That 3am Call Is Closer Then You Think

Loading

It’s 3am and the phone is ringing…but no answer. From Don Surber:

And we have this report from RIA, the Russian news service: “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has proposed to Russia using a Venezuelan island for temporary hosting of Russian long-range aviation, a top-ranking Russian Air Force official said Saturday.”

And from CNN: “Russia expressed interest in using Cuban airfields during patrol missions of its strategic bombers, Russia’s Interfax news agency reported.”

And from Bloomberg: “Russia could land strategic bombers at Cuban and Venezuelan airfields while conducting patrols, the head of the Russian strategic air force was quoted as saying by the Interfax news service.”

Russia can see they have a amateur in the White House, a man who will let them get away with anything and the only consequence from an Obama administration is a stern lecture. They can’t let this opportunity slip by…..

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
21 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Maybe they are the new generation of “friendly combatants”!

Can we just surrender NOW!!!!!

That’s right…can’t waste a good crisis.

Why is it all I can picture is “Red Dawn” and “V for Vendetta”?

Sarge

And that phone will just keep ringing and ringing and ringing as it’s clear Obama is too buys attacking Rush Limbaugh or any American who dares to disagree with him to lead on national security issues.

P.S. 3 AM phone call reminds me of this classic ad remake:

When all is said and done, Barry will be known as the worst President in modern American History.

thebronze, don’t you mean Ancient American History? After Obama, we all will just be a distant memory! ………..Remember… when America was a small Republic? Remember…when America morphed into an Empire?! Remember…how the republic over time became a socialist country wiping out the middle class?!

What a pity. Didn’t those Americans learn anything from history?

Curt

Amateur in the White House?

Was that why AQ hit us less than a year into Bush’s presidency?

BTW, it don’t believe that, but it shows how silly your comment is.

Retired Sarge,

Because you don’t make the effort to separate fact from fantasy.

I’d embed this…but I don’t know how. A link will have to suffice…

http://rightwingvideo.com/?p=932

If you want added facts and proof of potential aggression by the USSR please take a look at my compiled piece from this morning and read through what they have been doing for years!

http://ci-report.blogspot.com/2009/03/i-told-you-so.html

Lefties and America in general have got to start to understand this!!!

But, but, Iran was the only nation threatening the U.S. and they promised to spend their days flying kites and singing in the park, O’Dumbo told us so.

OK. Curt. “Amateur in the White House.” But same military in the field. As if George W Bush had all sorts of professional military experience, after 6 weeks in the White House. So far, Obama has gotten praise from the GOP for his military decisions relating to Iraq.

I’m curious, also. Let’s suppose that Russia decides to land their planes in Cuba and/or Venezuela. What would you advise the Joint Chiefs of Staff and NSA Jim Jones (former Marine Corps Commandant) to advise the President to do about it? Do you have any reason to suppose that they’d advise Obama any differently than they’d have advised Bush?

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

Larry,

Obama has no problem taking money for the military and giving it to ACORN and LaRaza. The military is NOT complimenting him on that…trust me.

So far the libs have slashed the pentagon’s budget by 10 percent. Yet ACORN gets how much? A couple of billion?

The Joint Chiefs wouldn’t be advising Bush on what to do, Bush would all ready give the order to take care of it. Unlike Obama…who never had executive experience, never had to make payroll in a company, never owned a business never-the-less he made it to the white house for being salesman of the year! Way to go.

Wait, B1JetMech, Bush never listened to the Joint Chiefs.

That explains a lot about the conduct of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The only way that 3:00 AM phone call will get answered is if the phone is hooked up to the teleprompter.
.

@philly_nj: That’s a good one!

Is there a 3 AM teleprompter in the White House?

Dave Noble,

In case you wondered, it was Eric Shenseki that the MSM made a “Broo ha ha” over, using against Bush of a supposedly failed strategy. But what did Tommy Franks and David Petraious declare? They never complained of the presidents lack of attention to their advice. Shenseki was the Army Chief of staff not the Joint Chief.

The last I checked , Iraq is a victory despite Harry Reid declaring it a loss before the surge began.

Afghanistan? We’ll see the the “messiah” would do or will he cut n’ run? He’s got a free nation to socialize back here so why would he bother with Afghanistan?

That’s the same Shinseki who doesn’t “_think_” that Obama is going to decide to make the military pay for their own service related medical issues???

_That_ Shinseki???

If:

(LBJ + Democrat ) x Vietnam + Escalation = Failure

(RWR + Republican ) x Russia + Cold War = Success

(GWB + Republican ) x Iraq + Escalation = Success

Solve for:

(BHO + Democrat ) x Afganistan + Escalation = ?

B1JetMech,

You know better than that. There is no such positon as the Joint Chief. The Army Chief of Staff is the Army member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In this case, he was the prime source for advice with respect to the ground assault of Iraq.

Gen. Shinseki, as the Army COS recommended at least twice the troops that were actually sent in. As a result, though we had won the war by Aprl, 2003 with minimal casualties, because we did not go in with enough troops, we were unprepared for the occupation. That is why nearly 4000 troops have died since we won the war and why we are still there.

Donald Rumsfeld replaced Gen. Shinseki with Gen Franks because Gen. Shinseki’s recommendation didn’t fit his theories of a streamlined military.

Suek,

Gen.Shinseki’s openness to billing private insurance for veterans is a matter of debate. But two things to remember: 1) It is irrelevant to the fact that he was right about the number of troops we should have sent in and Sec. Rumsfeld was wrong and 2) he was the recipient of numerous medals for valor in Vietnam where he lost part of his foot. I think it’s reasonable to believe he has veterans best interests at heart. Further, you misstated what is being considered. What is being considered is billing the private insurance of those veterans who have private insurance.

Ditto,

You forget or conveniently ignore:

(Roosevelt + Democrat) x WWII = Victory

(Nixon + Republican) x Vietnam + Cambodia = Failure + Genocide

(Clinton + Democrat) x Bosnia = End to Genocide + Minimal US casualties

We should have gone into Rwanda, but these formulas (yours and mine) involve actual engagements of US forces.

Further, as noted above, we needed an escalation in Iraq because we didn’t go in with enough troops in the beginning. The surge was the rectification of an initial planning failure, three years and many US and Iraqi lives later.

I figuire that if Russia lands bombers in Venezuela and Cuba the next thing to worry about is Mexico falling apart and Venezuela and Cuba stepping in to “help out” along with their Russian friends.

Correction:

Vietnam was lost before Nixon was inaugurated. The failure in Vietnam was mostly due to to the limitations that Johnson placed on the military. When Nixon inherited this mess he and Kissinger agreed that the war was not “winnable.” The public was already fed up with the war and were in no mood for further escalation of forces. The only way for America to possibly try to save some face was a gradual withdrawal. His program of “Vietnamization” was planned to pass the defense over to the South Vietnam Army.

Nixon did not commit genocide in Cambodia, that was the Communist leader Pol Pot.

I left out a lot of Presidents and their answers to various conflicts. The question here is not a review of the history of warfare, (which would be side-stepping the issue) but what Obama will do in Afghanistan?

He previously declared his plans to send or forces in Iraq to go hunt down the Taliban in that country, but he failed to discuss this with the Afghan leaders. What should be remembered here is that Obama has no experience or education in military or diplomatic matters, so he will have to rely entirely on the reccomendations of the Pentagon and his diplomatic staff.

I reiterate: What will Obama will do in Afghanistan?