"We can absorb a terrorist attack"

That (and one helluva lot more) from Obama in the latest book by The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward:

President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.

Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page “terms sheet” that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in “Obama’s Wars,” to be released on Monday.

According to Woodward’s meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.

“This needs to be a plan about how we’re going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan,” Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. “Everything we’re doing has to be focused on how we’re going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It’s in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room.”

Obama rejected the military’s request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. “I’m not doing 10 years,” he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. “I’m not doing long-term nation-building. I am not spending a trillion dollars.”

Woodward’s book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”

But most of the book centers on the strategy review, and the dissension, distrust and infighting that consumed Obama’s national security team as it was locked in a fierce and emotional struggle over the direction, goals, timetable, troop levels and the chances of success for a war that is almost certain to be one of the defining events of this presidency.

Obama is shown at odds with his uniformed military commanders, particularly Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command during the 2009 strategy review and now the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan.

Woodward reveals their conflicts through detailed accounts of two dozen closed-door secret strategy sessions and nearly 40 private conversations between Obama and Cabinet officers, key aides and intelligence officials.

There’s more at the link… and nearly all of it is quite alarming.

This removes any doubt that Barack Hussein Obama, mmm mmm mmm, is in over his head. 

His allies must be defeated this November, and Obama must be crushed in 2012.

We cannot absorb this kind of incompetence.

Can anyone doubt this dude's sincerity?
Two Minus One Equals One
  • Peter F.

    Another telling quote from the book:

    “I think about it more in terms of: Do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end?”

    Catch that? Prosecute. Not execute. To him, the War Against Islamofascism is a goddamn court case.

    Standard.

  • twolaneflash

    pResident Obama is unique in that he qualifies as an enemy foreign AND domestic – twice the reason to remove him from office.

  • John S

    Afghanistan wiped the ass off of Alexander the Great! Do you really think we can win? I’m no fan of Bambi, but he’s right on getting the hell out of there. Bush should have hit the Taliban with a few thermonuclear airbursts and called it a day.

  • Eric

    Well that settles it for me. If Alexander the Great couldn’t do it 2300 years ago, what chance do we have in 2010? God knows our current military wouldn’t stand a chance against Alexander’s spears, bows and chariots.

  • Hank

    What a damn fool, “pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan” from Afghanistan.

    This is the same man who said in July 2008:
    “The Afghan government needs to do more. But we have to understand that the situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus, the central front, on our battle against terrorism,” Obama said Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

    “I think one of the biggest mistakes we’ve made strategically after 9/11 was to fail to finish the job here, focus our attention here. We got distracted by Iraq,”

    Toward that, the Peter Principle President “Obama essentially designed his own strategy for the 30,000 troops”.

    What a damn fool.

  • Steve Crickmore

    Petraeus turns out to be a realist.

    Woodward quotes Petraeus as saying, “You have to recognize also that I don’t think you win this war. (Afghanistan). I think you keep fighting. It’s a little bit like Iraq, actually. . . . Yes, there has been enormous progress in Iraq. But there are still horrific attacks in Iraq, and you have to stay vigilant. You have to stay after it. This is the kind of fight we’re in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids’ lives.”

  • gary gulrud

    I dunno, the Terroist-in-Chief obviously miscalculated the economic terror Amerikkka could absorb and keep revenues afloat.

    Wall Street’s profits are down 25% on the year.

  • 914

    More foolishness from ole’ yoda ears.

  • hermie

    I can just see this occurring: “So we had Islamic terrorists blow up the Meadowlands. So we had several shopping malls attacked by terrorists. We can absorb that…so shut up and hand me my nine-iron Biden.”

  • GarandFan

    Odd, if you don’t talk about WINNING a war…….you won’t. Go figure.

    The directive given Eisenhower to defeat Germany was one page in length. Barry (typical lawyer) takes 6 pages. Probably a list of YOU WILL NOT…

    Americans are an impatient lot. Problems get solved in 1 hour on TV, including time for commercials.

    I seriously doubt we as a nation would have the fortitude to fight the Revolutionary War today.

    As for the constant liberal comparison to Vietnam…yeah, it will end the same way if you fight it the same way. Seems since Korea, every time we’re in a conflict, it’s because we want to “send messages”. WAR isn’t fought as a messenger service. It’s to inflict HURT on the enemy until they cease being a problem. Such a difficult concept to wrap your educated head around.

  • Roy

    The most priceless part in the book is Obama supposedly saying “I’m not going to spend a trillion bucks”.

  • serfer62

    Its true. America could absorb a major desaster or several…but the people that allowed that will pay. And pay big.

  • Steve Crickmore

    The most priceless part in the book is Obama supposedly saying “I’m not going to spend a trillion bucks

    Almost as priceless as Rumsfeld forcasting the Iraqi war would cost only 50 billion or pay for itself. The real cost of the Iraq war with unfunded liabilities on Veteran health benefits, 50 thousand American troops stationed in Iraq and counting, is 3 trillion dollars.

    Of course, Republicans are deficit hawks on domestic spending but not on war or occupation costs, and Cheney “deficits don’t matter” wanted five or six wars and occupations.

  • SER

    Mr. Crickmore,

    The war was not the spending problem:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/iraq_the_war_that_broke_us_not.html

    That said, I believe that Ralph Peters’ strategy (similar to Biden’s – it hurt to write that) would be the most effective. Keep the Taliban out of power with special forces and tribes that hate the Pashtun. The “trade off” is that the people of Afghanistan live with violence and squalor for decades.

    http://cubachi.com/2010/07/06/ralph-peters-says-general-petraeus-should-not-use-his-counter-insurgency-plan-in-afghanistan/

    I have rarely agreed with Col. Peters’ in the past, and he has usually been right and I have been wrong (not that my being wrong about anything is unusual).

  • bullwinkle

    If saying that we can absorb more 9-11 style attacks isn’t the equivalent of Bush saying ‘bring it on’ I don’t know know what is.

    Where’s the outcry from the gutless Left when THEIR man-child in chief says the same as something that knotted their knickers so much when Bush said it?

  • WildWillie

    Steve, learn your history. Even though you are from the left, you will understand. Our troops are still in Germany after 65 years. Our troops are still in Korea after 60 years. Our troops are in Bosnia, well you get the idea. It is not realizm, it is a fact of war. Try not to be so party affiliated. ww

  • GarandFan

    Watch it SER. The left’s mantra is that Afghanistan and Iraq brought on the recession. Which obviously relieves them of their complicity and their social engineering of “home ownership”.

  • cirby

    Yes, Mr. President, we can certainly absorb another terrorist attack.

    But you need to remember that the last big terrorist attack was nearly absorbed by your house, and they still remember the address…

  • AngryWhiteVoter

    I agree with Obama that we could absorb a terrorist attack, but only if it was a fully loaded 747 kamakazi crashing into the capital during a joint session of congress and Barry is there reading his teleprompter.

    I think America could absorb that and come back stronger. I think I read about that scenario in a Tom Clancy novel. What a way to reboot DC Barry, incite one of your fellow muslims to to it. It could save America.

  • Sky Captain

    “Absorbing” a terrorist attack?
    Doesn’t Obama realize THAT PEOPLE WILL DIE?!?

    Damn, that’s cold. Obama doesn’t even care that American citizens would die.

    Amateur Hour at the White House continues…

    Oh, and how did this country get stronger after 9/11?
    That’s right – IT’S BUSH’S FAULT!

  • Tsar Nicholas II

    Would you have expected anything different from a terrorist sympathizer??

  • GarandFan

    “Obama doesn’t even care that American citizens would die.”

    Priority One is keeping his ass safe. Screw the country.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE