If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   White House caught lying about Petraeus' recommendations on Afghanistan withdrawal. Ummm... LOOK OVER THERE. WHAT DID MICHELLE BACHMANN SAY?   (hotair.com) divider line 237
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

2429 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Jun 2011 at 7:22 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



237 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-06-30 01:20:26 AM  
wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?
 
2011-06-30 01:21:24 AM  

ElQue: wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?


Look at the headline, they're trying to find anything to cover for Michele Bachmann's immediate implosion.
 
2011-06-30 01:35:07 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: ElQue: wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?

Look at the headline, they're trying to find anything to cover for Michele Bachmann's immediate implosion.


Ah. Must be Fark's "Fair and Balanced" admins that greenlight this shiat.
 
2011-06-30 01:36:00 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: ElQue: wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?

Look at the headline, they're trying to find anything to cover for Michele Bachmann's immediate implosion.


This evening I saw Hannity and Bozell all outraged over Obama's missing his daughter's age and equivocating it to Bachmann's lying about the income she said she never got a penny of . Yeah they're exactly the same.
 
2011-06-30 01:54:09 AM  
So Fark has been concerned about Bachmann. Fair enough.

And f*ck me for not wanting this would-be theocrat to lecture me about less government intrusion while window-licking her way towards some of the most egregious fed intrusions in modern history.

F*ck Bachmann, and her ilk.
 
2011-06-30 02:11:35 AM  
The Bachmann bit is the joke and Farklibs are falling for it.

Read TFA again nice and slow and see if you can catch the part where it becomes obvious that Obama is not listening to his generals in the field and instead playing politics with Afghanistan.
 
2011-06-30 02:15:11 AM  
i798.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-30 02:17:50 AM  

Hobodeluxe: cameroncrazy1984: ElQue: wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?

Look at the headline, they're trying to find anything to cover for Michele Bachmann's immediate implosion.

This evening I saw Hannity and Bozell all outraged over Obama's missing his daughter's age and equivocating it to Bachmann's lying about the income she said she never got a penny of . Yeah they're exactly the same.


Are you farking kidding me?
 
2011-06-30 02:29:52 AM  

propasaurus: Are you farking kidding me?


Are you really that surprised? We (the reality-based crowd) are not their target audience. Anything that makes libs or Obama the bad guy is the absolute truth to these people. It's disgusting but what can we do about it?
 
2011-06-30 02:33:09 AM  

MeinRS6: Obama is not listening to his generals


I wouldn't listen to them either.

Bush fired all the ones who knew WTF they were doing.

"We need more troops Mr. President."

"Thanks, general. You're fired."
 
2011-06-30 02:34:02 AM  

MeinRS6: The Bachmann bit is the joke and Farklibs are falling for it.

Read TFA again nice and slow and see if you can catch the part where it becomes obvious that Obama is not listening to his generals in the field and instead playing politics with Afghanistan.


The part where Hot Air is lying, or at best prevaricating? That part?
 
2011-06-30 02:44:12 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: MeinRS6: The Bachmann bit is the joke and Farklibs are falling for it.

Read TFA again nice and slow and see if you can catch the part where it becomes obvious that Obama is not listening to his generals in the field and instead playing politics with Afghanistan.

The part where Hot Air is lying, or at best prevaricating? That part?


What part would that be exactly?
 
2011-06-30 03:00:41 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: i798.photobucket.com


heh
 
2011-06-30 03:03:01 AM  
Anyway, yeah ignore you generals Obama, whatever you have to do to re win your constituency.
 
2011-06-30 03:06:13 AM  
A kinetic collateral blowing people up using US weaponry but it's not a war because the Hawaiian is in charge -- that's ok.

Click, boom!
 
2011-06-30 03:12:04 AM  
Wolf!
 
2011-06-30 03:22:28 AM  
Bathia_Mapes: i798.photobucket.com

That will haunt my slumber this evening.
 
2011-06-30 04:53:21 AM  
This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.


See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.
 
2011-06-30 06:05:13 AM  
i798.photobucket.com

/don't stare into its eyes for too long or you'll fall into the abyss
 
2011-06-30 06:27:36 AM  

Are you farking kidding me?


It shouldn't be surprising. Look at the shiat that MeinRS6 types on a daily basis. It's obvious that we're talking about people who lack the courage to actually think.

You can literally tell these people anything if it supports the OMFG Obama muslim gay married my baby and then punched it right in the socialism soros msm derpgarbl narrative.

Just try not to think about how advanced the human race would be and what cool shiat we would have if we didn't have to drag these anchors behind us.
 
2011-06-30 07:04:39 AM  
There is so much truth in that headline that it is almost frightening. Obama lies and all of the Obama sycophants attack a Republican in an attempt to divert attention. You are some very sad little people.
 
2011-06-30 07:05:05 AM  

MeinRS6: The Bachmann bit is the joke and Farklibs are falling for it.

Read TFA again nice and slow and see if you can catch the part where it becomes obvious that Obama is not listening to his generals in the field and instead playing politics with Afghanistan.


You know what? I'm in this shiathole of a country right now. These people don't want to be helped. fark rebuilding this country and fark their farked up generations-old tribal grudges and fark these thugs that keep killing my compatriots. The ones who do want to help suffer under the constant threat of having their families and friends eliminated in a bid to keep them compliant.

Bin Laden is dead. We've made a concerted effort to eliminate the top echelons of Al Qaeda. We've proven that we have the ability and the moral flexibility (to quote a great movie) to break a sovereign country's boundaries to go after a target. We don't NEED to rebuild this country to prevent it from becoming a safe haven for terrorists, because guess what? It's not working anyway, and when we do find someone we're after, we're just going to send predators and tomahawks after them anyway. Failing that, well, there's now precedent for using special ops.

This country has known nothing but war for the past three millenia and to think that we're going to come in and throw money and lives at the problem till it goes away is delusional. COIN is a great philosophy but I think we've shown over the last decade that as a military strategy it's unsustainable.

I support my commanding officers to the fullest extent of my commission but that doesn't mean I have to agree with their policies. I also support my president, all three that I've served under so far, and if it's his decision to get us out, so be it. I think our national security will be much better served by not stretching our military and our budget to the breaking point for another decade.
 
2011-06-30 07:23:34 AM  

MeinRS6: Seig Heil! Derpland Uber Alles!


Yes, a very cogent argument, well done!
 
2011-06-30 07:28:26 AM  

BillCo: I have a hurty butt


There's a cream for that.
 
2011-06-30 07:29:26 AM  
Man, they're really grasping at straws over there at Hot Air, eh?

...and I concur. Bachmann is a whack job. If you think she should be president, you're probably a whack job, too.
 
2011-06-30 07:31:57 AM  

Hobodeluxe: cameroncrazy1984: ElQue: wat.

that was dumb. Not that I expect any more from HotAir or BreitbartTV.

Slow day for the Republican outrage department?

Look at the headline, they're trying to find anything to cover for Michele Bachmann's immediate implosion.

This evening I saw Hannity and Bozell all outraged over Obama's missing his daughter's age and equivocating it to Bachmann's lying about the income she said she never got a penny of . Yeah they're exactly the same.


So Obama intentionally lied about her age? I thought parents only lied about their kids age to get a discount at a movie theater or amusement park. What the fark is that guys problem?
 
2011-06-30 07:37:06 AM  

Hiro Nakamura: You know what? I'm in this shiathole of a country right now.


Pay attention. This man might know what he's talking about.

/Thank you for your service.
 
2011-06-30 07:37:24 AM  

RexTalionis: This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.




And we are done here.
 
2011-06-30 07:37:25 AM  
Why do all the Obama criticisms come down to intentionally incorrectly reading his statements and then blasting him for something you could only get out of purposefully screwing up what he was stating?

Reading the comment from the administration official, the testimony doesn't contradict it.

The testimony says the Obama administration picked something more aggressive tha what was presented. The official says Obama was presented with several options and decided to be more aggressive than the options presented.

If you would like to go with "Obama ignoring his generals omg!!!! Endangering the troops!!!" that would be acceptable. But I don't get the lying bit.
 
2011-06-30 07:41:32 AM  
White House:
"The President was given a range of options."

Graham:
"Was this actually presented as one of the points on that range?"

Allen:
"No."

Derpfaktorie:
"WHITE HOUSE IS IGNORING GENERALSGARBL"
 
2011-06-30 07:42:03 AM  
Also, the criticism over getting his daughter's age some 5 days before her birthday is hilarious.

My only hope is that, when they celebrate his daughter's birthday on the 4th, someone attacks Obama for caring more about his family than his country.
 
2011-06-30 07:42:10 AM  

RexTalionis: This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.


So, wait, Hot Air is spouting bullshiat?

Wow, it must be a day ending in 'Y'.
 
2011-06-30 07:44:16 AM  

Hobodeluxe: This evening I saw Hannity and Bozell all outraged over Obama's missing his daughter's age and equivocating it to Bachmann's lying about the income she said she never got a penny of . Yeah they're exactly the same.


Huh? I missed something. Was Obama trying to pass her off as younger so they could save $3 at the movies or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?

Was Obama trying to get her out of the military or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?

Was Obama trying to have her pick up some liquor or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?
 
2011-06-30 07:45:59 AM  

RexTalionis: This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.

 
2011-06-30 07:47:17 AM  
So do the rightwing nut jobs want us to continue nation building in Afghanistan or do they want to save tax payer money and bring the troops home or do they want to bring the troops home slowly and responsibly over a period of a year or two?
 
2011-06-30 07:47:27 AM  

bulldg4life: someone attacks Obama for caring more about his family than his country.


You're darn tootin'!

If Fartbama really loved his country, he would be cheating on his wife! Right, Newt?
 
2011-06-30 07:49:39 AM  
Apparently the "composer" of the article and the commenter's had time on their hands while they waited for their sheets to come back from the cleaners.
 
