Posts tagged "Afghanistan"

(via On CBS’s Face The Nation, Marco Rubio Accuses Obama Of ‘Emboldening The Taliban’)

WASHINGTON — Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Sunday charged President Barack Obama with “emboldening the Taliban,” citing details from a new book by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates that harshly criticizes the president’s leadership in the war in Afghanistan.

"I don’t think we can ignore what’s in that book, and I think for many of us it confirms our worst fears," Rubio said on CBS’ "Face the Nation." "And that is that this is an administration full of people that either have the wrong convictions or, in the case of former Secretary Clinton, lack the courage of her convictions."

Rubio pointed to parts of Gates’ book that suggest Obama didn’t feel that the war in Afghanistan was his war, and that his decision to pull out troops was political.

"You saw that reflected in the decision that [Obama] made," Rubio continued. "At the same time that he announced the surge, he also announced an exit date and strategy, thereby emboldening the Taliban to believe they could wait us out.”

The Florida senator, whose name has been floated as a 2016 presidential contender, said Obama’s actions on Afghanistan have had international repercussions.

"Our allies see us as unreliable, and our enemies feel emboldened," Rubio said. "I think that this confirms our worst fears, that this is an administration that lacks a strategic foreign policy and, in fact, is largely driven by politics and tactics."

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration says it might leave no troops in Afghanistan after December 2014, an option that defies the Pentagon’s view that thousands of troops may be needed to contain al-Qaida and to strengthen Afghan forces.

"We wouldn’t rule out any option," including zero troops, Ben Rhodes, a White House deputy national security adviser, said Tuesday.

"The U.S. does not have an inherent objective of ‘X’ number of troops in Afghanistan," Rhodes said. "We have an objective of making sure there is no safe haven for al-Qaida in Afghanistan and making sure that the Afghan government has a security force that is sufficient to ensure the stability of the Afghan government."

The U.S. now has 66,000 troops in Afghanistan, down from a peak of about 100,000 as recently as 2010. The U.S. and its NATO allies agreed in November 2010 that they would withdraw all their combat troops by the end of 2014, but they have yet to decide what future missions will be necessary and how many troops they would require.

At stake is the risk of Afghanistan’s collapse and a return to the chaos of the 1990s that enabled the Taliban to seize power and provide a haven for Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network. Fewer than 100 al-Qaida fighters are believed to remain in Afghanistan, although a larger number are just across the border in Pakistani sanctuaries.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said he foresees a need for a U.S. counterterrorism force in Afghanistan beyond 2014, plus a contingent to train Afghan forces. He is believed to favor an option that would keep about 9,000 troops in the country.

His statement could be interpreted as part of an administration negotiating strategy. On Friday Afghan President Hamid Karzai is scheduled to meet President Barack Obama at the White House to discuss ways of framing an enduring partnership beyond 2014.

The two are at odds on numerous issues, including a U.S. demand that any American troops who would remain in Afghanistan after the combat mission ends be granted immunity from prosecution under Afghan law. Karzai has resisted, while emphasizing his need for large-scale U.S. support to maintain an effective security force after 2014.

In announcing last month in Kabul that he had accepted Obama’s invitation to visit this week, Karzai made plain his objectives.

"Give us a good army, a good air force and a capability to project Afghan interests in the region," Karzai said, and he would gladly reciprocate by easing the path to legal immunity for U.S. troops.

Karzai is scheduled to meet Thursday with Panetta at the Pentagon and with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at the State Department.

Without explicitly mentioning immunity for U.S. troops, Obama’s top White House military adviser on Afghanistan, Doug Lute, told reporters Tuesday that the Afghans will have to give the U.S. certain “authorities” if it wants U.S. troops to remain.

Rhodes said Obama remains committed to further reducing the U.S. military presence this year, although the pace of that withdrawal will not be decided for a few months.

h/t: AP.org

Throughout Monday night’s presidential debate on foreign policy, President Obama used past positions that Mitt Romney has taken over the course of the campaign to depict him as the wrong candidate to run U.S. foreign policy.

