Would the US Be In Seven Wars if the GOP had its Way?

Capt Walter Miller — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:49:12 -0400

"President Barack Obama likes to paint Republicans as warmongers and portray himself as the diplomat-in-chief who ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though those conflicts continue and seem certain to outlast his time in office.

In a little-noticed White House video released last month, Obama insisted that he even knows exactly how many wars the United States would be in if he had listened to his hawkish GOP critics.

“Right now, if I was taking the advice of some of the members of Congress who holler all the time, we’d be in, like, seven wars right now,” he told a small group of veterans and Gold Star mothers of slain U.S. military personnel.

“I’m not exaggerating. I’ve been counting. We’d be in military actions in seven places around the world,” he emphasized.

The Sept. 10 meeting occurred behind closed doors in the White House Roosevelt Room, but the president’s comments were made public in a White House-produced video shared via social media.

Asked by Yahoo News to substantiate Obama’s remarks, a National Security Council spokesman first listed seven places to which the president has sent combat forces on a range of missions: Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, Afghanistan and Yemen.

Indeed, part of Obama’s Iran nuclear deal sales pitch hinged on his willingness to use deadly force overseas, intervening around the world far more aggressively than his critics say he’s willing to.

But that was plainly not what the president was talking about last month when he insisted that he was not exaggerating and had been counting how many additional conflicts Republicans wanted the U.S. to be engaged in.

“The point is that some of our critics think massive ground forces are the answer to any security challenge anywhere in the world for undefined ends,” NSC spokesman Ned Price told Yahoo News. “Our response has been to deploy boots on the ground for discrete missions when necessary for pre-defined and narrow purposes.”

He did not share Obama’s list of supposed GOP-sought conflicts.

That’s not to say that key Republicans are less hawkish than the president. Far from it: They’ve called for U.S. ground troops to carry out combat missions in Iraq, for more aggressive military action in Syria, for Washington to provide lethal aid to Ukraine’s military as it clashes with Russian-backed separatists and for Obama to send warships to the South China Sea as a counter to Beijing’s expansive territorial claims.

Nor is Obama alone in escalating the partisan rhetoric in Washington, D.C., and being dismissive of opponents. The verbal battle over the nuclear agreement between six world powers and Iran included GOP portrayals of Obama as the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, or as an accomplice to a new Holocaust.

Still, Obama’s comments suggest that the president — who has never hesitated to clash verbally with his critics — is planning to stay in “rhymes-with-bucket list” mode, as he has described himself, for his last year and a half in the White House."

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/gop-would-have-us-in-seven-wars-right-now-090043699.html

This is just another reason President Obama will be remembered as a great president.

GOP would have U.S. in ‘seven wars right now’

President Barack Obama likes to paint Republicans as warmongers and portray himself as the diplomat-in-chief who ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though those conflicts continue and seem certain to outlast his time in office. In a little-noticed White House video released last month, Obama

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2015 8:13 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 08:13:55 -0400

The 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force empowered the President “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those . . . he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored [those who did].” To put it bluntly, Congress did not declare war on terrorism in September 2001; it authorized military force against those whom the government reasonably believed were tied to the 9/11 perpetrators.

So, no, Walter. We would have one undeclared war in seven locations.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2015 9:27 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:27:42 -0400

Painting republicans as warmongers is a long tradition without merit. The Democrats have been in power during all of the Major Wars, Republicans the smaller ones, it doesn't seem there is a black and white line on who calls on the services the most. There is a clear line on who funds them, and uses the military as a diplomatic tool.
Republicans believe talk softly and carry a big stick, or you can get a lot more from a king word and a gun than a kind word alone.
Democrats seem to think that by disarming totalitarian regimes will do the same.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2015 1:41 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:41:32 -0400

The President must be joking, because as we speak there are current US military operations in Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Afghanistan and Yemen (that's six countries) and we were previously in action in Libya. That makes seven. Not to mention smaller scale stuff in Uganda and North Africa, or Abu Sayaf in the Philippines.
So what he's saying is that if "warmongering Republicans" were in charge, then we'd also have been engaged in seven countries.

It appears to me that he wants it both ways, by implying that Republicans are bad for wanting to exercise military force in certain circumstances, while he paints himself as pragmatic for doing the same thing. That is about as specious an argument as I've heard in a long time.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Oct 6 at 2015 6:46 PM

SN Greg Wright — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 18:46:12 -0400

Yet another troll post from RP's resident troll. Best to just not respond. Eventually he'll go away.