I think I just thought of a question that if Obama answered truthfully he would not start this war.

[Maraya1969]

And I really would like others to ask him the same.

The gist of it is this:


"If it were your daughters Sasha and Malia, who would be going into battle in Afghanistan would you still start this war? Is this war so important that you would risk your own daughter's lives to fight it? If not then how can you justify sending other parent's children to war?

And I asked for a response and an answer to my question.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

Comments: 202-456-1111

[NYC_SKP]

1. "Start" this war? This war turns ten years old soon.

And if his daughters were in the service, I doubt it would make a difference in his policy there.

[Maraya1969]

6. Afghanistan is a new war. And I think that there is enough doubt in his mind

about whether or not to send troops there that he would change his mind if he were convinced.

Alan Grayson said it was not too late to try and make him change his mind. And it is not.

[Sinistrous]

28. Your "new war" assertion is almost Republican in its illogic.

Utter fail.

[dionysus]

30. if you think this is a new war, i am sorry but you don't have a shred of credibility...

[Maraya1969]

40. So call it some other fucking thing. You are missing the whole point.

[dionysus]

68. you're missing elementary level comprehension.

:shrug:

[NYC_SKP]

44. Too clever by half: It's gone from 'Becoming Obama's War" to "The War Obama Started"???

WTF?

:wtf:

[dionysus]

69. next it will be obama that brought down the towers with rick warren and pastor wright.

:eyes:

[HamdenRice]

35. It's against DU rules to be insulting and disrespectful but without going there ...

some posts are so -- uh, you know -- that they don't deserve any respect.

[Tippy]

38. Old War started by REPUBLICANS.....They are trying to rewrite history..

To save their own hides and their party...

[midnight]

7. Why?

[NYC_SKP]

26. Why escalate or why send daughters?

The OP question is a bit of a reach.

If they mean "would Obama send his daughters, draft them from civilian jobs to go fight", then I'd reply that it's a nutty proposition.

If, however, they mean "would Obama go to Afghanistan if his daughters were in the service", I'd reply that yes, he would.

As to why we are going to fight harder and fight differently there...

Read up on the war from someone with a deeper understanding of it than you or I, I'm pretty sure:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7113264

:patriot:

[BeFree]

17. hmmm

If it were my children the war would have ended already. Just like that.

I guess I care more for my kids? Really?

[Sebastian Doyle]

63. And if he escalates this shit now, it will still be going on 10 years from now

By which time his daughters WILL be eligible. So then he could really ask himself the question. :evilfrown:

[niyad]

2. what the hell is the matter with the un'rec crew? that is a legitimate question, one that should be

asked of every person voting for war or its funding.

personally, I believe that every signle person who votes for war or its funding should be required, along with every member of the fmaily of age, to be the first ones there.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Maraya1969]

9. People un'reced this? They must be missing a heart.

[sandnsea]

3. And if he said yes?

Then would you support his decision?

[Maraya1969]

11. NO.

[sandnsea]

22. So his belief in his policies aren't really of interest to you

Why do you pretend they are?

[Maraya1969]

46. I don't believe in this policy. And I don't see where I "pretended" to believe in it.

You can believe in some policies and not others.

[sandnsea]

71. You called the man a liar

and said you could prove it with your questions. You clearly don't care what his answer is, so why pretend that it would mean anything to you if he said yes, he believes his Afghanistan policy is important.

[spoony]

66. Then he's insane and Biden should take over his duties. nt

[sandnsea]

70. Biden's son went to Iraq

I don't think Biden would send troops anywhere if he wasn't willing to send his own son.

[spoony]

79. Presumably the son is of age and Biden didn't "send" him anywhere nt

[dem629]

5. People asked that about Bush's daughters. It was a ridiculous question then, and it is now.

It's just like the "chickenhawk" argument. It doesn't work.

It's like asking whether fire and rescue workers should enter a burning building based on whether you would go in or send your kids in.

There are PLENTY of legitimate questions to ask and many angles of attack when it comes to criticizing the Bush/Obama war policy, but this is not a good one.

[Mari333]

8. au contraire, people need to have it brought home to them

thats why I fully support a draft.

people need to be forced to see it and think about it.

and have it hit home.

right now they are in denial.

and yes, they are chickenhawks, the ones who support sending other peoples kids.

[dem629]

10. So you don't expect police/fire/rescue folks to do anything you

wouldn't have your kids (or yourself) doing?

If the logic here is really based on that, let's explore it.

[Maraya1969]

19. The dangers are not even close. Just look at the suicide rates and the PTSD

And the loss of limbs and the blindness and the brain damage and the exposure to toxic chemicals. And the death.

Hardly a comparison. Ask a vet.

[dem629]

23. That happens to police/fire/rescue workers, too.

Ask a first-responder.

Do you have an answer about whether you expect people in that profession to do only those things that you yourself would do or have your kids do?

[Mari333]

21. draft.thats all.draft for everyone.

These occupations are not legitimate emergencies like a fire /rescue scenario.
This is a national concensus, by the people of the United States, to support or not support their elected constituents who make decisions to send people into countries and put themselves in harms way.

Since there are so many of those people out there supporting the elected representative who chooses to wage wars , then they too should be forced to see and feel the effects of what they have chosen.

I fully support a draft.

I also fully support encouraging these people who support wars to enlist or demand their own children enlist.

That, my friend, exposes them for who they really are. Chickenhawks.
exposure is always a good thing. it brings the cockroaches into the light.

here is the def:

[dem629]

27. Really?

After 9/11, no action in Afghanistan was legitimate?

Because if you think it was (to ANY degree) then I'm assuming you went or you had your kids enlist.

And if you don't think it was, well, then we'll just have to disagree on the legitimacy of action there.

Iraq is a different story. You and I most likely agree that no American should have ever been there.

[Mari333]

33. I didnt believe in attacking Afghanistan or Iraq

being that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and gee we kiss their saudi arabian arse dont we.

Afghanistan has never been about anything more than protecting the area for oil pipelines.

and it was a stupid kneejerk response to 9/11.

There has never been any proof Bin Laden even had anything to do with it, prove it. show me the proof .

You wont find it.

Perhaps the good old USA needs to get their proverbial shit together and stop sticking its motherfucking nose into everyones business, which we have done for over a century or so, and stop being a goddamned military empire, and than, maybe, people wont want to attack us.

and I already went thru one son in Iraq.

so dont tell me about that.

[dem629]

39. LOL "There has never been any proof Bin Laden even had anything to do with it, prove it. "

This is the first time I've run into what appears to be a 9/11 Truther. I share Bill Maher's view of that crowd: Wackos.

While I disagree with your view on the legitimacy of the invasion of Afghanistan, the issue remains: Do you oppose any and all actions people in dangerous lines of work do, based solely on the fact that you and/or your kids would not do it?

That's the logic of the OP's question. Everyone is dodging it.

[Mari333]

43. wrong, Im not a 9 11 truther

I am a realist. 15 of the 19 hijackers were from saudi arabia. period. now, prove again that we know Bin Laden was behind it, because so far we have no proof.
Even if he was, we attacked Afghanistan with no papers in hand showing proof. It was adolescent.

In the meantime, Obama obviously has never seen a war, been in one, or watched as his child is brought home in a coffin after having her legs and arms blown off.


THATS WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO ENCOUNTER EVERY DAY

and that is why the OP asked...

because he NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT HIS OWN DAUGHTERS BEING SHOT AT AND BLEED TO DEATH BEFORE HE MAKES DECISIONS ABOUT FORCING OTHER FAMILIES TO GO THRU THAT

Its called EMPATHY


try it sometime.

[dem629]

45. So the 9/11 commission report was wrong? (EDIT)

What do you know that they didn't?

When Bush ignored the PDB titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" you think it didn't matter because the PDB was wrong?

Again, what do you know that the authors of that PDB didn't?

And, of course, there's the big question here: If bin Laden was not responsible, obviously there was a giant conspiracy involving the intel agencies of the US and pretty much every other developed nation in the world, our Defense Dept. and similar agencies of our allies, and nearly every member of both major political parties to go into Afghanistan based on...nothing? Enlighten me here. I'm not good at uncovering conspiracy theories.

Edit to add: Why won't you answer the question? If there's an emergency on your street and police/fire/rescue show up, would you oppose their actions based on the fact that you would not go in yourself or send in all the neighborhood children?

[Mari333]

47. and you ignored my post

I dont know who did it, I dont care.It doesnt matter.

right now we are there for nothing more than an oil pipeline. Bin Laden is dead.

right now people are being blown to bits.

right now a fucking president wants to send the children of america to be killed and to kill.

and asking him if hes willing to see his daughters die is a good question..

because any asshole who supports this war should be asked that question.


otherwise, yeah, they are goddamned chickenhawks.

[dem629]

48. Just as you keep ignoring/dodging my question.

So I'll stop asking.

But I am interested in this statement of yours: "Bin Laden is dead."

You demand proof of his involvement in 9/11. You're the type of person who doesn't believe things for which there isn't sufficient evidence, right? I guess this means you have proof that he's dead. Please share.

[Mari333]

50. You need links to many things.

OIL PIPELINES

http://www.alternet.org/world/139983/pipeline-istan:_everything_you_need_to_know_about_oil,_gas,_russia,_china,_iran,_afghanistan_and_obama/?page=entire

BIN LADEN IS DEAD (which is why she was assasinated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg

WOMEN IN AFGHANISTAN WANT US OUT OF THERE
http://www.rawa.org/index.php



Empathy, which literally translates as 'in feeling', is the capability to share another being's emotions and feelings.

try empathy, the OP is attempting to ask Obama to try it. He isnt.

AND

spend the rest of the day contemplating the dead in afghanistan

[dem629]

54. Wait. Your "proof" that bin Laden is dead is that...

Benazir Bhutto was assassinated?

All you've done now is create another question: What's your proof that Benazir Bhutto was assassinated for that reason?

Oh, here's another one: Who did the actual killing?

Got proof of that?

And you deny being a conspiracy theorist? Really?

I will be more than happy to have a substantive conversation with you about all of these issues...when you produce the first ounce of evidence for any of these theories.

[Mari333]

56. You need to enlist

seriously.

You didnt even watch the tape.

You are so hell bent on starry eyed Obama you didnt even read the links.

You do, you need to enlist.

I dare you. You want to support the motherfucking occupation?

get over there right now,. get on the front lines.


put that pizza down and go.

Its easy as hell.

Go on, do it. I already watched my sons go.

Its your turn, baby.

and now, as I do with republicans I used to meet, I put you on ignore.

[dem629]

60. You have nothing.

That's why you're getting so angry.

I did watch the Youtube video, and saw nothing that supports your claim. In fact, if I were to ask you to tell me what, exactly, in that video proves your assertion, I know you couldn't tell me. It's amazing, isn't it? I mean, to think that the proof of bin Laden's death is contained in a three-minute video. WOW!

Wait, let me guess. The media is covering it up. Well, there's a Pulitzer waiting for someone. Isn't it a shame they're missing it?

:eyes:

As for being "starry-eyed" for Obama, I've criticized him many times here. In fact, I've been accused of being a "freeper" for it. I posted publicly that I wish I hadn't gotten swept up in the "hope and change" message. All politicians are suspect. Every last one of them. To me, they're pretty much all the same.

Further, I have posted NOTHING in support of escalation of the war. Actually, I am undecided on the matter because no one can tell me why we should stay there, yet I also recognize the potential for disaster if we leave. So I'm not on board with Obama. I'm also not on board with those who oppose it outright.

And I'm certainly not on board with those who believe in wild conspiracy theories for which there is no proof.

