world

Obama to Naval graduates: I won't send you to war without cause

21 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

21 Comments
Login to comment

Then don't send them to war at all; nothing justifies it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

...while he is sending ever more of them to the mountains of Afghanistan, to protect one islamist regime from another.

Reality beats fiction again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Translation: expect to be in the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea soon. Pakistan or Iran.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Then don't send them to war at all; nothing justifies it."

Right! Genocide, fascism, totalitarism, pyschotic regimes bent on destruction are absolutely NO reason to defend ourselves. PEACE-WANKER!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He promised higher pay enhanced child care and improved support and other benefits"

Where's he gonna get the money for all this?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge:

" Where's he gonna get the money for all this? "

Why, he´ll print it. Next question.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where's he gonna get the money for all this?

Same place Bush got money for two wars.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama to Naval graduates: I won't send you to war without cause

One of the possible cause:rising gas price; Good enough isn't it? Ok let's go to war!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sakurasuki: One of the possible cause:rising gas price; Good enough isn't it? Ok let's go to war!"

You should change your handle to "sensosuki."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He promised higher pay enhanced child care and improved support and other benefits"

Other than the pay, I am against that child care and dependence stuff. There is far too much of it in the military.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Graduates - don't worry - he'll send you to the war WITH a cause, but that wouldn't matter for those who die there, anyway. It doesn't have to be a good cause anyway.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bs4brains; Two wars over 8 years, Obama daddy been in office how long now and tripled the debt.....socialism has arrived.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dubya: "Right! Genocide, fascism, totalitarism, pyschotic regimes bent on destruction are absolutely NO reason to defend ourselves. PEACE-WANKER!"

In other words, you're saying you're not better than them, since I'm saying warring on others in any form is bad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"In other words, you're saying you're not better than them, since I'm saying warring on others in any form is bad."

No, actually, all you are saying with your naive and hopelessly idealistic world view is that you think you are holier than everyone else.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Without me causing it." Pakistan, Iran, Somalia, Algeria and now Russia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama did not recognize Sen. McCain in his speech; the White House says it was out of respect for the family’s wishes. But the president did say a few words about his rival for the presidency before he left the White House. He praised the senator as he signed legislation giving the Pentagon new power to curtail wasteful defense spending. McCain was a sponsor of the bill.

John McCain has always had the best intent for our nation. He and his family has served our nation with distinction. He would have made a very good President if he would have won in 2000.

I just wish that more of these so called patriotic politicians would serve our nation like Senator McCain. Too bad more of these politician's family members will never see action or a uniform. If they would they would not be as fond of war and carnage.

Love chicken hawks who will send other peoples children to war but hide their children behind deferments and boils on their behinds. Real chicken hearts love to talk big but when push comes to shove they run and hide.

I just wish it was mandatory that all politicians had to send one of their kids to the military. Patriots serve cowards make others serve.

I am glad to see that the President and Senator McCain have the same goals in mind when it comes to Washington, Change!

“I will only send you into harm’s way when it is absolutely necessary, and with the strategy, the well-defined goals, the equipment and the support that you need to get the job done,” the president told more than 1,000 graduates during a sun-splashed ceremony at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium.

As a former Submariner, it warms my heart to know that we now have a President that cares about our men and women in uniform.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Regarding where Sarge says: " 'He promised higher pay enhanced child care and improved support and other benefits' -- Where's he gonna get the money for all this?"

If we look at the article, it says the following:

[Obama is]... investing in the hardware — combat ships, submarines and fighter aircraft — they’ll need to do their jobs. He promised higher pay, enhanced child care and improved support and other benefits.

Why is there no concern about the money being used to purchase the hardware? Why is it, only when it comes to taking care of the people, is there such a concern about the money?

Doesn't this clearly show us where the conservatives place their priorities? People, to conservatives, appear to be an expendable resource, to be used and thrown aside after their Republican leaders are through with them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As a former Submariner, it warms my heart to know that we now have a President that cares about our men and women in uniform.

Amen. As a former "skimmer," and the parent of an "airedale" son (who is making the Navy a career), I could not agree with you more!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

JoeBigs writes: "Love chicken hawks who will send other peoples children to war but hide their children behind deferments and boils on their behinds. Real chicken hearts love to talk big but when push comes to shove they run and hide."

I love the way they show no concern for money when it comes to purchasing hardware, and otherwise transfering wealth to those who profit from war. And how they hate the thought of giving one extra dollar to take care of the people who fight it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama won't go to war, period. He's too chicken. Also he is planning to cut back on military spending to make is more vunerable to terrorist attack.

As an independent, i cannot follow the Obama doctrine as it would betray my patriotic ways. Why not carry on from the last administration and carry on the successfull war on terror?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LDickMorris writes: "Why not carry on from the last administration and carry on the successfull war on terror?"

Being that the Bush administration was internally at odds with itself over the war on terror -- to put it simply, it was Cheney against Rice and everyone else in the Bush Cabinet -- it is highly doubtful whether DickMorris or any other so-called "conservative" can delineate the differences between Bush's policies and Obama's.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites