Before Obama Egypt was an Ally. Now... not so much.

Well, we supported Egypt's revolution instead of supporting our ally who was killing people.

The end result is the muslim brotherhood being in control and making religiously biased decisions in accordance with islam.

Barack Obama's JOB is to attend to OUR interests, not the random interests of other nations. What did he achieve FOR America while he was out supporting the Muslim Brotherhood?

Bupkis, that's what.

What interest do we have in maintaining alliances with Egypt?

I have no interest in it, I couldn't care less.

Are you suggesting isolationism? :eusa_eh:
 
Barack Obama's JOB is to attend to OUR interests, not the random interests of other nations. What did he achieve FOR America while he was out supporting the Muslim Brotherhood?

Bupkis, that's what.

What interest do we have in maintaining alliances with Egypt?

I have no interest in it, I couldn't care less.

Are you suggesting isolationism? :eusa_eh:

Are you suggesting the traditional foreign policy as it's been for decades is effective and worth the trouble it causes?
 
When Barack Obama was sworn in, Egypt was our ally in the Middle East. Now, even from his own mouth, it can no longer be considered to be so. Video: Obama On Egypt: We Don't "Consider Them An Ally, But We Don't Consider Them An Enemy" | RealClearPolitics

Even MSNBC can't cover for Barack Obama's LOSS of Egypt, as we see in this reporter's reaction to Obama's statement that Egypt can't be considered an ally:

[youtube]vXXToNNNoZc[/youtube]

The bottom line is the bottom line. That's why we call it that. In 2008, we had a reliable relationship with Egypt, today, they're throwing rocks at our embassy and pulling down our flag. And IF the mob could get into the building, I have no doubt in my mind that our State Dept. staff there would meet the same fate as their counterparts in Libya.

Barack Obama is a foreign policy disaster, who has presided over the religious radicalization of Middle East, lost our relationships there, and is off campaigning today.

Lets see, our Embassador to Lybia was killed in a terrorist attack on the aniversary of 9-11 and instead of standing up for America, all you can do is play politics.

You pulled a Romney. You must be so proud!

Will there be a second strongly worded letter, or does killing Americans not rise that high on the level of outrage?

What do you bet that if President Obama recieves intel on the whereabouts of the guys that killed our embassador, that they will be blown away?
 
Lets see, our Embassador to Lybia was killed in a terrorist attack on the aniversary of 9-11 and instead of standing up for America, all you can do is play politics.

You pulled a Romney. You must be so proud!

Your Prom Queen boarded Air Force One and went to Vegas for a STUMP SPEECH. So forgive us if we're not terribly impressed by your phony outrage.

I stood behind President Bush on 9-12-2001 in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for the terrorist attacks that day. I stand behind President Obama today in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for killing our embassador and his gaurds.

You're just being a dick.

He didn't seem too busy getting that done yesterday while he was stumping in Vegas. The guy meets LESS THAN HALF of his daily security briefings, neither he nor his Secretary of State bothered to beef up security for our embassies on the anniversary of 9/11, and he's not even bothered enough about it to miss any sleep, let alone a campaign event. And I'm the "dick"??? :eusa_whistle:
 
Last edited:
Lets see, our Embassador to Lybia was killed in a terrorist attack on the aniversary of 9-11 and instead of standing up for America, all you can do is play politics.

You pulled a Romney. You must be so proud!

Will there be a second strongly worded letter, or does killing Americans not rise that high on the level of outrage?

What do you bet that if President Obama recieves intel on the whereabouts of the guys that killed our embassador, that they will be blown away?

Well, drones are easier than good foreign policy, aren't they?
 
Will there be a second strongly worded letter, or does killing Americans not rise that high on the level of outrage?

What do you bet that if President Obama recieves intel on the whereabouts of the guys that killed our embassador, that they will be blown away?

Well, drones are easier than good foreign policy, aren't they?

Oh yea, much better. Who needs all that intel some of those terrorists have. Drones allow Obama and his regime not be be inhumane by interrogating them. Just blow them up along with 3 or 4 dozen civilians, we don't need that info anyway and those stupid people shouldn't have been there to begin with. That's much better.
 
What do you bet that if President Obama recieves intel on the whereabouts of the guys that killed our embassador, that they will be blown away?

Well, drones are easier than good foreign policy, aren't they?

Oh yea, much better. Who needs all that intel some of those terrorists have. Drones allow Obama and his regime not be be inhumane by interrogating them. Just blow them up along with 3 or 4 dozen civilians, we don't need that info anyway and those stupid people shouldn't have been there to begin with. That's much better.

Well, you know it's because Barack is “among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet” , so he "does not need" briefings. Just drones and a map, I guess. :rolleyes:

Even after what happened yesterday, when Americans DIED in his service, his own ambassador that HE sent to Libya... Barack Obama did not attend the briefing:
Marc Thiessen: Obama alone: This president does not need intel briefers - The Washington Post
 
WH now backtracking Obama's "ally" comment

"I think folks are reading way too much into this," Vietor said. "‘Ally' is a legal term of art. We don't have a mutual defense treaty with Egypt like we do with our NATO allies. But as the president has said, Egypt is longstanding and close partner of the United States, and we have built on that foundation by supporting Egypt's transition to democracy and working with the new government."

