Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 10:47 am

A "soldier" has fallen, the "war" goes on.

Again:  One might gather a sense for the size and mass of a "crime" by the size of an attempt to "cover-up."

RIP Richard Holbrooke. 

A "soldier" has fallen, the "war" goes on.

What has "feminism" got to do with it?  Some?  Much?  A bit?  A bit too much?  A bit way to much?

The man of Steele was right;  Mr. Steele was right in Connecticut during campaign to have declared that Afghanistan "was a war of President Obama’s choosing."   Quite right, let us not miss the import and details needed though to keep "placed" for proper understanding.

What has "feminism" got to do with it?  And, what does the past "avoidance and inaction" by President Clinton have to do with it still?   And, what does the past of FLOTUS "Hillary" and her crusading, at times quite radicalizing and incendiary and in such regions of and around Afghanistan still have to do with it?

A "soldier" has fallen,  an unecessary war continues?

What has "feminism" got to do with it?

I have been a "soldier" in past feminist wars, all the time a citizen, just a concerned citizen, but never a soldier in "Hillary’s wars" abroad to feminism so polarized and flared;  Hillary lost me long ago on her special approaches to otherwise "good" concerns.

RIP  Richard Holbrooke.   Hillary, you should still resign;  more wrongs don’t make you more right.

Vietnam wasn’t a "war" was it?   Can Afghanistan be a "necessary WAR"?

To cover aspects of Nobel Peace:  President Obama in his own "acceptance" remarks was of a warning to "dangers" from "inaction" and "avoidance."   President Obama seemed erudite and lucid on "negligence" of the Clintons’ eight years of "inaction and avoidance" that has us now necessarily "in Afghanistan" but not as otherwise orated to "Afghanistan as a necessary WAR."


The Hawk, and, The Dove – The "Hillary", and, The "Bill" - The dangers too of spouses of attempting to create a reality as a movie for each of them and their different characteristics/politics and with a scheduled separation with PEACE DIVIDENDS and avoidance and inaction appropriate to "The Bill" as "The Dove" for "Hillary’s" "Bubba" and "Afghanistan a necessary WAR" for radical activist feminist "The Hawk" as The "Hillary"?

Ok, I should/we should consider that may be going "too far."

RIP Richard Holbrooke.  We should get back to Afghanistan as a necessary "operation" of "conflict" best to an active ‘re-entry’ during Clintons’ eight years and away from President Obama’s "Afghanistan is a necessary war" and like a war "more necessary" than President Bush’s "unnecessary war in Iraq" of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

What has "feminism" got to do with it?  What has "feminism" got to do more with it now than it did during the Clintons’ eight years of justifying PEACE DIVIDENDS as a moral option?

Did the Clintons use the CIA to lie, did the Clintons use the CIA to lie about "peace" as existing around the world in ways it didn’t really and couldn’t really be rationally said to?

Soldiers have fallen;  President Obama’s "war of choice" goes on unnecessarily so, so as a "war" when a "conflict" or "operation" the more appropriate "box"?

President Obama was right.  President Obama was maybe most right then as with any oration yet of his administration, then while speaking in acceptance of a Nobel Peace Prize with his erudite oration warning to "DANGERS" from "INACTION" and "AVOIDANCE."

Looking to 2012 Mr. Steele’s old controversial comments from campaigning in Connecticut of near "Afghanistan is a war of President Obama’s choosing" are now maybe the most important and correct and prescient for our times and times of a calling to restore a sense of sanity and comity anew in common sense and federalism discussing.

I, personally, have been involved enough in "feminism" issues and actively so and less "radical activist" than "Hillary" and so much so that I have to laugh at times I might rather cry, and not for a "soldier" fallen but a "rediculous" rendering again as "feminist" success.   My goals were to help females in their feminist reaching, but my expectations so with my clever "support" wasn’t that such would then get back to me as an "all femine" success with tellings of another women as a role model for such as I was helping without such realizing I had helped that other female so such that such would be there as a "help" for the other.  It never gets so silly as when even my sister and her friends are of such "pride" in "femine" yet with a pride of pack so of from my rendering of creative support as a "male" for such specific ends.  I have to laugh at "success" though with a desire to "cry" for "anonymity" designed by myself into my assistance in more "dovish" wildcatting.   I had loops of support looping around other loops of support and still some, and more of not making others success but helping level the playing field as fast as I could around people I thought shared my ambitions more thoroughly. 

Hillary too "HAWKISH"?   Bill, a "necessary Dove" or a portioned "Dove" by Dem deciding?

Mr. Steele wasn’t saying that President Obama "chose" to "a necessity" for American troops in Afghanistan.

Mr. Steele was though of remembering and refreshing and maybe a "reseting" of "war talk" to a necessary re-educated parsing between "conflicts" and "operations" and "war" and "necessary wars" and "peace keeping."

What has feminism got to do with it?   What do "Hillary" specific past crusading and polarizing professing quite radicalizing and incendiary have still to do with it?

Soldiers have fallen.

Was Vietnam a "war"?

How right was Mr. Steele, when from Connecticut so of a reminding of President Obama having been of a declaring that Afghanistan was a "necessary war" and a war more "necessary" than President Bush’s "unnecessary" "WAR" of Operation Iraqi Freedom?

Mr. Steele didn’t say President Obama "chose" that we needed to be "in" Afghanistan;  He was of reminding that President Obama was of changing an "emphasis" from our having been in the theater of Afghanistan at war against Al Qaeda in a "War on Terror" to a declaration that we were better to be "AT WAR" with Afghanistan, with Taliban.

Soldiers have fallen.

President Bush was right to have stopped "avoidance" and "inaction" of Clintons’ eight years and for a prioritizing to more necessary to effect in Operation Iraqi Freedom than such of President Obama to an otherwise counter declaring to Afghanistan his own choice as more necessary and as to a "war against" not just warring "within." 

What has "feminism" got to do with it;  how did Clintons manage so much "inaction and avoidance" those years we had sufficient justification to return to both Afghanistan and Iraq and while our absense then seeming to make matters worse than our staying likely would have?   Did the Clintons use the CIA to lie about "peace" to justify and irrational "PEACE DIVIDENDS" in their time? 

Could they have sold us on their gross underfunding without such being so?  Were/are they "popular" for a style, and style of governance but one that was inappropriate for such a time as theirs?

We needed to be back in both Iraq and Afghanistan within the Clintons first term for a "better solution" to have been possible! 

Mr. Steele was more right than most people realize, we/you should ask him more about it.


Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

Publication may require admin approval; please come back later to view your comment.