Obama used the tactic both to defend his own initiatives — particularly his Libya policy — and to characterize Romney as an untrained foreign policy hand who has been wobbly and inconsistent.

“I know you haven’t been in a position to execute foreign policy,” Obama said, in summarizing his theme of attack, “but every time you have offered an opinion, you have been wrong.”

Russia

Obama took the chance to needle Romney on his adversarial position on Russia. “I’m glad that you recognize al Qaeda is a threat. Because a few months ago when you were asked the biggest threat facing America, you said Russia,” Obama said. “The Cold War has been over for 20 years. But governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s.”

Later Obama said directly to Romney, “You indicated that we shouldn’t be passing nuclear treaties with Russia, despite the fact that 71 senators, Democrats and Republicans, voted for it.”

Libya

Regarding Romney’s campaign positions on the revolution in Libya, Obama said, “[T]o the governor’s credit, you supported us going into [L]ibya and the coalition that we organized,” Obama said. “But when it came time to making sure that Moammar Gaddhafi did not stay in power, that he was captured, governor, your suggestion was that this was mission creep.”

Syria

Responding to Romney’s call for arming Syrian opposition and his critique of the Obama administration’s more cautious policy, Obama noted that “to get more entangled militarily in Syria is a serious step. And we have to do so making absolutely certain that we know who we are helping, that we’re not putting arms in the hands of folks who eventually could turn them against us or allies in the region. I’m confident that Assad’s days are numbered. But what we can’t do is simply suggest that as governor at times as suggested that giving heavy weapons, for example, to the Syrian opposition is a simple proposition that would lead us to be safer over the long-term.”

Osama bin Laden

Obama reprised a familiar line based on Romney’s position in the 2008 campaign that locating and killing Osama bin Laden would not be a top priority.

“[Y]ou said we shouldn’t move heaven and earth to get one man,” Obama said. “If we would have asked Pakistan for permission, we wouldn’t have got him.”

Iraq

“You say that you’re not interested in duplicating what happened in Iraq, but just a few weeks ago, you said you think we should have more troops in Iraq right now,” Obama said pointedly. “You said we should have gone into Iraq despite the fact there were no weapons of mass destruction. You said that we should still have troops in Iraq, to this day.”

Afghanistan

You said that first we should not have a timeline in Afghanistan, then you said we should. Now you say maybe or it depends. Which means not only were you wrong, but you were confused and sending mixed messages to our troops and allies.”

h/t: Brian Beutler at TPM

Mitt Romney has spent considerable effort trying to avoid foreign policy and national security this campaign season. But when he’s had to engage, he’s forced to strike a delicate balance between satisfying his neocon advisers and right-wing war base on the one hand — while speaking to the rest of the country, which has no appetite for the militaristic Republican policies that have plagued this country since 2001, on the other.

In recent weeks, Romney made good on a promise he made earlier this year to a wealthy donor that he would try to exploit a foreign policy crisis for political gain. “If something of that nature presents itself,” Romney said, referring to the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979, “I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.” With the attack that killed four Americans at the U.S diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya last month, Romney has done just that.

The basis of Romney’s foreign policy critique of President Obama is that Obama went around the world and apologized for America after he became president. Of course, this never happened, but the baseless attack has been a hallmark from Romney’s campaign with respect to foreign policy.

– Romney accused President Obama of “mission creep” and “mission muddle” in Libya. “Military action cannot be under-deliberated and ad hoc,” he said. Libyan rebels ousted then-Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi five months later. (In his book, Romney attacked Obama for appeasing Qaddafi.) [4/21/2011]

– Romney announces he is officially running for president and, in doing so, chides Obama for “leading from behind” in Libya. One wonders if Romney would criticize Nelson Mandela, who once said: “It is better to lead from behind and to put others in front, especially when you celebrate victory when nice things occur. You take the front line when there is danger. Then people will appreciate your leadership.” [6/02/2011]

