Chickenhawk Romney's hilarious OP ED in Chicago Tribune

[rightwinger]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

 

[Warrior102]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

Obama isn't fit to shine a Lance Corporal's boots, son.

 

[naturegirl]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

How about Obama did this without congressional approval?? I suppose drones that kill civilians are free!! If you think Al Qadea leadership is decimated you've been watching too much CNN. Bin Laden was no longer necessary in the daily operations of Al Qaeda, they have lots of jihadists waiting in the wings to take over.

What about the innocent civilians, women and children, that were taken out by Obama's drones?? Do they not matter as long as your guy takes the credit for going to war without congressional approval?

Last I checked NATO is not who we turn to for acts of war.

 

[rightwinger]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

Obama isn't fit to shine a Lance Corporal's boots, son.

He is our Commander in Chief little boy

 

[rightwinger]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

How about Obama did this without congressional approval?? I suppose drones that kill civilians are free!! If you think Al Qadea leadership is decimated you've been watching too much CNN. Bin Laden was no longer necessary in the daily operations of Al Qaeda, they have lots of jihadists waiting in the wings to take over.

What about the innocent civilians, women and children, that were taken out by Obama's drones?? Do they not matter as long as your guy takes the credit for going to war without congressional approval?

Last I checked NATO is not who we turn to for acts of war.

Well.....it all comes down to something we like to call the Bush Doctrine. Where we will get the terrorists wherever they are. Can't have the President running to Congress every time intelligence identifies a target

I love drone attacks. Silent death from above. Nothing I enjoy more than terrorizing the terrorists. I especially like the part where we do not have to jeopardize US lives while we take out terrorists. Beats a invasion doesn't it?

Long overdue for the US to force other NATO countries to do more of the heavy lifting. Especially in their sphere of influence

 

[Chris]

Does anyone really want Mitt Romney answering the phone in the White House at 3 am?

 

[naturegirl]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

How about Obama did this without congressional approval?? I suppose drones that kill civilians are free!! If you think Al Qadea leadership is decimated you've been watching too much CNN. Bin Laden was no longer necessary in the daily operations of Al Qaeda, they have lots of jihadists waiting in the wings to take over.

What about the innocent civilians, women and children, that were taken out by Obama's drones?? Do they not matter as long as your guy takes the credit for going to war without congressional approval?

Last I checked NATO is not who we turn to for acts of war.

Well.....it all comes down to something we like to call the Bush Doctrine. Where we will get the terrorists wherever they are. Can't have the President running to Congress every time intelligence identifies a target

I love drone attacks. Silent death from above. Nothing I enjoy more than terrorizing the terrorists. I especially like the part where we do not have to jeopardize US lives while we take out terrorists. Beats a invasion doesn't it?

Long overdue for the US to force other NATO countries to do more of the heavy lifting. Especially in their sphere of influence

More Constitution trampling, you're Ok with that, huh? And killing innocents is fine in your book. What ya gonna do when a drone settles over your house and takes your family out because a suspected terrorist might be living next door or down the block.

 

[rightwinger]

How about Obama did this without congressional approval?? I suppose drones that kill civilians are free!! If you think Al Qadea leadership is decimated you've been watching too much CNN. Bin Laden was no longer necessary in the daily operations of Al Qaeda, they have lots of jihadists waiting in the wings to take over.

What about the innocent civilians, women and children, that were taken out by Obama's drones?? Do they not matter as long as your guy takes the credit for going to war without congressional approval?

Last I checked NATO is not who we turn to for acts of war.

Well.....it all comes down to something we like to call the Bush Doctrine. Where we will get the terrorists wherever they are. Can't have the President running to Congress every time intelligence identifies a target

I love drone attacks. Silent death from above. Nothing I enjoy more than terrorizing the terrorists. I especially like the part where we do not have to jeopardize US lives while we take out terrorists. Beats a invasion doesn't it?

Long overdue for the US to force other NATO countries to do more of the heavy lifting. Especially in their sphere of influence

More Constitution trampling, you're Ok with that, huh? And killing innocents is fine in your book. What ya gonna do when a drone settles over your house and take your family out because a suspected terrorist might be living next door or down the block.

It is a sad part of war. The innocents have been killed ever since the aerial bomb was invented. Our current precision attacks have a lot less collateral damage than manned bombing attacks used to. Remember Napalm attacks in Viet Nam? You don't think innocent people were killed and maimed?

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

Do I want Mitt Romney answering the phone at the White House at 3:00AM? Oh, hell YES!

I just love it when a liberal tries desperately to use something they are so dead set against, have no clue about, and really wants to do away with, as a reason to vote for Obama. Now that the political hack rdean has spewed the unbelievable crap that he has spewed, lets look at reality, shall we?

Here's our bomber fleet. The B-52 was developed in the very early 1950's. The B-1B was developed and produced in the early 80's (upgraded from the B-1A that Jimmy cancelled). And the B-2 was developed and produced in the late 1990's (but theres only 20 of these). Based upon the number of bombers currently available for each type, the average age of the bomber fleet is over 45 years sunshine. The B-52H (the only variant still flying), because its airframe is over 50 years old, costs approximately $10,555 for every hour that it flys. The B-1B, because it is rapidly approaching the 'designed' max life of its airframe, cost a little over $7,000 per hour to fly. The B-2 actually costs less to fly per hour than each of these (actual amount classified) because it is well within its engineered service life.

Why do we even have bombers? It is based upon something called the "triad." The triad is a concept that states that if you have three independent systems to rely upon, an enemy cannot knock out all three simultaneously, thereby effectively denying you the ability to strike back. If you're going to get 'hit' harder in retaliation than you can hit first, perhaps you'll think twice about making the first move. The legs of our triad is the manned bomber fleet (cruise missles, gavity bombs, etc.), strategic missles (Minuteman III) and the SLBM's (Ohio class nuclear submarines with Poseiden missles). So the question then becomes, "Isn't this a 'cold war' concept that doesn't apply today?" Hardly.

The North Koreans aren't exactly sitting at the peace table wanting to see how they can get a Kia plant in Pyonyang. The Iranians can't seem to hide the chill they get up their leg when they talk about nuking someone with the medium-ranged missle they just got from Pakistan. Russia has just allowed Putin to return to power with his side-kick Medyeved (SP??) and they are rebuilding the northern fleet as fast as they can to return Russia to it's glory. And China has just launched it's first deep-water aircraft carrier that is making the Taiwanese very, very nervous. Not to mention our good friends the Pakistani's who still tingle from the bin Laden take down; works closely with the North Koreans AND the Iranians; and sits at the breakfast table with terrorists from around the globe. Don't forget that because of Barry and the boys, about 20% of our oil comes through the strait of Hormuz. Don't forget the pirates off Somali that take ships at an alarming rate. What happens if they get ahold of a nuke from one of the ships they take?

It is not enough that we have good special operators in the SEALS and Delta. We must have a capable and effective force to protect our interests around the world. The legs of the triad are old and MUST be modernized. NATO is a very good way to ensure that our interests around the world are protected (refer to Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states). The United States MUST lead in this organization, but member nations MUST provide their fair share.

By the way: Props to the President for the drone strikes. Great job and great tactic. Keep them up.

 

[bodecea]

When Bush was President, liberals said Drone attacks were illegal.

Really? I don't think they are illegal. In fact, I think the concept of Drones is pretty damn good.

 

[Katzndogz]

Drones kill them dead. It's better than capturing them and interrogating them. Heaven forbid they be waterboarded.

It's better than finding out where the next attack is going to be, which is the whole point behind drone strikes. This regime weighs the results. Kill a few and ensure the deaths of many, or make one uncomfortable and save the lives of dozens. We know where obama stands.

 

[tinydancer]

Does anyone really want Mitt Romney answering the phone in the White House at 3 am?

I'll take Hillary you mother fucking bitches

Damn straight I will.

This is not my post.

I did not post this.

 

[rightwinger]

Drones kill them dead. It's better than capturing them and interrogating them. Heaven forbid they be waterboarded.

It's better than finding out where the next attack is going to be, which is the whole point behind drone strikes. This regime weighs the results. Kill a few and ensure the deaths of many, or make one uncomfortable and save the lives of dozens. We know where obama stands.

President Obama stands on hitting the the terrists wherever they are hiding. Make them mistrust everyone, make them afraid to go out in public, disrupt their chain of command

Putting US lives at risk to enter foreign territory, capturing suspects and taking them out alive is foolhardy except in the most extreme circumstances. Bush tried it. He put hundreds of thousands of troops on the ground and ended up with 5000 Americans killed

 

[tinydancer]

whoa thats weird

Any one else see this>

 

[Oldstyle]

Did Romney miss the part where Ghadaffi was eliminated without US boots on the ground? How about the part where Republicans tried to block funding for the NATO mission?

Did Romney miss the part where Obama got NATO countries to increase support to the Afghanistan mission? Or where stepped up drone attacks have decimated AlQaida leadership?

Killing bin Laden did not get his attention?

Does he want to go back to Republican inspired invasions and nation building?

Obama isn't fit to shine a Lance Corporal's boots, son.

He is our Commander in Chief little boy

He is. However having a title doesn't make him something he's not, Winger...namely a leader. Barack Obama runs from tough decisions. Always has...always will.

 

[rightwinger]

Does anyone really want Mitt Romney answering the phone in the White House at 3 am?

I'll take Hillary you mother fucking bitches

Damn straight I will.

This is not my post.

I did not post this.

You will get Hillary in 2016

 

[rightwinger]

Obama isn't fit to shine a Lance Corporal's boots, son.

He is our Commander in Chief little boy

He is. However having a title doesn't make him something he's not, Winger...namely a leader. Barack Obama runs from tough decisions. Always has...always will.

Raising troop levels in Afghanistan was a tough decision
Sending SEALs to take out Bin Laden was a tough decision
Supporting Libyan freedom fighters was a tough decision

 

[paulitician]

Uh, your Dear Leader is probably the biggesst Chickenhawk President in U.S. History. Although Slick Willy Clinton could give him a good run for his money on that.

 

[rightwinger]

Do I want Mitt Romney answering the phone at the White House at 3:00AM? Oh, hell YES!

I just love it when a liberal tries desperately to use something they are so dead set against, have no clue about, and really wants to do away with, as a reason to vote for Obama. Now that the political hack rdean has spewed the unbelievable crap that he has spewed, lets look at reality, shall we?

Here's our bomber fleet. The B-52 was developed in the very early 1950's. The B-1B was developed and produced in the early 80's (upgraded from the B-1A that Jimmy cancelled). And the B-2 was developed and produced in the late 1990's (but theres only 20 of these). Based upon the number of bombers currently available for each type, the average age of the bomber fleet is over 45 years sunshine. The B-52H (the only variant still flying), because its airframe is over 50 years old, costs approximately $10,555 for every hour that it flys. The B-1B, because it is rapidly approaching the 'designed' max life of its airframe, cost a little over $7,000 per hour to fly. The B-2 actually costs less to fly per hour than each of these (actual amount classified) because it is well within its engineered service life.

Why do we even have bombers? It is based upon something called the "triad." The triad is a concept that states that if you have three independent systems to rely upon, an enemy cannot knock out all three simultaneously, thereby effectively denying you the ability to strike back. If you're going to get 'hit' harder in retaliation than you can hit first, perhaps you'll think twice about making the first move. The legs of our triad is the manned bomber fleet (cruise missles, gavity bombs, etc.), strategic missles (Minuteman III) and the SLBM's (Ohio class nuclear submarines with Poseiden missles). So the question then becomes, "Isn't this a 'cold war' concept that doesn't apply today?" Hardly.

The North Koreans aren't exactly sitting at the peace table wanting to see how they can get a Kia plant in Pyonyang. The Iranians can't seem to hide the chill they get up their leg when they talk about nuking someone with the medium-ranged missle they just got from Pakistan. Russia has just allowed Putin to return to power with his side-kick Medyeved (SP??) and they are rebuilding the northern fleet as fast as they can to return Russia to it's glory. And China has just launched it's first deep-water aircraft carrier that is making the Taiwanese very, very nervous. Not to mention our good friends the Pakistani's who still tingle from the bin Laden take down; works closely with the North Koreans AND the Iranians; and sits at the breakfast table with terrorists from around the globe. Don't forget that because of Barry and the boys, about 20% of our oil comes through the strait of Hormuz. Don't forget the pirates off Somali that take ships at an alarming rate. What happens if they get ahold of a nuke from one of the ships they take?

It is not enough that we have good special operators in the SEALS and Delta. We must have a capable and effective force to protect our interests around the world. The legs of the triad are old and MUST be modernized. NATO is a very good way to ensure that our interests around the world are protected (refer to Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states). The United States MUST lead in this organization, but member nations MUST provide their fair share.

By the way: Props to the President for the drone strikes. Great job and great tactic. Keep them up.

The USAF could have modernized its bomber fleet decades ago. Instead they chose to invest in the B-1 and B-2 programs which were ill suited for conventional missions. The Strategic mission is not as critical as it was in the cold war

In any case, there is no nation that can challenge our air superiority

 

[whitehall]

You have to wonder about the mental stability of liberals who still use the term "chickenhawk" while Barry Hussein is still in office and after the debacle of the Clinton years.