Bush/Republican Doctrine Verses the Obama Doctrine

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.

If that is true you must be a Republican because that was incredibly stupid.

Clinton bombing Kosovo paved the way for Bush to invade Iraq. The Republicans passed on calling Obama out on Libya so that the next time a Republican president wants to attack someone without consulting Congress it will be easier. Every time you support the party you like you make it easier for the party you hate. Thanks for proving that partisan hacks should not be allowed to vote.
 
Last edited:
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".


ROFLMAO how long did you have to sit with your own Twisted thoughts to concoct this in your mind Dean?
Your Hero Barack Obama said before the War in Iraq that US Military Force should only be used in cases where a credible Threat to our National Security is involved. Then he Attacks a country based solely on Humanitarian Reasons but says it's ok, we not at war, We just Dropping Bombs and killing Libyian Troops.

As usual with Democrats and War. It's Half Assed, No US boots on the Ground. No Clear Idea who is going to take over, and what Libya is going to be like. Did things just get better for the People of Libya? or are they about to get way worse? This is why we considered and Rejected just Killing Saddam and the Bath party leadership and being done with it in Iraq. Because then not only would we not know who was going to be in control, But the Anarchy that would follow such an action is sure to claim lives. Scores will be settled.

I think you are a bit Quick to even be crediting Obama with Anything right now. There is still intense Fighting going on, and we still have no real Idea who we are helping. We could very well be watching IRAN all over again.

I was actually alive back then, judging on the Childish shortsightedness of most of your post, I am going to assume you were not. Back then everyone got all excited to. Thought we were watching real Democratic Change coming to Iran. Just to see the Mullahs Take over and set up their Islamic Theocracy.

You were one of the loudest voices claiming all we did in Iraq was set up an Islamic Government loyal to Iran, Yet you are sitting here now claiming Victory for Obama when we clearly have no fucking Idea if we have won anything or not.

I swear your pic has to be in the Dictionary next to Hypocrite.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Vel
BS...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....BS.

The Bush Doctrine in Egypt worked far better than the Obama Doctrine in Libya. Obama dithered in the beginning with our support of the Libyan Rebels allowing Qaddafi to slaughter many in the beginning & allowed him to hang on for far to long.

It is very difficult to change citizens minds in nations like Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, Iraq & Iran where the military & people support their leader's fight against US. Nation building in those places is nearly impossible. It was a mistake or a lie to claim that we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

BTW - How is Obama's Nation Building Disaster coming along in Afghanistan? :cuckoo:
 
The Bush doctrine was to take over with full force and use a form of "mad", but instead of nukes or destruction it was threat of force(war). Afghanistan is kind of understandable after those bastards attacked us...The Taliban was the extremist and we replaced it with moderates that would give the country a fighting chance. Iraq is debatable, but saddam was a piece of shit and was funding terrorist activity, but it didn't have the pay offs that Afghanistan surely has, because you could replace him with some one worst. Countries like Libya backed down and respected us. The middle east respected us as a force and are enemies were on the run more or less. The middle east was pretty stable.

The Obama doctrine lets just say is a cluster fuck. We lost as many troops in Afghanistan with his policies and the Taliban may take over once we're gone. So if that occurs we lose as the country falls to where we started with. Iraq has turned into a snake that is siding with people like Assad and iran. We took a chance and we will find out, it was not a good choice of action. What is the worst thing Obama has done is disstablize the middle east and northern Africa(taking out the moderate dictators). We're stabbing our friends like Mubarak of Egypt that had holded the peace for 30 years...We're doing that to all our friends throughout this part of the world. Democracy doesn't work in this part of the world, because these people hate us and will put someone more extreme most of the time into power. They will do so with Egypt, Libya, Tanzania, Lemon, maybe even syria, and Pakistan is laughing at us and thumbing there nose. We have a huge mess that we may not repair and full scale wars may break out, because of it. We will be living with it for the next 100 years in one form or the other.

The Obama doctrine is a joke! This arab spring crap is a extremist spring that we will be living with for a very long time.
 
Last edited:
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?

So, you have comprehension issues. (Not a question, a statement of fact)

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".

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.

Just because it was Dem Presidents doesn't mean Dems are any smarter...THEY weren't the ones that went in to fight. Our soldiers did....and i'm sure they were both republicans and democrats doing the fighting! Geesh! :lol: Or did they ask all the soldiers what party they belonged to and only sent the dems???
 
The Bush doctrine was to take over with full force and use a form of "mad", but instead of nukes or destruction it was threat of force(war). Afghanistan is kind of understandable after those bastards attacked us...The Taliban was the extremist and we replaced it with moderates that would give the country a fighting chance. Iraq is debatable, but saddam was a piece of shit and was funding terrorist activity, but it didn't have the pay offs that Afghanistan surely has, because you could replace him with some one worst. Countries like Libya backed down and respected us. The middle east respected us as a force and are enemies were on the run more or less. The middle east was pretty stable.

