Barack Obama's Iraq Speech

[Avorysuds]

I opposed Iraq from the start and support getting the hell out of Afghanistan

Libya is far from reaching a war status

Yes, you need to kill at least 10,000 people that don't want to die before a liberal can consider Obama's War a "War."

Like I said, you are what you hate, good luck.

Oh and I’m yet to see you start a single thread with bitching about Obama needed to get the fuk out of Iraq or Afghanistan… All I see is support for his third War.

Hey RW, can you define what makes a war a war for all of us? Pretty please?

Sure thing buddy...

To Libya this is a Revolution or Civil War

To the US at this time, it is a military engagement. Firing weapons does not make a war. Until the US puts significant troop strength on the ground and is involved in taking and holding territory it is not a war

Military engagements have been used by President over the last 60 years and have not reached war status

What do you think a war is?

To me a war is our military killing another countries military. Calling it less is political BS as I'm sure you would have agreed to just hours before Obama started this war.

So do you agree that all the “military actions” were just that in the past?

BTW, the definition of needing to achieve a certain level of troops on the ground has to be the most absolutely pathetic attempt I have seen yet to argue this is not a war. So now all the US has to do is bomb the fuk out of a country and it’s not a war… great… fukin moronic.

I see we are back to the quite literally the middle ages when it comes to defining what war is with you.
Are we not having a debate or conversation because it’s through text and over the internet as well RW?

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, you need to kill at least 10,000 people that don't want to die before a liberal can consider Obama's War a "War."

Like I said, you are what you hate, good luck.

Oh and I’m yet to see you start a single thread with bitching about Obama needed to get the fuk out of Iraq or Afghanistan… All I see is support for his third War.

Hey RW, can you define what makes a war a war for all of us? Pretty please?

Sure thing buddy...

To Libya this is a Revolution or Civil War

To the US at this time, it is a military engagement. Firing weapons does not make a war. Until the US puts significant troop strength on the ground and is involved in taking and holding territory it is not a war

Military engagements have been used by President over the last 60 years and have not reached war status

What do you think a war is?

To me a war is our military killing another countries military. Calling it less is political BS as I'm sure you would have agreed to just hours before Obama started this war.

So do you agree that all the “military actions” were just that in the past?

BTW, the definition of needing to achieve a certain level of troops on the ground has to be the most absolutely pathetic attempt I have seen yet to argue this is not a war. So now all the US has to do is bomb the fuk out of a country and it’s not a war… great… fukin moronic.

I see we are back to the quite literally the middle ages when it comes to defining what war is with you.
Are we not having a debate or conversation because it’s through text and over the internet as well RW?

You can't change the rules of the game just because Obama is President (oh...I forgot...you guys do that all the time)

Military actions like Somalia, Kosovo, Grenada, Panama, Reagans attack on Libya are not considered wars.

In this case we are intervening to prevent the rebels being massacred by Government forces. If you want to call it a war...go ahead
But rewrite the history books to include many more "wars"

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea their Civil War was going to "Destabilize" all of Africa and the Middle East. My God,who actually believes such BULLSHIT? What a Nightmare.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Thanks for posting Steph...prophetic wasn't it?

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.



He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.



And you wonder why we voted for the guy?

Nope.... he sounds great... and that is all that matters... to some of us.

 

[kiwiman127]

Gaddafi is a far less threat to the U.S. and Region than Saddam Hussein was. Hussein gassed his people and invaded other Nations. Gaddafi has never been hostile to his neighbors. And there is absolutely no evidence of "Genocide" either. Those claims are just BULLSHIT. This is a Libyan Civil War. Their whole "Gotta save the poor Civilians/Destabilizing the Region" shtick really is a dishonest sham. This War is only about the Oil. And that's the truth. Shame on them.

Ha! Your post reminds me of the far left prior to the invasion of Iraq. How ironic.
Regarding the "genocide". I did a Google search using the words "genocide" "Libya" and "evidence" and did come up with some videos and pictures. However, the number of victims that are connected with this, number anywhere from 250 to 1,000. Not exactly in the same league as Saddam, not even close.
Personally, I was for attacking Afghanistan and to this day felt GWB dropped the ball there big time. If he woulda done what he said he was going to do, we would have been out of Afghanistan along time ago. But "W" didn't, he diverted most of the resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.
I was always against the invasion of Iraq and I don't want the US entrenched in a war in Libya.
However, I have no problem with just a no-fly zone by NATO or the UN, just so it's not squarely on the US's shoulders physically or monetarily.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Gaddafi is a far less threat to the U.S. and Region than Saddam Hussein was. Hussein gassed his people and invaded other Nations. Gaddafi has never been hostile to his neighbors. And there is absolutely no evidence of "Genocide" either. Those claims are just BULLSHIT. This is a Libyan Civil War. Their whole "Gotta save the poor Civilians/Destabilizing the Region" shtick really is a dishonest sham. This War is only about the Oil. And that's the truth. Shame on them.

Ha! Your post reminds me of the far left prior to the invasion of Iraq. How ironic.
Regarding the "genocide". I did a Google search using the words "genocide" "Libya" and "evidence" and did come up with some videos and pictures. However, the number of victims that are connected with this, number anywhere from 250 to 1,000. Not exactly in the same league as Saddam, not even close.
Personally, I was for attacking Afghanistan and to this day felt GWB dropped the ball there big time. If he woulda done what he said he was going to do, we would have been out of Afghanistan along time ago. But "W" didn't, he diverted most of the resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.
I was always against the invasion of Iraq and I don't want the US entrenched in a war in Libya.
However, I have no problem with just a no-fly zone by NATO or the UN, just so it's not squarely on the US's shoulders physically or monetarily.

