Bush/Republican Doctrine Verses the Obama Doctrine

R

rdean

Guest
Most in the Republican base don't even know they have a Doctrine. To put it simply, the Bush/Republican Doctrine is to attack and level a country you think might one day, in the far future, threaten the US.

An example of the Bush/Republican Doctrine being applied? Iraq.

An example of Republicans wanting to apply the Bush/Republican Doctrine?
Bomb bomb bomb....bomb bomb Iran.

Why this Doctrine didn't work in Iraq?

George Bush tricked the US into invading Iraq. There was no "ownership" by the people. What did they do? They rioted and looted their own country. They attacked the Christians living there since the time of Christ reducing the population by up to a million. They put their women in Burkas. They put up a monument to the man who threw shoes at our president. Maybe it was a thanks, "Here, I love you so much, take my shoes", others think it was a deadly insult. The people simply were not "invested" because this wasn't a "revolution".

Obama in Libya supported those in revolt. They are invested. Very little looting has been reported. The US is not responsible for nation building because we didn't tear down that nation. The people in Libya are invested in their own future.

Overseas, Obama's actions are being described as "thoughtful" and "wise". Right wingers call him "boy" and "manchild". Of course, I'm sure there is nothing "racial" in those comments.

The reason Obama has been much more successful overseas than domestically is because it's much easier for the Republican Party to block his actions domestically. I suspect he would achieve the same level of success if Republicans worked with him instead of demanding he fail, or at least get out of the way. Of course, that won't happen. Because they want him to "fail".
 
LOl, SO, supporting dropping bombs on people is considered, thoughtful and wise..
but bush liberating people is somehow DIFFERENT. Can you believe these people. sheeesh

I'm putting on hip waders.:lol:
 
LOl, SO, supporting dropping bombs on people is considered, thoughtful and wise..
but bush liberating people is somehow DIFFERENT. Can you believe these people. sheeesh

I'm putting on hip waders.:lol:

So you had no problem with Qaddafi slaughtering his own people? Hmmm, interesting.

Bush "liberated" people. Did they ask to be "liberated"? If you were "liberated" and didn't ask to be "liberated", were you really "liberated"? And why do the Iraqi women say they had it better under Saddam? Look how terrible they were treated. That leads you to believe being "liberated" when you didn't ask is "worse". Hmmm. Something to think about? I suspect you don't waste your time "thinking". Am I right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOl, SO, supporting dropping bombs on people is considered, thoughtful and wise..
but bush liberating people is somehow DIFFERENT. Can you believe these people. sheeesh

I'm putting on hip waders.:lol:

So you had no problem with Qaddafi slaughtering his own people? Hmmm, interesting.

Bush "liberated" people. Did they ask to be "liberated"? If you were "liberated" and didn't ask to be "liberated", were you really "liberated"? And why do the Iraqi women say they had it better under Saddam? Look how terrible they were treated. That leads you to believe being "liberated" when you didn't ask is "worse". Hmmm. Something to think about? I suspect you don't waste your time "thinking". Am I right?

lol, please LIBERATE us from you dribble... and I suspect you sit around just thinking up how you can come up with another lame ass excuse for you hero Obama.
Obama is a WARMONGER, no ifs and or butttts.

thoughful and wise. good grief.
 
Last edited:
So killing people Obama's way is better than killing them Bush's way?

Either way, people are still dead. And honestly, I'm not sure we are safer.
 
Most in the Republican base don't even know they have a Doctrine. To put it simply, the Bush/Republican Doctrine is to attack and level a country you think might one day, in the far future, threaten the US.

An example of the Bush/Republican Doctrine being applied? Iraq.

An example of Republicans wanting to apply the Bush/Republican Doctrine?
Bomb bomb bomb....bomb bomb Iran.

Why this Doctrine didn't work in Iraq?

George Bush tricked the US into invading Iraq. There was no "ownership" by the people. What did they do? They rioted and looted their own country. They attacked the Christians living there since the time of Christ reducing the population by up to a million. They put their women in Burkas. They put up a monument to the man who threw shoes at our president. Maybe it was a thanks, "Here, I love you so much, take my shoes", others think it was a deadly insult. The people simply were not "invested" because this wasn't a "revolution".

Obama in Libya supported those in revolt. They are invested. Very little looting has been reported. The US is not responsible for nation building because we didn't tear down that nation. The people in Libya are invested in their own future.

Overseas, Obama's actions are being described as "thoughtful" and "wise". Right wingers call him "boy" and "manchild". Of course, I'm sure there is nothing "racial" in those comments.