– Romney says he will let the generals dictate his Afghanistan policy. “I want those troops to come home based upon not politics, not based upon economics, but instead based upon the conditions on the ground determined by the generals,” he said. [6/13/2011]

– Romney continues his call for Obama to ramp up the war rhetoric on Iran. [9/15/2011]

– Romney said the U.S. should “reconsider” its relationship with countries that supported Palestine’s bid for U.N. recognition: that could have included Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and the Non-Aligned Movement, a U.N. block consisting of 118 members, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan, Chile and Peru. [9/28/2011]

– Romney said he would start foreign aid for every country “at zero” and call on them to make their case for U.S. financial assistance. [11/10/2011]

The Washington Post fact-checker debunks Romney’s oft-repeated claim that Obama “went around the world and apologized for America.” “Take it from us,” the Post concluded, “The apology tour never happened.” [12/10/2011]

– Mitt’s Cold War mentality continues. Russia “is without question our number one geopolitical foe,” he says on CNN, sparking ridicule from foreign policy experts of all stripes. [3/26/2012]

– Vice President Biden states the obvious: Romney “seems to be uninformed” on foreign policy. [4/01/2012]

– Former Bush administration Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell asks Romney to be more “mature” when talking foreign policy and criticized Romney for calling Russia America’s “number one geopolitical foe.” “Come on Mitt,” Powell said, “think.” Powell also said of Mitt’s advisers: “I don’t know who all of his advisers are but I’ve seen some of the names and some of them are quite far to the right.” ThinkProgress took an in-depth look into some of Romney’s far-right foreign policy advisers here. [5/23/2012]
– The Romney Stimulus: military spending creates jobs, other government spending does not. [7/25/2012]

– Romney breaks with every GOP president, pledging to never criticize Israel. [7/29/2012]

– Romney Shambles. Romney ventures to Europe and Israel in an effort to boost his standing on foreign policy issues. But the trip turns out to be a disaster. Romney ends up offending the Britishre-living the Cold War in Poland and claiming Israelis are superior to Palestinians. [7/27 - 8/1/2012]

– International media criticize Romney’s foreign trip. ‘The Republican has done damage.” Even Republicans mock his trip: “Seemed like a good idea at the time.” Another Republican says “it made him look like Rip Van Winkle.” [7/31/2012]

– Romney refuses to condemn Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-MN) widely criticized anti-Muslim witch hunt. Bachmann claimed that a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is part of a Muslim Brotherhood plot to infiltrate the U.S. government. [8/3/2012]

– Romney spends just 202 words on foreign policy during his Republican National Convention speech. Most of Romney’s foreign policy claims were false and misleading. [8/30/2012]

– Romney accuses President Obama of “sympathizing” with the attackers that killed four Americans in an assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. Romney had said at a fundraiser in early 2012 that he would try to capitalize politically on a future foreign policy crisis. “If something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity,” he said. (Romney himself had previously warned against placing blame after a terror attack.) [9/11/2012]

– Romney doesn’t back away from that statement the next day and his campaign even blamed Obama for the attacks. Romney is widely criticized for politicizing the event, even by Republicans. [9/12/2012]

– In a newly released video from a fundraiser in early 2012, Romney is caught saying “there’s just no way” to achieve Middle East peace and that his policy will be to “kick the can down the the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it.” [9/18/2012]

– The head of the Office of Legal Counsel under President George W. Bush concluded that any return to the use of torture or any other so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” would be both “indisputably illegal” and strongly opposed by the interrogators who would be tasked with the torturing. [10/03/2012]

– ThinkProgress outlines four key areas where Romney’s alleged “new” foreign policy is identical to Obama’s. [10/08/2012]

– Top Romney surrogate Rudy Giuliani says Romney “should be exploiting” the Libya attack for political gain. [10/15/2012]

– The Romney team claims the Obama administration is deliberately misleading the public on the Libya attack. [10/16/2012]

