Obama is as 'Dumb' as Dubya

During the Bush years, the left regularly hooted at the ridiculous things he said. The constant refrain from the left was the Bush was an idiot. Nowadays, since I'm more on the 'left' than the 'right', I tend to hear more of the left-wing echo chamber than the right-wing echo chamber. And that of course has gone amazingly silent when it comes to criticizing their great leader in Washington.

Here's an example. Obama said something absolutely stupid and ridiculous in talking about the decade of the Bush/Obama wars. The Herald Sun's coverage of this speech quotes Mr. Obama as saying ...

"A few months ago, our troops achieved our greatest victory yet in the fight against those who attacked us on 9/11, delivering justice to Osama bin Laden in one of the greatest intelligence and military operations in American history."

Now, if Bush had said something like that, the left would be howling in ridicule. They would be laughing at this fool of a president who obviously had slept through his history classes in a drunken stupor.

Lets see, as a possible contender for 'the greatest intelligence and military operation in American history', I've recently been re-reading Stephen Ambrose's book on D-Day. Here's some numbers on D-Day as its report card for its bid of being the 'greatest intelligence and military operation in American history'. From the D-Day museaum in the UK.

On D-Day, the Allies landed around 156,000 troops in Normandy. The American forces landed numbered 73,000: 23,250 on Utah Beach, 34,250 on Omaha Beach, and 15,500 airborne troops. In the British and Canadian sector, 83,115 troops were landed (61,715 of them British): 24,970 on Gold Beach, 21,400 on Juno Beach, 28,845 on Sword Beach, and 7900 airborne troops.

11,590 aircraft were available to support the landings. On D-Day, Allied aircraft flew 14,674 sorties, and 127 were lost.

In the airborne landings on both flanks of the beaches, 2395 aircraft and 867 gliders of the RAF and USAAF were used on D-Day.

Operation Neptune involved huge naval forces, including 6939 vessels: 1213 naval combat ships, 4126 landing ships and landing craft, 736 ancillary craft and 864 merchant vessels. Some 195,700 personnel were assigned to Operation Neptune: 52,889 US, 112,824 British, and 4988 from other Allied countries.

By the end of 11 June (D + 5), 326,547 troops, 54,186 vehicles and 104,428 tons of supplies had been landed on the beaches.

To this, you can add the 'intelligence' side of the operation, which included finding out the numbers and placement of all German troops in France, as well as coordinating operations by the French resistance in support of D-Day, and an elaborate fake of helping the Germans to believe that the Allies were really going to invade at Calais instead of Normandy which included the creation of an entire fake army under the command of General Patton.

And, all of this was done in the age when computers were a rare and expensive new thing. There wasn't a spreadsheet or database in sight as this invasion was planned. All the work was done by hand by another unseen army of planners and clerks.

By comparison, Obama's murder of Osama consisted of an intelligence operation that took four years to find a guy who wasn't trying very hard to hide. After all, Osama hadn't changed his safe house location in years. Not even when messengers and operatives who knew where he was were known to be captured by American intelligence. Heck, he was sitting just across town from the Pakistan version of West Point, probably surprised that it had taken the Americans what probably seemed like forever to find him and give him the martyrdom he so obviously craved.

Then, the military operation consisted of crashing a top-secret high-tech helicopter into the yard, then not being able to overcome an unarmed old man and his wife without being forced to kill them. In geo-political terms, the real lasting outcome of this operation is the damage it did to the US-Pakistan alliance.

Really? That's the 'greatest intelligence and military operation in American history'? As opposed to something like D-Day? If Dubya had said such a thing, the left would be howling in derision. Notice who isn't howling at Obama if you want to judge the credibility of the voices you hear on the left. That tells you who you might just maybe be able to trust as being honest in the future, and who you can not. The ones who ignore this and who still proclaim Obama as the 'peace' candidate are the ones who are lying to your face and who should not be listened to in the future.

Share