are you watching george?

[Anachronism]

Yeah....everyone's well-aware o'.....

....Teabaggers' black and white principles, and ideals.​

And with that, there's obviously no point in having any more conversation between us. Welcome to the Ignore List.

 

[jodylee]

 

[jodylee]

You lot could turn a post about Medieval Badger poo into a partisan argument

 

[Quantum Windbag]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

If this is what a coalition looks like I have to say that Bush was right to ignore the people who said he needed one. It took about a day for the Arab Legue to go from supporting the NFZ to criticizing us for killing innocent people. Why go to the trouble of getting people behind us if all they are going to do is stab us in the back?

The Associated Press: Arab League criticizes allied airstrikes on Libya

 

[Uncle Kenny]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

Shame they couldn't get this done early enough to take advantage of the rebels holding half the country. Well I guess they wanted to see how many rebels and civilians would die pushing them out of every major city first.

Might work out, but a little slow on the trigger pull, unfortunately.

PS-Do we still have to pay for most of this coallition or will the lead countries be picking up the tab?

 

[Immanuel]

You lot could turn a post about Medieval Badger poo into a partisan argument

It was your OP and you started this thread out that way. What did you expect?

Immie

 

[California Girl]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

Shame they couldn't get this done early enough to take advantage of the rebels holding half the country. Well I guess they wanted to see how many rebels and civilians would die pushing them out of every major city first.

Might work out, but a little slow on the trigger pull, unfortunately.

PS-Do we still have to pay for most of this coallition or will the lead countries be picking up the tab?

Arab League is picking up a substantial chunk of the bill. What does that tell you?

 

[skookerasbil]

Nobody cares about George Bush...........

 

[Uncle Kenny]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

Shame they couldn't get this done early enough to take advantage of the rebels holding half the country. Well I guess they wanted to see how many rebels and civilians would die pushing them out of every major city first.

Might work out, but a little slow on the trigger pull, unfortunately.

PS-Do we still have to pay for most of this coallition or will the lead countries be picking up the tab?

Arab League is picking up a substantial chunk of the bill. What does that tell you?

We will see. Only that we won't be paying for all of it up front. If we get away without paying for most of the rebuild, then I will be better with it. Of course, a little quicker action might have reduced that requirement significantly as well.

 

[The Gadfly]

wow, the PEACEFUL liberals who protested Bush's war are now cheering WARMONGERS.

hypocrites

Well, some of them are just that; then again, some of them are tying themselves in knots, explaining why this isn't as bad as "Bush's war" in Iraq, and still others won't even support "their" president, the one they said could do no wrong! It would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic!

Look at this, as a shining example of how not to behave as Americans. When a president, any president, sends our armed forces into action, we ought to support him...and them. Politics stops where the ocean begins, or at least that's the way it should be. I don't care for Obama's politics, I didn't vote for him, and I don't care for his administration; but right now he is the only Commander-in -Chief we have, he has taken action on behalf of the nation, and we ought to support that action, and hope it succeeds. If we did otherwise, we would be no better than those on the left. We criticized them enough (justifiably) for wanting America to fail, for the sake of their political ends. If it was wrong for them to do that, it would be equally wrong for us to do the same.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

Shame they couldn't get this done early enough to take advantage of the rebels holding half the country. Well I guess they wanted to see how many rebels and civilians would die pushing them out of every major city first.

Might work out, but a little slow on the trigger pull, unfortunately.

PS-Do we still have to pay for most of this coallition or will the lead countries be picking up the tab?

Arab League is picking up a substantial chunk of the bill. What does that tell you?

Are they?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

wow, the PEACEFUL liberals who protested Bush's war are now cheering WARMONGERS.

hypocrites

Well, some of them are just that; then again, some of them are tying themselves in knots, explaining why this isn't as bad as "Bush's war" in Iraq, and still others won't even support "their" president, the one they said could do no wrong! It would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic!

Look at this, as a shining example of how not to behave as Americans. When a president, any president, sends our armed forces into action, we ought to support him...and them. Politics stops where the ocean begins, or at least that's the way it should be. I don't care for Obama's politics, I didn't vote for him, and I don't care for his administration; but right now he is the only Commander-in -Chief we have, he has taken action on behalf of the nation, and we ought to support that action, and hope it succeeds. If we did otherwise, we would be no better than those on the left. We criticized them enough (justifiably) for wanting America to fail, for the sake of their political ends. If it was wrong for them to do that, it would be equally wrong for us to do the same.

We should support the president even if he is wrong? Should we support him if he decides to attack France because he hates escargot?

 

[hortysir]

George this is what a coallition looks like!

No link, no quote.....

Not even a pic.


Just what the fuck are you talking about??