2011-06-30 07:50:05 AM  

violentsalvation: Anyway, yeah ignore you generals Obama, whatever you have to do to re win your constituency.


The majority of the American people want this war to end, and want it to end quickly. This isn't just about his constituency.
 
2011-06-30 07:53:47 AM  
I read this as if the generals suggested: "We can remove 5,000, 8,000, or 12,000 troops." and Obama went with 10,000.
 
2011-06-30 07:54:21 AM  
YES MICHELLE BACHMANN IS JUST A PRIVATE CITIZEN TRYING TO LIVE A QUIET LIFE ITS NOT LIKE SHES RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AND SAYING STUPID SH*T IN FRONT OF CAMERAS ON AN HOURLY BASIS

/enough caps for you, butthurtmitter?
 
2011-06-30 07:54:53 AM  
Also how hilarious that his critics shout and yell and cry about how he's not a leader and can't make decision, then also cry and shout about when he DOES make decisions because he's not doing what other people want?
 
2011-06-30 07:56:38 AM  
Generals are always going to recommend staying in a conflict if they can, it's their nature, it's their calling. Politicians, however, are charged with recognizing the will of the American people (both liberals and conservatives alike) who now want out of the longest, most expensive conflict in our history.

Yeah, if I were President, I think I would go with the people's wishes over the general's. This is why we have a civilian as Commander in Chief.
 
2011-06-30 07:58:53 AM  

RexTalionis: This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.


As much as I hate to defend HotAir, you omitted what they were talking about. It was the very next sentence.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

That said, the President's decision was fully within the range of options that were presented to him and has the full support of his national security team.
I think there's a broad understanding among the national security team that there's an imperative to both consolidate the gains that have been made and continue our efforts to train Afghan security forces and partner with them in going after the Taliban, while also being very serious about the process of transition and the drawdown of our forces.


It can't be fully within the range of options and be more aggressive/"not an option".
 
2011-06-30 08:00:06 AM  
Petraeus' opinion is what Obama tells him it is.
 
2011-06-30 08:00:43 AM  

stebain: Hobodeluxe: This evening I saw Hannity and Bozell all outraged over Obama's missing his daughter's age and equivocating it to Bachmann's lying about the income she said she never got a penny of . Yeah they're exactly the same.

Huh? I missed something. Was Obama trying to pass her off as younger so they could save $3 at the movies or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?

Was Obama trying to get her out of the military or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?

Was Obama trying to have her pick up some liquor or was it just something Dad's do on occasion, myself included?


It's what Dad's do on occasion, myself included!
 
2011-06-30 08:01:43 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Petraeus' opinion is what Obama tells him it is.


That too.
 
2011-06-30 08:05:05 AM  
Option 1 - "I'm the commander-in-chief, I make the final call, you follow my orders".
Option 2 - see option 1

/"learned from my predecessor"
 
2011-06-30 08:05:15 AM  

LasersHurt: Also how hilarious that his critics shout and yell and cry about how he's not a leader and can't make decision, then also cry and shout about when he DOES make decisions because he's not doing what other people want?


Whatever scores the most points, I guess.
 
2011-06-30 08:05:18 AM  

krelborne: RexTalionis: This whole thing was stolen from the Weekly Standard, but the Weekly Standard also appears to have reading comprehension issues. This is the relevant portion from the White House Briefing on Afghanistan that the Weekly Standard cites:

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing the call. I've got a couple, but I'll be quick. Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the President? And as a follow-up, did Gates, Panetta and Clinton all endorse it? Finally, will the President say about how many troops will remain past 2014? And of the 33,000 coming home by next summer, how many are coming home and how many are going to be reassigned somewhere else?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

See my emphasis. The Senior Administration Official is saying that General Petraeus presented options to the President - including options which would have kept troops in Afghanistan for longer than what the President settled on (i.e. less aggressive than than the the plan settled on by the President).

This is not inconsistent with General Allen's testimony that the present withdrawal plan selected by the President is more aggressive than the options presented by General Petraeus. I think this would be clear to anyone with a higher reading level than an 8th grader.

As much as I hate to defend HotAir, you omitted what they were talking about. It was the very next sentence.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, I'll take part of that. In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out - so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

That said, the President's decision was fully within the range of options that were presented to him and has the full support of his national security team. I think there's a broad understanding among the national security team that there's an imperative to both consolidate the gains that have been made and continue our efforts to train Afghan security forces and partner with them in going after the Taliban, while also being very serious about the process of transition and the drawdown of our forces.

It can't be fully within the range of options and be more aggressive/"not an option".


Ah, yes, you're right. That definitely teaches me to post stuff at 4 or 5 AM. Mea culpa.
 
2011-06-30 08:05:29 AM  
It is the General's job to fight the war with resources allocated to them. Since when have we used them as the final decision makers as to how many resources are to be allocated? Settle down, conservatards, nothing to see here.
 
Displayed 50 of 237 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report