Media Reports: Obama To Send 34,000 More Troops To Afghanistan

General McChrystal gave the President three options on Afghanistan: A low-risk plan requiring 80,000 more troops, a medium-risk plan requiring 40,000 more troops, and a high-risk plan requiring 20,000 more troops.
Obama has apparently, if these reports are accurate, opted to go between the high-risk and medium-risk plans with 34,000 more troops.

President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called “a war of necessity” in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.
Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said.
The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.

As much as I believe in the mission in Afghanistan, and as much as I believe it would be a mistake to withdraw, I think I would rather see us pull our troops out and end the war then go forward at this point with Obama’s decision.
If we are going to commit our troops to the battlefield I think we need to be committed to winning. “Go big or go home.” Our commander in Afghanistan offered the President a low-risk solution to the war. Obama opted to undercut that solution for the sake of political expediency.
If that’s how Obama’s going to lead on the war, if he’s going to be more worried about political calculations and keeping up the appearance of standing by his campaign promises on Afghanistan than actually winning the war, then let’s give up. Let’s bring the troops home and stop the charade.
The blood of our soldiers, and to a much lesser degree our tax dollars, are too important to play these sorts of games with.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • sayanything-2819

    You are exactly right. The left in this country made it harder to win, caused the deaths of many of our soldiers and Iraqi citizens and used those deaths as political fodder since the 04 elections.

  • Brent

    “Go big or go home.”

    That’s something I can agree with. Dragging things out just ends up with more people dead and otherwise undermines the accomplishments made.

    Though we probably disagree here, grand, vague goals should also be either abandoned or refined into very specific goals that a military can realistically accomplish.

  • sayanything-2

    And when are you going to pick one usename? Posting under 4 different ones is dishonest, but you know that.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Obviously you missed millions of purple fingers, the execution of the murdering dictator Saddam Hussein, and the installation of a modern govt in Iraq.
    If you really like parades that much, there are plenty of them in downtown San Francisco for you.

  • sayanything-4625

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=56807

    Canada has more than 2,800 troops in the ground in Afghanistan, serving in Regional Command South, where Canadian generals have commanded the troublesome region. Canada has suffered among the highest per-capita casualty rates there, with more than 130 servicemembers killed. Canada also has contributed generously to support economic and infrastructure improvements and in building government institutions.

    “It was Canadian soldiers – along with our British, Dutch, Danish and Estonian allies – who largely held the line in the south before U.S. reinforcements arrived in strength

    Regional Command South is pissed they didn’t get the memo about the US cutting and running.

    The US has four thousand wounded in Afghanistan over the course of the war. Over one thousand in the last three months alone. They are pissed they didn’t get the “cut and run” memo too!

  • sayanything-203

    Greg,

    Don’t pay RBB any attention. His “Bush this… Bush that” routine is the radical Left’s standard defense when someone comes to realize that their American Idol is little more than a dithering, second-rate hack with nothing more to his credit than a Harvard J.D., pair of daughters, and his mastery of the teleprompter. Its a poorly executed attempt at diversion. Nothing more. The Lib’s version of Three Card Monty.

  • sayanything-51

    Just asking because your numbers are off no matter how they are divided up.

  • avs75

    “Go big or go home.” “Let’s kick some ass.” “We have to win.”

    You people are talking about this war like it’s a football game. Come on, what do you guys want from the President? If he pulled the troops out, you all would scream like babies, and now that he’s escalating the number of troops you’re STILL not happy. What’s the problem now?
    How does it not make sense to you that we are not fighting a normal war, we are not fighting a nation or an army. We are fighting insurgents who hide out in mountains like cowards, and no matter how many troops we have, we’ll never kill all of them. The important thing for us to do, is to lower their presence, power and stability, and then transfer the power to the Afghan security forces. It’s common sense!