The reason Obama has been much more successful overseas than domestically is because it's much easier for the Republican Party to block his actions domestically. I suspect he would achieve the same level of success if Republicans worked with him instead of demanding he fail, or at least get out of the way. Of course, that won't happen. Because they want him to "fail".
You hypo critic ass hole. Saddam Hussein killed up to a million, maybe more, of his own people and you blast Bush. Obamaturd is too spineless to actually go into Libya, so he just bombs them. Typical leftwing bullshit!! IDIOT!!
 
Most in the Republican base don't even know they have a Doctrine. To put it simply, the Bush/Republican Doctrine is to attack and level a country you think might one day, in the far future, threaten the US.

An example of the Bush/Republican Doctrine being applied? Iraq.

An example of Republicans wanting to apply the Bush/Republican Doctrine?
Bomb bomb bomb....bomb bomb Iran.

Why this Doctrine didn't work in Iraq?

George Bush tricked the US into invading Iraq. There was no "ownership" by the people. What did they do? They rioted and looted their own country. They attacked the Christians living there since the time of Christ reducing the population by up to a million. They put their women in Burkas. They put up a monument to the man who threw shoes at our president. Maybe it was a thanks, "Here, I love you so much, take my shoes", others think it was a deadly insult. The people simply were not "invested" because this wasn't a "revolution".

Obama in Libya supported those in revolt. They are invested. Very little looting has been reported. The US is not responsible for nation building because we didn't tear down that nation. The people in Libya are invested in their own future.

Overseas, Obama's actions are being described as "thoughtful" and "wise". Right wingers call him "boy" and "manchild". Of course, I'm sure there is nothing "racial" in those comments.

The reason Obama has been much more successful overseas than domestically is because it's much easier for the Republican Party to block his actions domestically. I suspect he would achieve the same level of success if Republicans worked with him instead of demanding he fail, or at least get out of the way. Of course, that won't happen. Because they want him to "fail".
You hypo critic ass hole. Saddam Hussein killed up to a million, maybe more, of his own people and you blast Bush. Obamaturd is too spineless to actually go into Libya, so he just bombs them. Typical leftwing bullshit!! IDIOT!!

How many did Bush kill?

Did they ask to be "liberated"?
 
So killing people Obama's way is better than killing them Bush's way?

Either way, people are still dead. And honestly, I'm not sure we are safer.

Obama stopped Moammar's troops from killing citizens. Are you saying that was wrong?

Did Iraq ask to be "liberated"? Are they liberated now? Living under Sharia Law by constitution? Women used to be able to work where they want and wear what they wanted. Now they are slaves in Burkas. Is that what you support?
 
Bush got Congressional Approval for his wars, Obama has not.

In fact, Obama said the Libya Adventure was to preserve the image of the UN. It had nothing to do with the US. It is an illegal war for which Obama should be impeached.

"There is no fail like an rdean fail. Ask for it by name!" :lol:
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: del
Both Libya and Iraq are stupid wars that do more harm than good. Anyone who tries to justify one and condemn the other is blinded by partisan politics.

They should both be condemned. We have no right to police the world.
 
So killing people Obama's way is better than killing them Bush's way?

Either way, people are still dead. And honestly, I'm not sure we are safer.

Obama stopped Moammar's troops from killing citizens. Are you saying that was wrong?

Did Iraq ask to be "liberated"? Are they liberated now? Living under Sharia Law by constitution? Women used to be able to work where they want and wear what they wanted. Now they are slaves in Burkas. Is that what you support?
Did Libya ask to be liberated? Are they liberated now? Who do you think will replace Qaddafi, Thomas Jefferson?
 
Last edited:
Libya is and will backfire on Obama, the more he tries to play it as a success the more he will destroy himself.

People were tired of was under Bush and they really don't like that the Anti Bush/Anti war President Obama they elected turned out to be a much bigger war President than Bush... Bush, one of the most hated Presidents in this country’s history, that's who Obama is compared to lol... Hell, Obama compares himself to Bush on his own as a way to hope people still hate Bush more than him.
 
Most in the Republican base don't even know they have a Doctrine. To put it simply, the Bush/Republican Doctrine is to attack and level a country you think might one day, in the far future, threaten the US.

Here we go again.

Can you give me a list of all the countries Bush leveled?

An example of the Bush/Republican Doctrine being applied? Iraq.

Last time I checked the map Iraq is still there. I guess you have a different definition of level than the rest of the world.

An example of Republicans wanting to apply the Bush/Republican Doctrine?
Bomb bomb bomb....bomb bomb Iran.