What I've done in this thread is post why the OP's question is illogical. Your responses have actually backed me up.

[Maraya1969]

59. OMG I am so sorry about your son.

No words.

[closeupready]

65. +1000.

n/t

[Maraya1969]

36. I think the perpetrators should have been caught and brought to justice just like they did

after the first world trade center bombing and the Oklahoma city bombing. I don't believe you attack an entire country because a certain group may take up residence there.

15 of the suicide bombers were from Saudi Arabia. Why didn't we start a war with Saudi Arabia?

Good intelligence work could have found these people.

[dem629]

41. I believe that may have been a legitimate option, as it was after the '93 bombing of the WTC.

But I also believe that it was necessary to take down the al Qaeda network (personnel and camps) that was based on Afghanistan.

Whether we did that (or whether we even could) is still a question, I think.

[avalonofmists]

58. I recall the blood of the Veitman war being on the screens of the evening

news year after year. it took time but I am convinced it woke up people.

[Maraya1969]

13. Are you the question Guru?

[dem629]

18. Let me get this straight.

You freely post (ostensibly for purpose of discussion) what you believe to be a good question to ask of the President.

Someone disagrees.

You take issue not with their reason for disagreeing, but with the fact that they disagree.

Got it.

[Maraya1969]

29. You talk as if you have proven a scientific theory. I said I "think" it would

be a good idea. You said adamantly that it was "ridiculous" and "not the right question" as if you had proven a scientific theory.

How are you so certain about what you say? How do you know it is the wrong question?

This is what I mean by;

Are you the question guru?

[dem629]

31. Yes, I am certain that the logic of your question fails.

I've stated the reason about four or five times in this subthread.

[midnight]

15. Really? You think that only some questions are legitimate?

Can we ask the question about why they,Bush and Blair, lied us into this war, and will not send their own children, but the children of the poor/working class?

[dem629]

20. Correct. I do not believe that all questions are legitimate and logical.

The first part (about the lies) is legitimate. The second part (about why they won't send their own kids) is not.

I'll ask you, since no one else seems to want to answer: If there's an emergency on your street and police/fire/rescue show up, would you oppose their actions based on the fact that you would not go in yourself or send in all the neighborhood children?

[Sebastian Doyle]

67. Ridiculous analogy

It's like asking whether fire and rescue workers should enter a burning building based on whether you would go in or send your kids in.

No, because a burning building represents an actual threat to those who live in the general vicinity. The lack of a pipeline that Hamid Karzai's previous employer really wants to build does NOT.

And spare me the crap about The Easter Bunny's terraist wabbit militia threatening the entire fucking planet !!11!! because that was bullshit when Chimpy said it, and even more so now.

[HamdenRice]

12. "still start this war?" -- Isn't it a little early in the morning to start smoking?

Iirc, the war started in the wake of the 9/11/01 attacks. Did I miss something?

[JNelson6563]

16. Same wavelength!

I had similar sentiments just below yours, hadn't seen yours. Funny.

[JNelson6563]

14. Obama's starting a war????

Little heavy on the spin for this time of day, isn't it?

Maybe it's just me but if one expects an honest answer, shouldn't one pose an honest question?

[HamdenRice]

34. So much fail, so much "teh stupid" so early in the day-- I agree.

[AngryOldDem]

24. It's cliche, and you'll not get a straight answer.

People have been asking that of their leaders since time immemorial. And the same bullshit of "of course, I never want to send other people's children into harm's way...blah blah blah" has always ensued since time immemorial.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Obama didn't vote to start any wars

He was in the Illinois State Senate when both the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq were authorized by Congress. He is trying to end both wars in a responsible manner.

[mopinko]

32. ah, ignore.

one more for the list. this is one of the dumbest posts i have seen since i have been here. that covers a lot of territory.

[Maraya1969]

51. Well you probably can't see this but I would say you feel very threatened

by what I said.

