The New York Times sees victory when surrounded with nothing but defeat.

Editor’s notes: In a recent news article,  below,  the New York Times, here,  is seen desperately trying to rehabilitate Obama’s failed record as to  his “war on terror.”  In the article, below,  there is the embedded but unstated fantasy of a winning strategy as the result of a treasure trove of information,  captured in the bin Laden killing,  and,  again,  in a raid last October. 

One can parse the notion of “significance” as to said captured documents until the cows come home,  but,  in the end,  we leave Afghanistan without any measure of victory.  In fact,  the defeat is so pronounced,  that Obama could not even get the Taliban to play along with his claim for a “negotiated peace.”  Not familiar with this term?  That is because it failed and was taken “off the table,” the Taliban refusing to "negotiate" with Obama on any level.    The raid,  last October,  is meaningless in the larger scheme of things.  And how is that so?  Because  we are leaving the region,  totally and completely. 

Understand that what happened in Iraq, wholly because of Obama’s idealistic stupidity,  will happen in Afghanistan,  shortly after we leave that country.  As a result,  more than 6,000 American lives,  soldiers all,  will have been sacrificed for absolutely nothing,  thanks to the man in our White House,  with that Muslim sounding name. 

No wonder Obama’s approval rating within military ranks,  is 15%,  as he stands alone,  as a Lame Duck of a President  (since the summer of 2010). 

After reading the excerpt,  below,  stop for a moment,  and say,  out loud,  “But we still lost this war.”   


WASHINGTON — As an October chill fell on the mountain passes that separate the militant havens in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a small team of Afghan intelligence commandos and American Special Operations forces descended on a village where they believed a leader of Al Qaeda was hiding.
That night the Afghans and Americans got their man, Abu Bara al-Kuwaiti. They also came away with what officials from both countries say was an even bigger prize: a laptop computer and files detailing Qaeda operations on both sides of the border.

American military officials said the intelligence seized in the raid was possibly as significant as the information found in the computer and documents of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, after members of the Navy SEALs killed him in 2011.

2 comments:

  1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_bush_first_term_job_approval.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pols are for raising campaign money, period. This same "very unpopular" GW Bush took in 12 million more votes that he won, in 2000. Compare that to the "very popular" Obama who lost 4.5 million in the 2012 re-election versus his total in 2018 and the difference between McCain and Romney's totals. That's a swing of 16.5 million votes, Charlie Brown. But keep thinking your party is the party of choice. How has that worked out for you over the past three election cycles ? I have plenty to laugh about, but I try not imitate a third grader. You got me on that.

      Delete