Obama Says US Killing Afghan Civilians, Wants To Do More

By DemocracyRules

On Aug. 13, 2007, Obama said, “We've gotta get the job done there...and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there."

On Oct 4, 2008, Palin said, “Some of his comments that he’s made about the war, that I think, in my world disqualify someone from consideration for the next commander-in-chief...Some of the comments he’s made about Afghanistan, what we are doing there, ‘just air raiding villages and killing civilians.’ That’s reckless.... That's not what we're doing there... we're fighting terrorists, and we're securing democracy, and we're building schools for children there so that there is opportunity in that country."

Today Obama’s campaign stood by his previous remarks, claiming that,  "Western forces have been killing civilians at a faster rate than the insurgents have been killing civilians."

McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb responded, "Americans have at times questioned Senator Obama's support for American troops because of what were believed to be ill-considered remarks. The fact that Barack Obama and his campaign would stand by this statement is a stunning admission to the contrary -- Barack Obama actually believes American troops are engaged in war crimes as a matter of routine."

In recent speeches and debates, Obama has demanded more troops in Afghanistan.  In Thursday’s VP debate, Biden said he and Obama want to extend the existing war strategy.

Thus, Obama thinks Western forces are killing civilians.  However, he wants to increase the forces, and keep the existing strategy.  But by this logic, even more civilians would be killed... hmm...

Can we go back to Palin's point about, "not fit to lead"?

Comments

[Susan]

Similar things over the years have been said by Kerry. However put yourself in the shoes of active servicemen and see how that shoe feels. I have heard soldiers call up on talk radio with great disdain for the remarks of Obama. It is an implied assertion that if the troop level is not adequate enough for the task then the military just goes in and tries to wipe out as many good and bad people with any sort of arsenal that they have. From all I have read choosing the right deadly use of force is a huge consideration depending on the task and taken very seriously by the military and often the task is abandoned because the use of force might prove to be too risky for the population. It has been my belief all along that Obama really dislikes the military. So it may be to him a necessary evil, but he dislikes the reason people choose to sign up and sees little use for the military. When the discussion of service came up, he never once suggested to young people to join the military as a way of serving this country. Some time ago Phil Donahue, that is also a very liberal guy like Obama, said he would only agree to hunting down OBL if a task group could take out ONLY OBL. So if they knew where he was he would support the idea of taking him out if that included civilian casualties. He actually suggested somebody like Rambo take OBL. There are also people within the City of SF that believe we do not need any military. Of course when an earthquake does strike SF they will be the first ones wanting the national guard to come save them.

[yes but truthfully]

you know all my life I have grown up in western society with western morals and beliefs, but the way you people post here really makes me want to side with the Russians and Chinese , any time. Scary thought.

{From DR -- Well, as I've said before, DON'T STAY IN A COUNTRY YOU HATE.}