– CNN’s Candy Crowley fact checks Romney’s false claim during his debate with Obama that Obama waited 14 days to call the Libya attack an “act of terror.” (Obama actually called the incident terrorism well before Romney did.) [10/16/2012]

– Obama is still outpacing Romney in military donations. [10/17/2012]

– Romney is again widely criticized for again politicizing the Libya attacks. Richard Clarke, who served as the top counter-terror official in Republican and Democratic administrations, lambasted Romney: “If there were not a presidential campaign going on, a campaign in which the incumbent has a stellar record of fighting terrorism, I doubt Romney would care about the details of what happened in Benghazi.” [10/17/2012]

h/t: Ben Armbruster at Think Progress Security

CHARLOTTE — Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), considered a shortlist candidate to be secretary of state if Democrats hold the White House, offered a robust defense of President Obama’s national security record and an equally blistering critique of Mitt Romney’s limited resume.

“We’ve all learned Mitt Romney doesn’t know much about foreign policy,” Kerry said. “But he has all these neocon advisers who know all the wrong things about foreign policy. He would rely on them — after all, he’s the great outsourcer.”

For Kerry, the speech was at least in part an exorcism of his own foreign policy demons. As the Democratic nominee two election cycles back, Kerry was savaged as a “flip flopper” at the Republicans’ 2004 convention. This time, Kerry clearly relished the chance to do the same to another Massachusetts nominee often tagged with the same epithet.

In the most brutal section of his speech, Kerry highlighted Romney’s mixed messages on a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan and military intervention in Libya.

“It isn’t fair to say Mitt Romney doesn’t have a position on Afghanistan — he has every position,” Kerry said. “He was against setting a date for withdrawal, then he said it was right and then he left the impression that maybe it was wrong to leave this soon. He said it was ‘tragic’ to leave Iraq, and then he said it was fine. He said we should’ve intervened in Libya sooner. Then he ran down a hallway to duck reporters’ questions. Then he said the intervention was too aggressive. Then he said the world was a ‘better place’ because the intervention succeeded.”

He didn’t let up on the flip-flop theme, waiting for the applause to subside before delivering one of the best received lines at the convention.

“Mr. Romney — here’s a little advice,” he said. “Before you debate Barack Obama on foreign policy, you better finish the debate with yourself!”

“Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska,” he said. “Mitt Romney talks like he’s only seen Russia by watching ‘Rocky IV.’”

As for Obama, Kerry praised him for his combination of diplomacy to bring America’s allies closer and military force to repel its enemies. Equally as important, he contrasted him with Romney as an honest broker who kept his promise to leave Iraq, will keep his promise to leave Afghanistan,and wasn’t kidding around when he said in 2008 he’d take the war to al-Qaeda.

“After more than 10 years without justice for thousands of Americans murdered on Sept. 11, after Mitt Romney said it would be ‘naive’ to go into Pakistan to pursue the terrorists, it took President Obama, against the advice of many, to give that order to finally rid this earth of Osama bin Laden,” Kerry said. “Ask Osama bin Laden if he is better off now than he was four years ago!”

While the election has overwhelmingly focused on the economy, with some social issues popping up, Mitt Romney has been a strong critic of the White House on foreign policy. His book “No Apology” in its title alone was a rebuke of what Republicans claim was an “apology tour” by Obama to repair relations abroad after President Bush’s unpopular administration. Romney and other Republicans also frequently suggest Obama doesn’t believe in “American exceptionalism,” a phrase that’s come into vogue on the right.

H/T: Benjy Sarlin at TPM

Here’s solid irrefutable proof that Dumbya destroyed the economy.

Indeed, the country is still reeling from Bush’s disastrous economic stewardship. His irresponsible tax cuts and deregulatory policies have contributed significantly to the slow recovery and are partly responsible for the nation’s economic plight. Here are 5 reasons why:

1. Deregulated Wall Street: It was a great time to be a Wall Street executive during the Bush administration. Sweeping financial deregulation helped build the housing bubble and allowed financial institutions to pursue risky trades unchecked. In fact, Bush eliminated the rules that allowed Wall Street to cause the financial crash that plunged the nation into the Great Recession.