Hey at least with Iraq and Hussein,you had clear proof of Genocide and he did invade other nations. Supporters of the Iraq Wars had a much stronger argument than the supporters of this Libyan War do. Gaddafi is absolutely no threat to "Destabilize" Africa and the Middle East. Those claims really are just BULLSHIT. It's a Civil War. Nothing more,nothing less. So what are we doing bombing & killing Libyans? The answer is Oil. And that's all this is about in the end. Sad but true.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Gaddafi is a far less threat to the U.S. and Region than Saddam Hussein was. Hussein gassed his people and invaded other Nations. Gaddafi has never been hostile to his neighbors. And there is absolutely no evidence of "Genocide" either. Those claims are just BULLSHIT. This is a Libyan Civil War. Their whole "Gotta save the poor Civilians/Destabilizing the Region" shtick really is a dishonest sham. This War is only about the Oil. And that's the truth. Shame on them.

Ha! Your post reminds me of the far left prior to the invasion of Iraq. How ironic.
Regarding the "genocide". I did a Google search using the words "genocide" "Libya" and "evidence" and did come up with some videos and pictures. However, the number of victims that are connected with this, number anywhere from 250 to 1,000. Not exactly in the same league as Saddam, not even close.
Personally, I was for attacking Afghanistan and to this day felt GWB dropped the ball there big time. If he woulda done what he said he was going to do, we would have been out of Afghanistan along time ago. But "W" didn't, he diverted most of the resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.
I was always against the invasion of Iraq and I don't want the US entrenched in a war in Libya.
However, I have no problem with just a no-fly zone by NATO or the UN, just so it's not squarely on the US's shoulders physically or monetarily.

Why is scale the most important thing and not principle? Why is it ok for the US to be involved at all or one penny of US taxpayer dollars wasted on this?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Gaddafi is a far less threat to the U.S. and Region than Saddam Hussein was. Hussein gassed his people and invaded other Nations. Gaddafi has never been hostile to his neighbors. And there is absolutely no evidence of "Genocide" either. Those claims are just BULLSHIT. This is a Libyan Civil War. Their whole "Gotta save the poor Civilians/Destabilizing the Region" shtick really is a dishonest sham. This War is only about the Oil. And that's the truth. Shame on them.

Ha! Your post reminds me of the far left prior to the invasion of Iraq. How ironic.
Regarding the "genocide". I did a Google search using the words "genocide" "Libya" and "evidence" and did come up with some videos and pictures. However, the number of victims that are connected with this, number anywhere from 250 to 1,000. Not exactly in the same league as Saddam, not even close.
Personally, I was for attacking Afghanistan and to this day felt GWB dropped the ball there big time. If he woulda done what he said he was going to do, we would have been out of Afghanistan along time ago. But "W" didn't, he diverted most of the resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.
I was always against the invasion of Iraq and I don't want the US entrenched in a war in Libya.
However, I have no problem with just a no-fly zone by NATO or the UN, just so it's not squarely on the US's shoulders physically or monetarily.

Why is scale the most important thing and not principle? Why is it ok for the US to be involved at all or one penny of US taxpayer dollars wasted on this?

A voice of reason. Thanks.

 

[Avorysuds]

Sure thing buddy...

To Libya this is a Revolution or Civil War

To the US at this time, it is a military engagement. Firing weapons does not make a war. Until the US puts significant troop strength on the ground and is involved in taking and holding territory it is not a war

Military engagements have been used by President over the last 60 years and have not reached war status

What do you think a war is?

To me a war is our military killing another countries military. Calling it less is political BS as I'm sure you would have agreed to just hours before Obama started this war.

So do you agree that all the “military actions” were just that in the past?

BTW, the definition of needing to achieve a certain level of troops on the ground has to be the most absolutely pathetic attempt I have seen yet to argue this is not a war. So now all the US has to do is bomb the fuk out of a country and it’s not a war… great… fukin moronic.

I see we are back to the quite literally the middle ages when it comes to defining what war is with you.
Are we not having a debate or conversation because it’s through text and over the internet as well RW?

You can't change the rules of the game just because Obama is President (oh...I forgot...you guys do that all the time)

Military actions like Somalia, Kosovo, Grenada, Panama, Reagans attack on Libya are not considered wars.

In this case we are intervening to prevent the rebels being massacred by Government forces. If you want to call it a war...go ahead
But rewrite the history books to include many more "wars"

History is already remembering this as a war you noob, lolz.

The fact that there is a HUGE debate over this being a war or "how is this not a war" while you fools sit around studdering the same line of war loving shit means it will be remembered as one. Obama is at odds with his base and the independents on this war, he is loosing his own support not gaining it.
Don't ever call me "you guys" again plz, that's who *you guys* are and many of the other Neocons are... The fringe war loving fools like yourself get title like "you guys."

It's amazing, it really only took a President with a D next to their name garner your full support for something you moments before would condemn. If Obama is Bush III than funny stuff, that make you a Bush bot colne.