling Obama a "socialist" for the measures of state intervention he is taking to counter the crisis, so it would not be too far-fetched to suggest that he might join the project of "21st century socialism" that the Venezuelan leader is heading.

"Nothing is impossible. Who would have thought in the 1980s that the Soviet Union would disappear? No one," he said.

"That murderous, genocidal empire has to end, and some day there has to come a leader ... who interprets the best of a people who also include human beings who suffer, endure, weep and laugh," the outspoken Chavez said.


To be dissed by the Taliban leaders and courted by Chavez has got to be a serious blow to his ego. Ouch :( :(
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
best-selling author Jamie Glazov about his latest book, "United in Hate."

Question: In your book, you outline the Left's various love affairs with despotic leaders throughout history, from Stalin and Mao, to Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad. Will the cycle break under President Obama, who holds the respect of the radical Left, yet selected a strong war cabinet?

Answer: The signs now indicate that the cycle will by no means be broken. One only has to look at the choices being made in foreign policy to get a feel of what the Obama administration has in its heart. It's clearly going out of its way to make sure that our adversaries will be able to hurt us. Obama has announced the closure of Guantanamo and the closing of all overseas CIA interrogation centers. The information and intelligence that was gathered through these vehicles prevented myriad strikes against the United States. Now our hands will be tied and our eyes blindfolded while jihadis plan to attack our soil not just 9/11 style, but with WMDs. It's not a good picture. This is all not to mention where the hardcore terrorist inmates in Guantanamo will go.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
best-selling author Jamie Glazov about his latest book, "United in Hate."

Question: In your book, you outline the Left's various love affairs with despotic leaders throughout history, from Stalin and Mao, to Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad. Will the cycle break under President Obama, who holds the respect of the radical Left, yet selected a strong war cabinet?

Answer: The signs now indicate that the cycle will by no means be broken. One only has to look at the choices being made in foreign policy to get a feel of what the Obama administration has in its heart. It's clearly going out of its way to make sure that our adversaries will be able to hurt us. Obama has announced the closure of Guantanamo and the closing of all overseas CIA interrogation centers. The information and intelligence that was gathered through these vehicles prevented myriad strikes against the United States. Now our hands will be tied and our eyes blindfolded while jihadis plan to attack our soil not just 9/11 style, but with WMDs. It's not a good picture. This is all not to mention where the hardcore terrorist inmates in Guantanamo will go.

The Guantanamo inmates don't concern me half as bad as those who have been in the training cells around the globe. We don't even know their names. Obama is showing them that their actions get results. There is nothing like some encouragement.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
hypocritexposer said:
best-selling author Jamie Glazov about his latest book, "United in Hate."

Question: In your book, you outline the Left's various love affairs with despotic leaders throughout history, from Stalin and Mao, to Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad. Will the cycle break under President Obama, who holds the respect of the radical Left, yet selected a strong war cabinet?

Answer: The signs now indicate that the cycle will by no means be broken. One only has to look at the choices being made in foreign policy to get a feel of what the Obama administration has in its heart. It's clearly going out of its way to make sure that our adversaries will be able to hurt us. Obama has announced the closure of Guantanamo and the closing of all overseas CIA interrogation centers. The information and intelligence that was gathered through these vehicles prevented myriad strikes against the United States. Now our hands will be tied and our eyes blindfolded while jihadis plan to attack our soil not just 9/11 style, but with WMDs. It's not a good picture. This is all not to mention where the hardcore terrorist inmates in Guantanamo will go.

The Guantanamo inmates don't concern me half as bad as those who have been in the training cells around the globe. We don't even know their names. Obama is showing them that their actions get results. There is nothing like some encouragement.

I totally agree!
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Pathology of the Man

We now have a name for what is at the essential core of Obama—narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Obama’s language, posture, and demeanor demonstrate a man who projects a grandiose and false image of himself yet betrays an essential hollowness within. He is in the company of men like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong II, and Adolph Hitler.

“All these men created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches, elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom (Vankin, S., Malignant Self-love)”.

One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse. Whoever this child is, he was abandoned by his father before he was a year old, moved to Indonesia for his formative years (ages 2 or 5 to age 10), abandoned by his mother and stepfather in Hawai’i, and raised by his grandparents. His reaction to the abuse of abandonment was to develop a personality disorder, a mental health issue. Certainly this is not a character flaw, nor can it be dismissed as simply an ‘ego’ issue.

The importance of knowing this relates to not only Obama’s tactics (anything to get ahead), but to his vulnerability to manipulation—by any number of people. We have exposed many of them who have shaped his life, and firmly planted inside him the ideas which now guide him, frankly, quite out in the open. The pathology of Obama has become a distraction in itself.

However, it is never wise to underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists, especially when they are ‘captured’ or used by an ideology and people with other agendas. His backers simply build him up, taking advantage of his NPD, only to use him to meet their needs. If he destroys the country he leads well then so be it.

Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous. The question is not “what more do we need to know about NPD?” The question is really “what kind of actions can we expect from Obama and his handlers, and how do we expect someone with NPD to react when ridiculed, embarrassed, cornered, questioned, blamed, or attacked”?

And what tactics are effective in ‘rolling a log’ under the train of an NPD?

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/the-rise-of-the-american-patriot/#more-6560
 
Top