2. Cut Taxes For The Wealthy: The Bush tax cuts — over 50 percent of which benefited the richest 5 percent of American taxpayers — cost about $2.5 trillion over the decade after they were enacted. Ten years later, Bush’s tax cuts are still the main driving factor of the national debt:

3. Ran Up A Tab On Two Wars: The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost the country trillions of dollars. Combined with Bush’s tax cuts, war spending was amain factor in blowing up the deficit and spending the surplus accumulated under Clinton. Lawmakers now use the deficit as an excuse for inaction.

4. Left Homeowners In A Lurch: While Bush was happy to help out the banks in the wake of the housing crisis, he did little to assist struggling homeowners.Hope For Homeowners, Bush’s proposal to assist those struggling with their mortgages, was a colossal failure; in its first six months, it helped just one homeowner renegotiate his mortgage. Many mortgage holders — 15.7 million or, one in three — are still underwater today.

5. Weakened Workers: Bush weakened worker safety regulations and collective bargaining rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Department of Labor throughout his time in office. Today, corporations are back to making record profits, while workers’ incomes are falling.

h/t: Tara Culp-Ressler and Annie-Rose Strasser at Think Progress Economy

 

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) on Monday accused the Republican presidential field of incendiary rhetoric that did not match the level-headed tone in combating terrorism laid out by President George W. Bush and continued under President Obama. Appearing on CNN, Durbin was responding to the GOP candidates’ criticism that Obama’sapology to Afghans for the inadvertent burning of Muslim holy books was “unacceptable,” as former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) put it.

Durbin said the Bush “got it right” when “(h)e said our war is not with the religion of Islam.” Instead, he said, “Our war is with those who would distort [Islam] and turn it into terrorism.” Durbin went on to say that this was a “guiding principle” that “was adopted by President Obama.” He then drew a distinction with the GOP presidential field, and CNN commentator Will Cain asked him to clarify:

DURBIN: Now, listen to these Republican candidates for president. They’re at war with Islam. What the president is trying to do is to calm down –

WILL CAIN: Senator Durbin, I haven’t heard one thing that backs up what you suggest. Just give me an example, how are they at war with Islam?

DURBIN: Newt Gingrich saying that the president is guilty of appeasement. […]What you listen to is incendiary rhetoric coming out in a very delicate situation. Lives are at stake here. The president is showing leadership. The president is stepping up, trying to calm a situation. These three candidates are coming on television doing the opposite.

Indeed, Durbin is right. Much of the GOP presidential campaign has been steeped in Islamophobic rhetoric. Gingrich has said he would single out Muslims by advocating for anunconstitutional federal law that would criminalize some practices of being Muslim in America.Santorum has endorsed Muslim profiling at airports, and has said Muslims don’t believe in equality. In 2007, Mitt Romney reportedly said he wouldn’t consider Muslim candidates for a cabinet position.

h/t: Ali Gharib at ThinkProgress Security 

(via Perry: “Administration Shows ‘Disdain For The Military’ By Calling Urinating On Corpses A ‘Criminal Act’”)

When a video surfaced on the internet appearing to show four U.S. Marines urinating on the corpses of dead Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, the far right reacted with a mix of apathy (“I could care less”; “Pile them up, let them rot, piss on them”) and approbation (“I love these Marines”). Republican politicians like Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Rep. Allen West (R-FL) were considerably more restrained, lamenting the incident and calling for the Marines to be punished (West specified that the punishment should be “non-judicial”).

But on CNN’s State of the Union yesterday, flagging GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry broke with his fellow Republicans and, while calling for the Marines to be “reprimanded and appropriately punished,” blamed the Obama administration for condemning the actions depicted in the video and initiating a full investigation. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta condemned the acts and called for an investigation, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Anyone found to have participated or known about it, having engaged in such conduct must be held fully accountable.”

This apparently did not sit well with Perry, who compared urinating on Taliban corpses to aphotograph of Gen. Patton urinating into the Rhine River and Winston Churchill urinating on the Siegfried Line, then said:

But what I’m saying is what is really disturbing to me is just, kind of, the over-the-top rhetoric from this administration and their disdain for the military, it appears, whether it’s the secretary of state or whether it’s the secretary of defense.

I mean, these kids made a mistake. There’s not any doubt about it. They shouldn’t have done it. It’s bad. But the — the — to call it a criminal act, I think, is over the top.

Actually, far from being “over the top,” labeling the act of desecrating corpses on the battlefield a “criminal act” in line with international treaties to which the U.S. is party. That means those treaties, since they are ratified, carry the force of U.S. law. The First Geneva Convention states unequivocally:

At all times, and particularly after an engagement, Parties to the conflict shall, without delay, take all possible measures to search for and collect the wounded and sick, to protect them against pillage and ill-treatment, to ensure their adequate care, and to search for the dead and prevent their being despoiled.

h/t: Ali Gharib at ThinkProgress Security

International outrage stemming from a video showing US Marines urinating on the dead bodies of dead Afghan Taliban fighters has swept the airwaves and the internet. US leadership, Pentagon officials, Generals, and foreign policy experts have all condemned the video. But not everyone is against what these Marines did. Some, like CNN contributor and radio host Dana Loesch, applauded it.

During the January 12th edition of The Dana Show on KTFK based in St. Louis, host Dana Loesch, who also contributes to CNN, complained about the outrage and then declared that she would have urinated on the dead bodies too.

Dana Loesch

Her comments are outrageous, extreme, and should get her fired. In fact, Loesch’s comments are so extreme that even Rush Limbaugh won’t defend her. During his radio show, Limbaugh called the actions of the Marines indefensible and admitted that they violated the rules of war (not to mention human decency).

“Well, there’s a video, nobody knows how old it is, of some U.S. Marines urinating on the bodies of Taliban combatants in Afghanistan. Peed on them. And of course it’s Marines. It violated the rules. There’s no defense of this. The overreaction of this is nuts, but still it happened.”

When Rush Limbaugh is a voice of reason, you’ve gone over the edge. Degrading a dead body is not defensible and CNN and KTFK should fire Loesch. It’s just the right thing to do.

h/t: Stephen D. Foster, Jr at Addicting Info.


 

More violent rhetoric from KFTK 97.1 FM right-wing extremist Islamophobic radio host Dana Loesch, as she misleadingly declared onThe Dana Show today that “the Progressives/Liberals are outraged that Taliban corpses are urinated on, while the ‘Liberal press’ ignores OWS Protestors urinating on cop cars.” She stated that “I have no problem with it.”

From the 01.12.2012 edition of KFTK’s The Dana Show:

Adam Shriver at the St. Louis Activist Hub has more on Loesch’s venom:

CNN “political analyst” Dana Loesch, on the other hand, apparently doesn’t care at all if these actions were directly working against the mission of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan; instead, she cheered for it to fuel the unhinged Muslim hatred that has become a staple of modern day right-wing media. On her show, she gave the marines in question “one million cool points” and said that she would “drop trow” and “do it too.” She ended by saying: “Do I have a problem with that as a citizen of the United States? No, I don’t.”



Loesch’s rhetoric echoes that of rabid Islamophobe Atlas Shrugged blogger Geller’s ridiculously offensive tripe regarding the Marines’ urination of Taliban corpses.


Hamas-tied CAIR, once again sides with jihadists against the US military. Always. Apparently they are a  “Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization” for jihadists and Taliban and Al-Shabaab, Hamas, Hezb’allah, et al).
CAIR has whipped itself up into an Islamic frenzy because  a video surfaced that appears to show US Marines combat gear urinating on several dead jihadis.
I love these Marines. Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.
Ms. Pamela Geller, YOU are the one that’s the lunatic, not CAIR. 

Here are the REAL facts (NOT the propaganda from the likes of Loesch and Geller) about the shameful act of corpse urination by some members of the US Marines. 
ThinkProgress Security: 
video that surfaced Wednesday that allegedly depicts a group of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan urinating on corpses that they called “dead Taliban” could complicate nascent peace talks in the decade-long war there. The act portrayed on the video faceduniversal condemnation from the military, politicians, and the Afghan president Hamid Karzai.
With the U.S. expected to begin talks soon with the Afghan Taliban insurgency, all parties were quick to distance themselves from the act. The Marines said in a statement that the actions “are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps.” In a separate statement, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a criminal probe was being launched and added:

This disrespectful act is inexplicable and not in keeping with the high moral standards we expect of coalition forces.
ISAF strongly condemns the actions depicted in the video, which appear to have been conducted by a small group of U.S. individuals, who apparently are no longer serving in Afghanistan.

Not everyone, however, was saddened by the events. Anti-Muslim activist Pam Geller wrote in favor of the incident. “I love these Marines,” she said, adding, “Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.” A former Republican National Committee researcher tweeted wondering, “this is a story?” He added: “I could care less. Liberal media at work.” Michael Goldfarb, a neoconseravtive Republican operative (a former McCain campaign spokesman), lobbyist and, as of recently, chairman of a new conservative online media ventureretweeted the comments from the RNC researcher.

Memo to the people that are cheering it on: DO NOT urinate on ANYBODY’s dead corpses. It is sick, disrespectful, and offensive to  do it.


This type of rhetoric is reason enough for Emmis execs to suspend and/or fire her, but since her station’s manager is a hardcore Republican, it won’t happen.

H/T: DanaBusted.blogspot.com 

 

video that surfaced Wednesday that allegedly depicts a group of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan urinating on corpses that they called “dead Taliban” could complicate nascent peace talks in the decade-long war there. The act portrayed on the video faceduniversal condemnation from the military, politicians, and the Afghan president Hamid Karzai.

With the U.S. expected to begin talks soon with the Afghan Taliban insurgency, all parties were quick to distance themselves from the act. The Marines said in a statement that the actions “are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps.” In a separate statement, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a criminal probe was being launched and added:

This disrespectful act is inexplicable and not in keeping with the high moral standards we expect of coalition forces.

ISAF strongly condemns the actions depicted in the video, which appear to have been conducted by a small group of U.S. individuals, who apparently are no longer serving in Afghanistan.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said of the incident, “I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.” Panetta has ordered an investigation to the matter.

Afghans offered across-the-board condemnation as well. “It was inhuman and despicable, an unforgivable act which we condemn in the strongest terms,” said a Taliban spokesman. Karzai called the act “completely inhumane” and asked that those found responsible by an investigation get the “most severe punishment” possible.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who served in the U.S. military, said:

Here’s a handful of obviously undisciplined young people of the hundred and some thousand Marines that we have. And it makes me so sad. There should be an investigation and these young people should be punished, but it does great damage. It makes me so sad.

Not everyone, however, was saddened by the events. Anti-Muslim activist Pam Geller wrote in favor of the incident. “I love these Marines,” she said, adding, “Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.” A former Republican National Committee researcher tweeted wondering, “this is a story?” He added: “I could care less. Liberal media at work.” Michael Goldfarb, a neoconseravtive Republican operative (a former McCain campaign spokesman), lobbyist and, as of recently, chairman of a new conservative online media ventureretweeted the comments from the RNC researcher.

H/T: Ali Gharib at ThinkProgress Security

cognitivedissonance:

One in three U.S. veterans of the post-9/11 military believes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not worth fighting, and a majority think that after 10 years of combat America should be focusing less on foreign affairs and more on its own problems, according to an opinion survey released Wednesday.

The findings highlight a dilemma for the Obama administration and Congress as they struggle to shrink the government’s huge budget deficits and reconsider defense priorities while trying to keep public support for remaining involved in Iraq and Afghanistan for the longer term.

Somehow, I don’t think the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is the morale issue… 

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)