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    More BS from you, ollie! You lefties “won everything”, so the only thing real Americans have going for us is the truth.
    The terrorist incident at Ft Hood was an illustration of how dangerous PC is in this time of worldwide Islamic terrorism, no matter how you try to twist and spin it.
    Our nation is “crumbling” due to the insane policies of the Kenyan Marxist in the White House.
    The cure is to return to fiscal conservatism(living within our means).

    BTW, fighting and killing the terrorists who want to enslave and kill us isn’t “warmongering”. Nice Soros talking points, though.

  • sayanything-4625

    Bob, its clear to me all you want to do is blame Bush. War doesn’t work on a time line. Technically we are still at war with North Korea. This has been a nice exercise in futility. In reality, your boy championed the war in Afghanistan and talked up how he would win the war. He’s trying to squirm out of that now. Blaming Bush only gets you so far.

    http://www.cfr.org/publication/18952/

    Many people in the United States – and many in partner countries that have sacrificed so much – have a simple question: What is our purpose in Afghanistan? After so many years, they ask, why do our men and women still fight and die there? They deserve a straightforward answer.

    So let me be clear: al Qaeda and its allies – the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks – are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the U.S. homeland from its safe-haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.

    The future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan. In the nearly eight years since 9/11, al Qaeda and its extremist allies have moved across the border to the remote areas of the Pakistani frontier. This almost certainly includes al Qaeda’s leadership: Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. They have used this mountainous terrain as a safe-haven to hide, train terrorists, communicate with followers, plot attacks, and send fighters to support the insurgency in Afghanistan.

    As President, my greatest responsibility is to protect the American people. We are not in Afghanistan to control that country or to dictate its future. We are in Afghanistan to confront a common enemy that threatens the United States, our friends and allies, and the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan who have suffered the most at the hands of violent extremists.

    So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That is the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just. And to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same: we will defeat you.

    That’s what your boy said. Now he’s trying to get out of his tough words. That’s March Bob. Its now October and Zero made up his mind. Its no coincidence that we have had 1000 wounded in the last three months. Think about that Bob, 4000 wounded during eight years of war, 1000 of them in the last three months. Don’t you think that’s a result of our dicking around? Keep trying to make this about Bush. Guess what? He’s gone. He can’ come back. Its all on your shoulders now and you’re screwing it up.

  • sayanything-4625

    We are talking about it like its a war. In fact, “go big or go home” is an actual Army doctrine. Its usually called by its proper name the Powell Doctrine. Under the Powell Doctrine you use overwhelming force to destroy your enemy. You know, go big or go home. Do rant on though.

  • sayanything-4625

    If the massacre at Ft Hood didn’t show how much these long and repeated deployments are affecting our troops, I guess nothing will.

    The shooter had never deployed anywhere. How did “long deployments” cause him to snap. Oh, it didn’t.

  • sayanything-4272

    Why do you believe in the mission in Afghanistan?

    Why don’t you enlist to support your belief?

    I don’t believe in the mission in Afghanistan because it serves no purpose other than to enrich defense contractors.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    “Eight years of fail…”

    Another lie from you; before Obama started screwing things up, Afghanistan was relatively stable. The failure is all Obama’s.

  • sayanything-51

    Afghanistan was a secondary theater for Al Queda and us. It was fairly stable. As we started winning in Iraq Al Queda began to move operations to Afghanistan.

    Wow, just wow.

    Are you saying that bush invaded Afghanistan first because it was a secondary theater and Al Queda moved into Afghanistan after bush invaded Iraq?

  • sayanything-3444

    I hope for the sake of our soldiers that if this is true it is enough. Having watched the half-hearted efforts of the politicians chew up so many of our best and brightest during Viet Nam, I have no desire to see a similar result. You said it right Rob – Go BIG or go home. We have the capability to end this in very short order if we have the stomach for it – if not, good luck keeping the bile down.

  • sayanything-4416

    Just think. When it fails and more troops die, you'll have something to club Obama with!

    That's your real hope. More death and failure so you can use it politically.

    What wonderful people. You're only disappointed that he isn't sending 100,000.

  • sayanything-287

    I totally agree with Rob on this issue, go big, get it done, or get the heck out now!

  • AKA WOOF

    Spreading peas on the plate
    to make it appear we've eaten our meal.
    Eight years of fail, the troops
    are being disengaged.

  • sayanything-3717

    Only took about six months to make this decision. He is not up to the job.

  • sayanything-4416

    He should send 200,000. 400,000. Millions. All young republicans. All conservatives. Just go to the teabagger events, round up all the men and ship them out. Oh hell, send the women too.

    Just think of how many problems we'd be solving.

  • Minouska

    Haha.Haha.. I can guess who this is…

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    I'm glad that we can at least find some common ground. If we're going to commit to war we should commit fully and win the war. If we aren't willing to do that we shouldn't even bother.

    As for the goals of the war, I think we need to draw a line between political rhetoric and actual policy. There were specific goals in Iraq that weren't vague at all. Its just that most people (admittedly on both sides of the debate) mostly ignored them in favor of simplistic slogans.

  • sayanything-203

    He is not up to the job.

    AMEN!! Obama is little more than a second-rate political hack.

    This is a split the difference, wait til after next year's elections, then declare victory and retreat decision. It certainly isn't about winning.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Any failures are Obama's fault. While he dithered, the terrorists regained momentum. War isn't just about numbers, it's also about timing. Obama's insane dithering has cost American lives, made us appear weak, and is a recipe for failure.

    As far as using death for political purposes, that's exclusive leftie territory. You did it extensively in both Vietnam and in Iraq. You even tried to do it in the Gulf War, but GHW Bush won too quickly, by using the correct force level at the right time, that you had no time to do your usual squealing.

  • AKA WOOF

    Stable narcostate.

  • sayanything-51

    Say, is this the first war that bush started, cut and ran from to invade a country that did not attack us, could not attack us and had nothing to do with the terrorist attack that happened on his watch.

    Why didn't bush win this one while he was the decider instead of kicking it down to the next administration? He only had 7 years to gititdun, but he failed us on this one too.

    Just another horrible mess the new guy has to clean up.

  • sayanything-106

    Lets go kick some a$$ and then go home.

  • sayanything-106

    Many of us knew that back in 2008 but there were still moron that voted for him.

  • sayanything-12

    LOL, even dismal Dino has no faith in his president.

  • sayanything-12

    You're a f**king idiot Bob. That was was going on long before Bush came into office. It started during the presidency some guy named "Clinton". Opening salvo? First WTC attack.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Thought you lefties, and some who claim to be conservative, want more drug use.

    Double standard?

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    No matter how much you lie, twist and spin, rbb, the fact remains that Obama's incompetence and dithering has made things measurably worse in Afghanistan. BTW, we never left, so you lie again. President Bush's strong stand against terrorism had resulted in relative stability in Afghanistan, while we secured the freedom of the Iraqi citizens from a murdering, torturing(real torture, not interrogation) dictator.
    Had you lefties not tried to sabotage President Bush's strong efforts to fight terrorism for eight years, we might have won in Iraq a lot sooner, gone on to victory in Afghanistan, and might even have destroyed the Iranian nuke program.
    The traitorous Dems have cost both lives and money.

  • sayanything-4625

    cut and ran from to invade a country

    Interesting. The 10th Mountain, the 101, the Brits, the Dutch, the Germans, the Aussies, the Czechs, the Moldovans and many others would be shocked to know that we "cut and ran". Perhaps you could explain why they've been fighting all those years?

  • sayanything-51

    Are you saying that the plan bush left in place, the plan Obama and our Generals have been following has been a failure?

    Obama increased troop levels in Afghanistan, didn't he?

  • AKA WOOF

    Won in Iraq.
    When's the victory parade, or did I miss it?

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Plans don't win wars when they aren't properly executed, rbb. You really don't know that? Handing the momentum back to the terrorists by dithering is faulty execution, which is why things have gotten much worse under Obama's "leadership".

  • sayanything-2804

    On Friday night's "Hairball" with Chris (I felt this thrill going up my leg) Matthews, MSNBC host Matthews took a page out of Dick Cheney's book and accused the president of "dithering" over Afghanistan.

    I guess Obama finally found a replacement for the teleprompter that tells him what to do… say, eat, bow to…etc. etc.

  • sayanything-4625

    No, I'm telling you events on the ground changed. Afghanistan was a secondary theater for Al Queda and us. It was fairly stable. As we started winning in Iraq Al Queda began to move operations to Afghanistan. We are now in the process of shifting troops to reflect that reality.

    In war, things don't always go to plan. The enemy gets a vote too. Not being idiots they chose to move to a different battleground. No one "cut and ran". Cutting and running implies that we had no troops there and were not fighting. That wasn't true and is a slur to the brave men from many countries that were fighting there with us.

  • sayanything-13784

    He finally took time off from golf to make a decision, amazing.

  • sayanything-4625

    Bob, I know this is hard but without creating a huge post, here we go. We invaded Afghanistan. We removed the Taliban. They had to go somewhere so they moved into Pakistan and Iraq. We followed them to their new battlefield. After the surge, they began to lose in Iraq and they moved their operations back to Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Afghanistan was a secondary theater. Much like New Zealand, Burma, the Aleutians and several other places were secondary theatre's in World War II. The main effort was somewhere else and got the priority on men and supplies but that doesn't mean we "cut and run". If you can't see that, sorry dude, I would like to see you walk up to the families of those killed in action and tell them we cut and ran in Afghanistan. I don't think they will be all that happy. Now, if you want to go on and pretend we "cut and ran" go on ahead.

  • sayanything-51

    bush cut and ran in Afghanistan to invade a country that did not attack us and could not attack us. He failed us as our CiC.

    You do know the difference between Al Queda and the Taliban doncha?

  • sayanything-4625

    When did we pull out? I seem to remember that we had troops there the whole time. Perhaps you could provide evidence of the "cut and run" troop pull out?

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_and_run

    Cut and run is a pejorative phrase used in the context of a war or battle meaning cowardly retreat.

    So you should have no trouble finding evidence of our "cowardly retreat" from Afghanistan, right Bob? Is this really the game you want to play? You have no problem with saying that we retreated from Afghanistan.
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retreat

    Retreat : the usually forced withdrawal of troops from an enemy or from an advanced position

    So when were we forced to withdraw from Afghanistan? You do know the difference between a change in priorities and a forced withdrawal, right?

  • Brent

    "There were specific goals in Iraq that weren't vague at all."

    Yes, there were. Not all were in accordance with what a small government should be doing and obviously the wiseness of even legimitate goals can be questioned, but the constant changing of goals and the grand, vague goals of providing security for foreign peoples the world over, rebuilding countries, establishing new customs and traditions, etc. are not conducive to what just war is supposed to be about, let alone what limited government is supposed to be about. I don't agree the military ought to be used as if it were the Peace Corps or, worse yet, a welfarist central planning authority for other countries.

  • sayanything-203

    Brent,

    You make a good point about the use, and misuse, of the US military. Perhaps the answer is to forget the niceties, the politically correct drivel about national building, and instead simply hunt down bin Laden, al Zawahiri, and the rest of al Qaeda, wherever they are, whatever the cost or consequences and let someone else worry about picking up the pieces. The UN perhaps? Heaven knows, they aren't much good for anything else.

  • sayanything-2804

    Sure, One is a group of Terrorists while the other is a bunch of Terrorists.

  • sayanything-1321

    Well, I hope you guys are happy. It seems that Obama lost his nerve and gave in to the war mongers on the right. Yes. He made a commitment to Afghanistan during the campaign. However,

    things change. If the massacre at Ft Hood didn't show how much these long and repeated deployments are affecting our troops, I guess nothing will. You won't pay for health care reform. But you will spend millions for bragging rights in the world's political arena. Maybe, after the return of the draft, many of you will feel that you and your children shouldn't be trying build democracy overseas, while our nation crumbles. Even now many of you pundits are questioning how to pay for the war while still encouraging it. I feel sorry for America and I feel sorry for our president. There is no "change you can believe in". It is the same old political game played with total disregard for the health and welfare of American soldiers and their families.

  • sayanything-2804

    Hey Skippy, I think you missed this;

    On Friday night's "Hairball" with Chris (I felt this thrill going up my leg) Matthews, MSNBC host Matthews took a page out of Dick Cheney's book and accused the president of "dithering" over Afghanistan.

    You're barking at the wrong war monger.

  • sayanything-203

    If the massacre at Ft Hood didn't show how much these long and repeated deployments are affecting our troops, I guess nothing will.

    ollie-b,

    This may be the most astonishingly stupid thing written here all year. You have the cognitive skills of a fence post.

    The massacre at Ft. Hood had nothing whatsoever to do with overseas deployments. The shooter was a devout Muslim, an Army shrink who had never been deployed overseas, and who was apparently in the throes of religious orgasm as he gunned down innocent human beings.

    It was an Islamist terrorist attack. Nothing more, nothing less. Your bizarre take on that tragedy is an obscenity.

  • avs75

    I don't understand how a moderate Democrat Hawaiian born man is a Kenyan Marxist. Get your facts straight before you say insulting, despicable crap like that, idiot.

  • HG

    My concern is the same one expressed by others on this site and that is that our President does not have the stomach, political will, or leadership to win in Afgahnistan. In other words, he is a typical leftist.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Fact: Obama's mother was a Marxist, his father was a Marxist, his grandparents who raised him were Marxists, and his surrogate father was a Marxist organizer in Hawaii.
    A village in Kenya and a Kenyan tribe both claim him as a Kenyan, down to naming his birthplace. In addition, he is covering up his real birth certificate, along with a lot of other information about his life.
    You had better read something other than your Soros talking points, leftie.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    "You people are talking about this war like it's a football game."

    Actually, we're talking about it like it's a war, which it is. In case you don't know, or in case your Soros talking points omitted this fact, the object of war is to win.

    When your terrorist allies say they want to die in jihad, I say we should give them all the help they need.

  • sayanything-51

    Too bad the last president did just the opposite.
    8 years later and we are still nowhere near the finish line.

    bush failed us.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Wrong again, rbb! Before Obama started groveling and weakening our military and dithering, Afghanistan was relatively stable. Since then, Obama's lack of leadership has given us more casualties then the years leading up to his takeover.

    Obama is failing us, while he satisfies his terrorist/commie masters.

  • sayanything-2804

    On Friday night's "Hairball" with Chris (I felt this thrill going up my leg) Matthews, MSNBC host Matthews took a page out of Dick Cheney's book and accused the president of "dithering" over Afghanistan.

  • sayanything-342

    Obama is the great undecider. A real leader would send 60,0000 troops, demand a surge, win , then declare victory and come home. That stimulus is wasted on liberal entittlement programs.

    IMPEACH AND DEPORT

  • http://Array sayanything-51

    GIA, are you saying 4,000 wounded in 8 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan?

  • sayanything-4625

    Are you playing a game? I talking about the Afghan war. You know, the war we are talking about in this thread?

  • sayanything-4625

    They may be wrong, I got them from the Telegraph and the Washington Post.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1557597/Af…

    More than 1,000 American troops have been wounded in battle over the past three months in Afghanistan, accounting for one-fourth of all those injured in combat since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001.

  • avs75

    "Dithering…" George W. Bush dithered over Afghanistan for 8 years while he was making his oil tycoon family and friends happy in Iraq. Just because our current President actually takes the time to make an effective, intelligent decision is nothing to be ashamed of, I'm proud of the fact that he is diplomatic and wants a real solution.

    If only it were easy enough to send 60,000 troops and "win." If that was enough, why haven't we "won" yet? And just because troops are dying in Afghanistan recently, how about the 36,000 dead Americans in Iraq alone?

  • sayanything-2483

    I heard earlier today that the 34,000 additional troops will be added over the next 2-2 1/2 years. If it's true, the "plan" will fail. That's not a surge, it's a trickle.

  • sayanything-9974

    Bush didn't dither on anything about war – It appears he was successful by allowing the generals to pick the battlefield and gave them what they needed to win. After 7 years of glorious and prolific martyrdon in Iraq, the jihadis figured out THEY couldn't win there. They moved the fight to Afghanistan and will have their a$$es handed to them there if the Ditherer in Chief gives McCrystal what he asked for months ago. Yes the fighting has increased – Thats where the bad guys are now. Hello Captain Obvious. Our military won't lose this war but a dithering president and Democrap Congress could.

    Don't have a clue where you got the 36,000 Americans dead in Iraq – You must be using the same math that the Dithering Obamunist use to calculate job creation and saved stats. It is pretty typical of your side to lie and distort for dramatic effect- Just like the recent public pronouncements about the global warming hoax.

    You sound like a real Koolaid drinker, comrade.

    Obama = Ditherer

  • j.l.

    Ah, poor BasedBob (no reality). "Invaded a country that didn`t attack us". That`s wrong, you say? Ok, what about Belgium, Poland, Italy, France, ect., in WW2? None of them "attacked" us, but yet we sent thousands of troops to those countries to fight the enemy. They were "invaded" by U.S. troops. And second, even if you were right, and you`re not, remember Iraq violated the no-fly zone hundreds of times, and tried to assassinate Bush senior. Either one of those alone were justification for going into Iraq.

  • sayanything-4272

    That is just a plain stupid post. No where in Cheney's and Bush's lies before embarking upon their illegal invasion of Iraq did they suggest that we were chasing the Al Queda into Iraq as a premise for such action.

  • Hanni

    I'm glad that we can at least find some common ground. If we're going to commit to war we should commit fully and win the war. If we aren't willing to do that we shouldn't even bother.

    So McCrystal offered Obama a plan to win, lose or win a little? Is that what you are saying, you idiot?

    In your effort to be a partisan kook, you have unwittingly insulted the General. Good job, chump.

  • http://twitter.com/evanblogs twitter-84650768

    The only decision I would support is to withdraw from Afghanistan immediately. This country is broke and prolonged wars fought to prop up a fake democracy is moronic. http://bit.ly/2Lsw39

  • avs75

    Wow, I've never heard a member of the KKK actually try to pretend like they're smart until you. I got the 36,000 troops dead in Iraq because I know how to read the news, and we didn't kick anyones ass in Iraq. That's probably why were giving up on it, why it is still extremely corrupt and why we haven't accomplished basically anything there. Nothing was there to accomplish in the first place. The people who attacked us on 9/11 were from Afghanistan/Pakistan to begin with. Learn how to read/write and then take a big step and read some factual news. It'll do you some good. It's fun too!

  • sayanything-2

    So you admit you are a member of the KKK who is pretending to be smart. OK, cupcake, whatever.

  • sayanything-4625

    how about the 36,000 dead Americans in Iraq alone?

    Why should we listen to someone so clueless about the war? 36,000 dead? Where did you dig up that stat?
    http://icasualties.org/

    4366 KIA in the war. Jesus, and you want us to take you seriously?

    4366

  • sayanything-4625

    Learn how to read/write and then take a big step and read some factual news. It'll do you some good. It's fun too!

    This from the man that said we had 36,000 US KIA. HA HAH AHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHHHAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHHA!

    You're a joke. Go bother someone else with your rantings.

  • sayanything-2

    Perhaps it is time I posted a news source list again. Give some of these leftarded morons something with actual journalism, facts, unbiased political reporting. I could keep it under 100 this time, so as not to strain the little dears.

  • spartacus

    Democrats didn't have a problem with fighting wars to prop up a fake democracy in Viet Nam, in fact it took a Republican to get us out. What makes you think the current Democrat in Chief is any smarter than his predecessors?

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development