When did we bomb Iran?

Why this Doctrine didn't work in Iraq?

Because no one used it?

George Bush tricked the US into invading Iraq. There was no "ownership" by the people. What did they do? They rioted and looted their own country. They attacked the Christians living there since the time of Christ reducing the population by up to a million. They put their women in Burkas. They put up a monument to the man who threw shoes at our president. Maybe it was a thanks, "Here, I love you so much, take my shoes", others think it was a deadly insult. The people simply were not "invested" because this wasn't a "revolution".

He tricked us into invading Iraq by telling us exactly what everyone believed. Why do you think Hillary never retracted her vote on the war? Could it be because she actually talked with an ex president and got his confirmation that there were WMDs in Iraq?

Obama in Libya supported those in revolt. They are invested. Very little looting has been reported. The US is not responsible for nation building because we didn't tear down that nation. The people in Libya are invested in their own future.

We didn't tear down that nation?

Does that mean that Obama does not actually get credit for Libya?

Overseas, Obama's actions are being described as "thoughtful" and "wise". Right wingers call him "boy" and "manchild". Of course, I'm sure there is nothing "racial" in those comments.

Can you give me any links to anyone anywhere that is describing Obama in those words?

The reason Obama has been much more successful overseas than domestically is because it's much easier for the Republican Party to block his actions domestically. I suspect he would achieve the same level of success if Republicans worked with him instead of demanding he fail, or at least get out of the way. Of course, that won't happen. Because they want him to "fail".

What makes you think there is a difference between foreign and domestic policy anywhere but in the small minds of confused people.

By the way, the US is actually viewed less favorably in the Arab world now than we were when that impulsive cowboy was president.
 
Most in the Republican base don't even know they have a Doctrine. To put it simply, the Bush/Republican Doctrine is to attack and level a country you think might one day, in the far future, threaten the US.

An example of the Bush/Republican Doctrine being applied? Iraq.

An example of Republicans wanting to apply the Bush/Republican Doctrine?
Bomb bomb bomb....bomb bomb Iran.

Why this Doctrine didn't work in Iraq?

George Bush tricked the US into invading Iraq. There was no "ownership" by the people. What did they do? They rioted and looted their own country. They attacked the Christians living there since the time of Christ reducing the population by up to a million. They put their women in Burkas. They put up a monument to the man who threw shoes at our president. Maybe it was a thanks, "Here, I love you so much, take my shoes", others think it was a deadly insult. The people simply were not "invested" because this wasn't a "revolution".

Obama in Libya supported those in revolt. They are invested. Very little looting has been reported. The US is not responsible for nation building because we didn't tear down that nation. The people in Libya are invested in their own future.

Overseas, Obama's actions are being described as "thoughtful" and "wise". Right wingers call him "boy" and "manchild". Of course, I'm sure there is nothing "racial" in those comments.

The reason Obama has been much more successful overseas than domestically is because it's much easier for the Republican Party to block his actions domestically. I suspect he would achieve the same level of success if Republicans worked with him instead of demanding he fail, or at least get out of the way. Of course, that won't happen. Because they want him to "fail".

The Obama Doctrine works.

Likewise, Bill Clinton won the war in the Balkans without losing a single American soldier.

Dems are smarter than Republicans, no question.
 
LOl, SO, supporting dropping bombs on people is considered, thoughtful and wise..
but bush liberating people is somehow DIFFERENT. Can you believe these people. sheeesh

I'm putting on hip waders.:lol:

So you had no problem with Qaddafi slaughtering his own people? Hmmm, interesting.

Bush "liberated" people. Did they ask to be "liberated"? If you were "liberated" and didn't ask to be "liberated", were you really "liberated"? And why do the Iraqi women say they had it better under Saddam? Look how terrible they were treated. That leads you to believe being "liberated" when you didn't ask is "worse". Hmmm. Something to think about? I suspect you don't waste your time "thinking". Am I right?

Qaddafi didn't slaughter his own people we just attacked him because he said bad things about Obama.
 
So killing people Obama's way is better than killing them Bush's way?

Either way, people are still dead. And honestly, I'm not sure we are safer.

Obama stopped Moammar's troops from killing citizens. Are you saying that was wrong?

Did Iraq ask to be "liberated"? Are they liberated now? Living under Sharia Law by constitution? Women used to be able to work where they want and wear what they wanted. Now they are slaves in Burkas. Is that what you support?

Qaddafi's supporters killed more people after we got involved in the rebellion than they did before we did. Does that mean I can blame Obama for all those dead people?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top