The Obama doctrine lets just say is a cluster fuck. We lost as many troops in Afghanistan with his policies and the Taliban may take over once we're gone. So if that occurs we lose as the country falls to where we started with. Iraq has turned into a snake that is siding with people like Assad and iran. We took a chance and we will find out, it was not a good choice of action. What is the worst thing Obama has done is disstablize the middle east and northern Africa(taking out the moderate dictators). We're stabbing our friends like Mubarak of Egypt that had holded the peace for 30 years...We're doing that to all our friends throughout this part of the world. Democracy doesn't work in this part of the world, because these people hate us and will put someone more extreme most of the time into power. They will do so with Egypt, Libya, Tanzania, Lemon, maybe even syria, and Pakistan is laughing at us and thumbing there nose. We have a huge mess that we may not repair and full scale wars may break out, because of it. We will be living with it for the next 100 years in one form or the other.

The Obama doctrine is a joke! This arab spring crap is a extremist spring that we will be living with for a very long time.

Democracy doesn't work in this part of the world?

Bullshit.

Democracy works everywhere.
 
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.

Just because it was Dem Presidents doesn't mean Dems are any smarter...THEY weren't the ones that went in to fight. Our soldiers did....and i'm sure they were both republicans and democrats doing the fighting! Geesh! :lol: Or did they ask all the soldiers what party they belonged to and only sent the dems???

Nice try, but the strategy not to put troops on the ground came from Clinton and Obama.

I love the spins you guys come up with. It's hysterical.
 
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:

You say that as if Republicans would give Obama approval on anything. We both know how likely that is.

Bush badgered and lied to Democrats to get their "support". You are with us or with the terrorists. After all Bush and the Republicans did to this country, the Americans killed and maimed, the ruined economy, clearly they were on the side of the terrorists.
 
Obama Doctrine: 4 illegal wars, lose our AAA Credit and Deany says "reelect him!"
 
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.

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?

Libya didn't ask to be liberated. They took matters into their own hands. All they asked for was air support and weapons and that was all they were given. They did the job themselves.

Bush and the Republicans never gave Iraq that "choice". Can't you keep up? That was the entire point of this thread.
 
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.



When did we bomb Iran?



Because no one used it?



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?



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.

Iraq and Afghanistan. One was for justice, the other was for fun and profit.

When do you ask a "serious" 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.

I suspect this is the most stupid thing you ever said. But who knows? There are so many.
 
Nice try, but the strategy not to put troops on the ground came from Clinton and Obama.

I love the spins you guys come up with. It's hysterical.
Nice try lying twit. but Obama's Libya strategy was a poorly executed Republican strategy that worked like a dream in Egypt. For 3 years Republicans secretly backed uprising in Egypt planning for regime change & it went without a hitch. Obama dithered in his support for the Libyan rebels & nearly got them all killed in the beginning.

Obama has also got more soldiers killed in Afghanistan than Bush did & we ain't done there yet.
obamavsbush.jpg
 
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.

Just because it was Dem Presidents doesn't mean Dems are any smarter...THEY weren't the ones that went in to fight. Our soldiers did....and i'm sure they were both republicans and democrats doing the fighting! Geesh! :lol: Or did they ask all the soldiers what party they belonged to and only sent the dems???

Nice try, but the strategy not to put troops on the ground came from Clinton and Obama.

I love the spins you guys come up with. It's hysterical.

My comment was about your statement that Clinton won the war in the Balkans without loosing a single soldier...then stating Dems are smarter tha Reps...sounds like you're saying all the soldiers he sent were Dems! :) And there was no "strategy" on Clinton and Obama's part. Obama said we were there for "support". If that's the case, he has NOTHING to pat himself on the back for. Plus, it's illegal what he did without Congress approval, but that doesn't matter to most of you.
 
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".

We are broke. We are going to have to cut Social Security, education, every federal program but obama figures 900million spent to bomb libya, a country full of people that hate us, is money well spent. In my opinion, these country's are not our friends and if they manage to kill themselves down to the last person, I don't care, the world would be a better place without them. Keep our money at home where we need it.
 
The middle east is not our friend and never will be.

Libyans are celebrating right now, Who knows what kind of Govt they will elect?? Another Iran with mullahs and sharia law?? Terrorists groups like Hammas and Hezbulah? The Muslim Brotherhood perhaps??

Yeah. They love the West when they need us to win the war.

Once the war is won they can't get rid of us fast enough.

Which way will Libya go?? Who knows but I'd be willing to bet they won't be friends with the US or the West.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top