Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SonOfDarkSkies

if true (which I only say because, face it, it’s Woodward), these should be the final two nails in Barry’s political coffin.

- he tried to override his own generals and formulated Afghan war strategy based on pleasing internal constituents in the Democrat Party, not for any sound national security reasons.

- he says that we can “absorb” another terrorist attack (which is clearly what he intends to do should there be one)


19 posted on 09/22/2010 6:35:08 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Buckeye McFrog

I agree with both points. He says we can “absorb” a terrorist attack, and claims that he wants to prevent it.

But he won’t allow either action which will help us, wiping out the terrorist sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and protecting our own borders. Surrendering in Afghanistan will allow the terrorists to run training camps and build weapons. Allowing an unlimited number of illegal aliens and an open border will allow terrorists to infiltrate the United States and attack. If any state or city attempts to defend itself by enforcing the immigration laws, Obama sues them.

Whose side is the president on? He is leaving us totally undefended from terrorist attacks, and saying that we should “absorb” them.


25 posted on 09/22/2010 7:07:55 AM PDT by Siegfried X
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson