It seems that Obama may have a different view, along with his wonderful military advisers as to what “on track” means. You do not have to be a passenger on a railway train, all stops, express or super fast to at least have an idea what the term means. This latest report from the Guardian neatly summarises Obama, the warmonger’s point of view. Please remember that it was the so called war or more correctly the invasion of Afghanistan that was singled out by Obama, hence the use of the term Obama’s war.” Barack Obama has described his strategy in Afghanistan as “on track” after the US military acknowledged in a review for the president that while it may not be losing America’s longest war it remains a long way from winning the conflict.” (George Ikners ikners.com Joomla)
Â
Remember these comments and attitudes are coming from a man that is in charge of sending US citizens to their death and actively oversees the death and destruction visited on the local population.
The rest of the article is as follows.
The first full-scale assessment of the president’s troop surge strategy said the deadline to begin withdrawing coalition forces from Afghanistan next year will be met because of successes in reversing some of the gains made by the Taliban and against al-Qaida on the Pakistani border.
But the report acknowledged that progress is limited and fragile, and said that the challenge is to make the gains sustainable. It also recognised the role of Pakistan in sustaining the Taliban and sheltering al-Qaida but refrained from pointed accusations.
“This continues to be a very difficult endeavour but … we are on track to achieve our goals,” said Obama.
The president said that the goal is to destroy al-Qaida not nation build in Afghanistan. “Today, al-Qaida’s senior leadership in the border region is under more pressure than at any point since they fled Afghanistan nine years ago. Senior leaders have been killed. It’s harder for them to recruit … It’s harder for them to plot and launch attacks. In short, al-Qaida is hunkered down,” he said.
However, the review said that in denying a safe haven to al-Qaida it was necessary “to deny the Taliban the ability to overthrow the Afghan government”.
If you think about the Wikileaked information from an Australian analyst all this talk of as-Qa’ida being “hunkered down” is just nonsense. As the US intentions of remaining in the Middle East forever become obvious to even the blindest fool who accepts what these international assassins say, it will be obvious that resistance to their presence and Australia’s presence for that matter will continue as long as they remain there. Rudd and Gillard will never come to terms with this logic as their eyes and ears are filled with all the pro Zionist Israeli claptrap about who the great dangers are in the Middle East.
The last time anyone looked Israel has somewhere between 300 and 400 nuclear weapons that are totally launch and delivery capable. Now where does that leave dangers on a scale of 1 to 10? How can any state regardless of where it is in the world be trusted when it imprisons and devastates such a large portion of the population for purely apartheid based reasons? For that matter why should Australians be believed when they talk of compassion and understanding given the shocking state of racism in this country toward the indigenous population.
You can sugar coat that as much as you like but the sour taste of race hatred still comes through.
Â
George Ikners ikners.com Joomla.