[JNelson6563]

52. I am sure they are terrified of your rapier wit

not to mention your cunning and clever turn of phrase.

From dishonest questions to self-flattery, your entertainment value is increasing. Sadly your credibilty is flatlining.

Julie

[Maraya1969]

62. No they are afraid of the question. And the insulting words in the rest of your

of your post makes no sense and is entirely unnecessary.

I can't believe the lack of common courtesy on this board lately.

[JNelson6563]

72. I don't bother with courtesy when dealing with the dishonest

among us. The more trouble one goes to to be deceptive, the less I bother with courtesy. Respond all you want, this is the last kick your thread will get from me.

Julie

[Maraya1969]

76. You can't point to one thing I said that was dishonest. You are just making

things up because you are just like the others who are soooo upset at the question I asked of the President.

[JNelson6563]

77. Ok, I go back on my word and give this shit another kick

I addressed it with my first post. You are claiming the President is "starting a war". Lie.

Isn't it time for homework now?

Good night little one.

Julie

[Maraya1969]

80. It's sematics for the love of God. In a very real respect I believe he is starting

a "war" (or "escalation") (big fucking deal).

And you use that as an excuse to dump your miserable esteem onto me.

It takes a mature person to make a point without using ad hominem support. And your posts are filled with insults and accusations that have no bearing and no need in this conversation.

It doesn't take nasty decorations to make a point.

[Maraya1969]

82. BTW it is a rule of this board that you respond respectfully and refrain from

personal insults.

Just some information for you to use in the future.

[peacetalksforall]

37. Why isn't this op as legitimate as the posts seven years ago when DUers

made the same connection to Bush's daughters?

The poster might have written renew insteand of new, but that is not a severe enough flaw for ridicule.

[Echo In Light]

42. Agreed

[Mari333]

49. a lot of the warmongers on here dont like the truth

they cannot imagine THEIR little darlings actually going off to war, they prefer OTHER peoples kids doing it.
God forbid THEIR little Johnny and Susie have their guts blown out.

so the OP brought something up they themselves dont like thinking about.

I think I detest Dem warmongers even more then the Repuke ones.

[SammyWinstonJack]

81. +1

I think I detest DEM warmongers even more then the Repuke ones. :thumbsup: x3

[Maraya1969]

53. Some of the responses here make me feel like I am on Fox news.

Bringing up trivial stuff and ignoring the basic question.

And the un-rec's remind me of Bill O'Reilly saying "Cut his mike"

[dem629]

57. Oh, the irony. Your entire premise reads like something Hannity would demand of Obama.

I guess some of us should apologize for having the nerve to disagree with you.

[Romulox]

55. No surprise to see the "usual suspects" defend war, rich people's right for waiver

in participation in same.

What, rich people should share in America's sacrifice? What are you smoking? :eyes:

[FarLeftFist]

61. Because you volunteer for the military.

[Maraya1969]

74. They didn't in VietNam and they won't in these quagmires if it doesn't end soon enough.

There are only so many people who volunteered.

[peacetalksforall]

64. Wow, I think Bill Kristol himself or perhaps Paul Wolfowitz is participating in this

thread.

We only need to know a little bit of math, we only need to have a good ear to listen to the scientists, we only need some inbred logistical thinking to list the open ended puzzles about why so many things worked in favor of so-called box cutter hijackers to know something is really wrong.

We don't need to be lawyers to know that it was a criminal act that should have been carried out in the court room as the first attack was.

Every one who wants to use their brain can figure out that the barons got their opening to the oil.

So Bill Kristol or whoever you are, don't demean the statements of well intentioned and reasoning members.

[grahamhgreen]

73. Why the unrec's you chickenhawk, yellow-bellied losers!

[branders seine]

75. His little brats will never be in the military

He'll never stand on an unemployment line.


Why should he care? He got his.

Change? That's our lookout.

[JI7]

78. Biden's isn't demanding troops come back and his son went to Iraq

and if you really care about this issue why be dishonest about it