Please be specific on how this coalition was formed in a better and stronger way that Bush's.

otherwise go back to Media Matters for America

 

[Immanuel]

wow, the PEACEFUL liberals who protested Bush's war are now cheering WARMONGERS.

hypocrites

Well, some of them are just that; then again, some of them are tying themselves in knots, explaining why this isn't as bad as "Bush's war" in Iraq, and still others won't even support "their" president, the one they said could do no wrong! It would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic!

Look at this, as a shining example of how not to behave as Americans. When a president, any president, sends our armed forces into action, we ought to support him...and them. Politics stops where the ocean begins, or at least that's the way it should be. I don't care for Obama's politics, I didn't vote for him, and I don't care for his administration; but right now he is the only Commander-in -Chief we have, he has taken action on behalf of the nation, and we ought to support that action, and hope it succeeds. If we did otherwise, we would be no better than those on the left. We criticized them enough (justifiably) for wanting America to fail, for the sake of their political ends. If it was wrong for them to do that, it would be equally wrong for us to do the same.

We should support the president even if he is wrong? Should we support him if he decides to attack France because he hates escargot?

If I remember correctly after 9/11, liberals were told they were un-american for not supporting the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan even if there were no WMD's or even if Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

So, if it was good when it happened under Bush, it ought to be good today, right?

Immie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well, some of them are just that; then again, some of them are tying themselves in knots, explaining why this isn't as bad as "Bush's war" in Iraq, and still others won't even support "their" president, the one they said could do no wrong! It would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic!

Look at this, as a shining example of how not to behave as Americans. When a president, any president, sends our armed forces into action, we ought to support him...and them. Politics stops where the ocean begins, or at least that's the way it should be. I don't care for Obama's politics, I didn't vote for him, and I don't care for his administration; but right now he is the only Commander-in -Chief we have, he has taken action on behalf of the nation, and we ought to support that action, and hope it succeeds. If we did otherwise, we would be no better than those on the left. We criticized them enough (justifiably) for wanting America to fail, for the sake of their political ends. If it was wrong for them to do that, it would be equally wrong for us to do the same.

We should support the president even if he is wrong? Should we support him if he decides to attack France because he hates escargot?

If I remember correctly after 9/11, liberals were told they were un-american for not supporting the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan even if there were no WMD's or even if Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

So, if it was good when it happened under Bush, it ought to be good today, right?

Immie

You would have a point there, if I had said something like that. I didn't, even though I did think he was justified in invading Afghanistan. That does not mean he deserved unconditional support, and I did not give it too him.

 

[Immanuel]

We should support the president even if he is wrong? Should we support him if he decides to attack France because he hates escargot?

If I remember correctly after 9/11, liberals were told they were un-american for not supporting the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan even if there were no WMD's or even if Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

So, if it was good when it happened under Bush, it ought to be good today, right?

Immie

You would have a point there, if I had said something like that. I didn't, even though I did think he was justified in invading Afghanistan. That does not mean he deserved unconditional support, and I did not give it too him.

But, I was not speaking of you having said that. I simply meant that liberals were told by an awful lot of conservatives that they were un-American for not supporting George's wars.

Immie

 

[hjmick]

You lot could turn a post about Medieval Badger poo into a partisan argument

Are you fucking high? Or just a mindless twit? You started this thread with partisan hackery. What the Hell did you expect in response? A whole bunch of "Yeah jodylee! You're right!"

Fuck almighty, crawl back under that rock from whence you came.

 

[Avatar4321]

I dont give a hoot about Obama the guys a Hologram. the world isn't black and white.

hummm? I'm curious. How many countries did Bush have with him to go into IRAQ?

It was somewhere in the 50s.. i think. I could be off, it's been a few years.

But they don't count for some unclear reason.

 

[The Rabbi]

If I remember correctly after 9/11, liberals were told they were un-american for not supporting the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan even if there were no WMD's or even if Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

So, if it was good when it happened under Bush, it ought to be good today, right?

Immie

You would have a point there, if I had said something like that. I didn't, even though I did think he was justified in invading Afghanistan. That does not mean he deserved unconditional support, and I did not give it too him.

But, I was not speaking of you having said that. I simply meant that liberals were told by an awful lot of conservatives that they were un-American for not supporting George's wars.

Immie

Do you have a link?
Did anyone say that Iraq was responsible for 9/11? Or is that just more leftist spin?
Let's see: Iraq invaded a neighboring country and had an active WMD development program. Libya did not invade anyone and turned their nuclear program over to the U.S after Iraq was invaded (thanks, George!).
Our goals here are ousting Ghaddafi and putting in.....well, who? Who are we supporting? Who will be the ruler in Libya if we succeed? How is that going to help US interests?

 

[Avatar4321]

Our goals here are ousting Ghaddafi and putting in.....well, who? Who are we supporting? Who will be the ruler in Libya if we succeed? How is that going to help US interests?

That's what I'd like to know. What exactly are our objectives in this war? I mean from what I can tell, it's not even clear that we want Khadafi out. So what are we doing?