White House clarifies Obama

I'll bet Romney is in full smirk over this!
 
Are you suggesting isolationism? :eusa_eh:

Are you suggesting the traditional foreign policy as it's been for decades is effective and worth the trouble it causes?

bump

Sorry. I missed your post. Internet connection going in and out today.

What I'm saying is that it's a small world. Isolationist policy will not work. We want trade. We want peace.

Now, it's true that time sometimes proves our decisions unwise, so I can't fault you there. But at its core, our foreign policy needs to achieve OUR goals. We are a good and decent people. And while we have a few bad apples as we see on the 11 o'clock news, our goals usually reflect our decency.
 
We are the laughing stock of the world now. Obama wants this. THis is his plan all along. He has kept his hand close but LOOK out if he wins this next election!!!
 
Your Prom Queen boarded Air Force One and went to Vegas for a STUMP SPEECH. So forgive us if we're not terribly impressed by your phony outrage.

I stood behind President Bush on 9-12-2001 in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for the terrorist attacks that day. I stand behind President Obama today in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for killing our embassador and his gaurds.

You're just being a dick.

He didn't seem too busy getting that done yesterday while he was stumping in Vegas. The guy meets LESS THAN HALF of his daily security briefings, neither he nor his Secretary of State bothered to beef up security for our embassies on the anniversary of 9/11, and he's not even bothered enough about it to miss any sleep, let alone a campaign event. And I'm the "dick"??? :eusa_whistle:

Yes you are being a "Dick"
 
Are you suggesting the traditional foreign policy as it's been for decades is effective and worth the trouble it causes?

bump

Sorry. I missed your post. Internet connection going in and out today.

What I'm saying is that it's a small world. Isolationist policy will not work. We want trade. We want peace.

Now, it's true that time sometimes proves our decisions unwise, so I can't fault you there. But at its core, our foreign policy needs to achieve OUR goals. We are a good and decent people. And while we have a few bad apples as we see on the 11 o'clock news, our goals usually reflect our decency.

Our goals represent and reflect our interests, and nothing more. Saying that we're good and decent people means jack shit to those that see our actions reflect a different perspective than that.

Trade and peace are worthwhile goals, but our presence all over the middle east isn't doing anything to send a message that this is all we seek.

I just can't imagine another country acting like that on US soil, then after claiming they only want peace and trade, Americans would say, 'oh okay, now problem, do whatever you feel is best to attain your own interests, it doesn't matter if your actions don't fit the claim.'
 
This was a major misstatement by obama. If obama thinks that Romney's true statement was bad, this one is 20 times worse.
 
I stood behind President Bush on 9-12-2001 in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for the terrorist attacks that day. I stand behind President Obama today in his effort to capture or kill those responsible for killing our embassador and his gaurds.

You're just being a dick.

He didn't seem too busy getting that done yesterday while he was stumping in Vegas. The guy meets LESS THAN HALF of his daily security briefings, neither he nor his Secretary of State bothered to beef up security for our embassies on the anniversary of 9/11, and he's not even bothered enough about it to miss any sleep, let alone a campaign event. And I'm the "dick"??? :eusa_whistle:

Yes you are being a "Dick"

You're just mad because it's hard to make a case that Romney is behaving politically while your prom queen is out on the stump. :lol:
 

Sorry. I missed your post. Internet connection going in and out today.

What I'm saying is that it's a small world. Isolationist policy will not work. We want trade. We want peace.

Now, it's true that time sometimes proves our decisions unwise, so I can't fault you there. But at its core, our foreign policy needs to achieve OUR goals. We are a good and decent people. And while we have a few bad apples as we see on the 11 o'clock news, our goals usually reflect our decency.

Our goals represent and reflect our interests, and nothing more. Saying that we're good and decent people means jack shit to those that see our actions reflect a different perspective than that.

Trade and peace are worthwhile goals, but our presence all over the middle east isn't doing anything to send a message that this is all we seek.

I just can't imagine another country acting like that on US soil, then after claiming they only want peace and trade, Americans would say, 'oh okay, now problem, do whatever you feel is best to attain your own interests, it doesn't matter if your actions don't fit the claim.'

Acting like what? :eusa_eh:
 
Well, we supported Egypt's revolution instead of supporting our ally who was killing people.

The end result is the muslim brotherhood being in control and making religiously biased decisions in accordance with islam.

Barack Obama's JOB is to attend to OUR interests, not the random interests of other nations. What did he achieve FOR America while he was out supporting the Muslim Brotherhood?

Bupkis, that's what.

What interest do we have in maintaining alliances with Egypt?

I have no interest in it, I couldn't care less.


Ok so when liberals like you were bashing Bush for losing "Allies" in the world, when we didnt lose any, yet Obama actually does and oh it doesnt matter now.......do liberals every practice consistancy? or is hypocrisy par for the course?
 

Forum List

Back
Top