Difference between Reagan and Obama dealing with Libya

[Chris]

Obama got Gaddafi.

Reagan didn't.

Obama got Bin Laden.

Bush didn't.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Papa Obama got an ambassador killed

last one to be murdered before...

Carter did

 

[Chris]

 

[Chris]

List of Al Qaeda leaders killed by Obama.....

There’s Osama bin Laden.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.
Earlier this month officials confirmed that al Qaeda’s chief of Pakistan operations, Abu Hafs al-Shahri, was killed in Waziristan, Pakistan.
In August, ‘Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman, the deputy leader of al Qaeda was killed.
In June, one of the group’s most dangerous commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, was killed in Pakistan. In Yemen that same month, AQAP senior operatives Ammar al-Wa’ili, Abu Ali al-Harithi, and Ali Saleh Farhan were killed. In Somalia, Al-Qa’ida in East Africa (AQEA) senior leader Harun Fazul was killed.
Administration officials also herald the recent U.S./Pakistani joint arrest of Younis al-Mauritani in Quetta.
Going back to August 2009, Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mahsud was killed in Pakistan.
In September of that month, Jemayah Islamiya operational planner Noordin Muhammad Top was killed in Indonesia, and AQEA planner Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan was killed in Somalia.
Then in December 2009 in Pakistan, al Qaeda operational commanders Saleh al-Somali and ‘Abdallah Sa’id were killed.
In February 2010, in Pakistan, Taliban deputy and military commander Abdul Ghani Beradar was captured; Haqqani network commander Muhammad Haqqani was killed; and Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar was killed.
In March 2010, al Qaeda operative Hussein al-Yemeni was killed in Pakistan, while senior Jemayah Islamiya operative Dulmatin - accused of being the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombings – was killed during a raid in Indonesia.
In April 2010, al Qaeda in Iraq leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were killed.
In May, al Qaeda’s number three commander, Sheik Saeed al-Masri was killed.
In June 2010 in Pakistan, al Qaeda commander Hamza al-Jawfi was killed.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Apparently the mission is not quite done yet
No doubt Papa Obama trying to take credit
in a very public and rather boastful way for killing Muslims
has helped




A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World
in the last few days

[/QUOTE]

 

[JoeB131]

Teddy screwed Carter. He wanted more austerity, Teddy wanted expensive Dem programs after 8 years of Pubs mucking up the great society.

Yes, Teddy did. And shame on him for doing so. Because he felt that the "Kennedy Legacy" was more important than supporting his party's president.

We could have resolved the Health Care problem back in the 1970's, but Teddy sandbagged it because it wasn't good enough.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the Muslim protests are all the fault of the American far right.

Apparently the mission is not quite done yet
No doubt Papa Obama trying to take credit
in a very public and rather boastful way for killing Muslims
has helped




A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World
in the last few days

[/QUOTE]

 

[HUGGY]

Apparently the mission is not quite done yet
No doubt Papa Obama trying to take credit
in a very public and rather boastful way for killing Muslims
has helped




A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World
in the last few days

[/QUOTE]

Show me a map with cute little blue balloons on it where the muslims are protesting in the USA and I'll be concerned. They can cry over their sand dunes all they want till hell freezes over. I don't care!

 

[Neotrotsky]

And let's not talk about Reagan and Lebanon. He sent the Marines in with an unclear mission, than he pulled them out like a confused rookie, making the USA look indecisive and weak.

Or what about Grenada? What was the USA afraid of? A nutmeg bomb?

Reagan was a disaster on foreign policy.

He increased nuclear weapons production to bankrupt the Soviets. He gave a falling empire a push, but left us with crippling deficits as far as they eye could see. He was the first Republican president to completely abandon pay-as-you-go. We know the Dems spend like drunken sailors, but we depend on the GOP to be prudent.

So why did Reagan double Carter's spending and debt?

What a fucking disaster. The US has never recovered from his policies.

So much ignorance, and so little time to correct it. Reagan increased the national debt by about $1.5 trillion dollars in eight years. Just about the same amount that Clinton raised the national debt in his eight years. Yet, Clinton had no terrible economic mess to correct, instituted a huge tax increase in his first year in office, and still matched Reagan in the deficit spending arena.

For the ignorant asses that have little knowledge of government spending, the big drivers of the national debt are the entitlement programs, and that is what drove the debt in the 80's and 90's. A Republican congress drug Clinton, screaming, kicking and shutting down the government, to welfare reform, and that allowed Clinton to falsely claim that he left a surplus for Bush.

You need to get past the smoke and mirrors of Democrat rhetoric, and actually learn what the real facts are.

Don't count on it... they can't even admit the truth with the Arab Spring
let alone, anything else...


With these riots pointing to the failure of the "Arab Spring"

The Left/concerned trolls can only desperately hope to spin it away from Papa Obama

Like Hope and Change
a dismal failure

 

[Salt Jones]

Remember that Reagan ran in Lebanon, as fast as his, old palsied feet could go.

The attack on the consulate was not done by the administration, but by Libya's equivalent of our far cultural right, which wished it had the balls to do what the bad guys did.

He did invade Granada about a week later. That showed Hezbollah.

 

[Salt Jones]

And let's not talk about Reagan and Lebanon. He sent the Marines in with an unclear mission, than he pulled them out like a confused rookie, making the USA look indecisive and weak.

Or what about Grenada? What was the USA afraid of? A nutmeg bomb?

Reagan was a disaster on foreign policy.

He increased nuclear weapons production to bankrupt the Soviets. He gave a falling empire a push, but left us with crippling deficits as far as they eye could see. He was the first Republican president to completely abandon pay-as-you-go. We know the Dems spend like drunken sailors, but we depend on the GOP to be prudent.

So why did Reagan double Carter's spending and debt?

What a fucking disaster. The US has never recovered from his policies.

So much ignorance, and so little time to correct it. Reagan increased the national debt by about $1.5 trillion dollars in eight years. Just about the same amount that Clinton raised the national debt in his eight years. Yet, Clinton had no terrible economic mess to correct, instituted a huge tax increase in his first year in office, and still matched Reagan in the deficit spending arena.

For the ignorant asses that have little knowledge of government spending, the big drivers of the national debt are the entitlement programs, and that is what drove the debt in the 80's and 90's. A Republican congress drug Clinton, screaming, kicking and shutting down the government, to welfare reform, and that allowed Clinton to falsely claim that he left a surplus for Bush.

You need to get past the smoke and mirrors of Democrat rhetoric, and actually learn what the real facts are.

Don't count on it... they can't even admit the truth with the Arab Spring
let alone, anything else...


With these riots pointing to the failure of the "Arab Spring"

The Left/concerned trolls can only desperately hope to spin it away from Papa Obama

Like Hope and Change
a dismal failure

What did Reagan do in response to the Beirut embassy and Marine barracks bombings?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Darn straight!

Remember that Reagan ran in Lebanon, as fast as his, old palsied feet could go.

The attack on the consulate was not done by the administration, but by Libya's equivalent of our far cultural right, which wished it had the balls to do what the bad guys did.

He did invade Granada about a week later. That showed Hezbollah.

 

[Neotrotsky]

New Republic
One Year Later: The Failure of the Arab Spring

A year has passed since liberal America and the liberal opinion class, in particular, went ecstatic over the Arab debut into the modern world. I know that my standing in that class is suspect. So, being a bit flummoxed myself by the not altogether dissimilar developments in the vast expanse from the Maghreb to Mesopotamia, I conquered my doubts and made a slight stab for hope. But I quickly realized that I was wrong and left the celebration. The true-believers are still there, mesmerized by some ideological mirage or preferring to look on the brighter side of things. ​

That was in January of this year

The delusion still lives in the mind of Papa Obama apologists

 

[Dot Com]

And what about Reagan's vigorous support of Hussein while at the same time going back door with Iran? He formed deep partnerships with these terrorist regimes because they were amenable to US energy needs. We don't even need to talk about his increase of funding to the Saudi royals, who are the biggest freedom-haters on the block. This was the country where 99% of the 9/11 attackers came from. Carter, on the other hand, wanted us out of the middle east. He didn't want to support these regimes and make them more powerful through US aid. His long term plan of defunding the middle east was completely rejected by Reagan, who got Iraq and Hussein removed from the official list of terrorist nations. Why doesn't the Rightwing voter know any of this?

Listen, I get it.

Carter had a vastly different energy policy - one that was decreasingly less dependent on the middle east; one that defunded terrorist states. He was going to move 30% of energy use from middle east oil to alternative energy, conservation, and more efficient transportation/shipping and less wasteful, oil intensive urbanization. He wanted to raise cafe standards so that cars would get more miles per gallon. He wanted America to use less oil so as to strangle the middle east. Rather than pour money into Hussein, and then bomb him ten years later (as Reagan/Bush did), Carter wanted to hit these regimes where it hurt. Carter threatened the big oil monopoly which played a major financial role in the Reagan ascendancy. But... Carter lost to Reagan and Big Oil. Period. That was the most important political fight of our lives - and we are living the consequences, which is an empowered middle east along with an economy destroyed by expensive oil. Reagan tied America's neck to oil like a noose. Plain and simple.

Reagan did not want to defund the regimes sitting atop the profit cow of those who supported him. [Capital wants short term profit. Oil - which they knew would run out - was the ultimate short term profit. So they doubled down on a dead-end energy future and made no plans to shift to a post-petroleum world. China is now cleaning our clock with regards to alternative energy. They are quietly making investments and preparations to deal with a world that has markedly less and markedly more expensive oil]

But yes, Reagan got in bed with Iran (see Iran Contra) and Hussein and Saudi Arabia and the Mujahideen. He made all these terror states stronger, while making everyone think he was tough on terror by picking fights with irrelevant shit-holes like Grenada and Nicaragua. Do the fucking research. Reagan made mideast terror states stronger. This stuff isn't hidden. The only people who don't know this stuff are the useful idiots who listen to rightwing pundits and who never study actual policy.

All Reagan's policies served to increase our dependency on petrol-terror-states. Reagan increased American oil use like no other president. And because oil supplies were diminishing (as China/India demand rose), the cost would only rise - and eventually destroy the economy.

We are now lying in that bed. The game is over.

America swallowed poison in 1980.

that about sums it up. Its no surprise that people of the likes of loverbears65 deifies him

 

[Neotrotsky]

add in blame Bush and racism

you will have the full left spin or "round-robin"
on the failure of the Arab spring

 

[Dot Com]

wonder if neotrotsky is going to still hang around if/when the President is reelected or at least change his infantile avey? :dyunno:

 

[Neotrotsky]

Infantile is trying to push back to Reagan to spin
attention away from Papa Obama's failed Arab Spring

---just saying---


If Papa Obama wins
then life goes on, does it not...

First, I will pray for our country, we will need it.


Second, I will adjust my investments and protect
my family's assets, accordingly

 

[Bfgrn]

And let's not talk about Reagan and Lebanon. He sent the Marines in with an unclear mission, than he pulled them out like a confused rookie, making the USA look indecisive and weak.

Or what about Grenada? What was the USA afraid of? A nutmeg bomb?

Reagan was a disaster on foreign policy.

He increased nuclear weapons production to bankrupt the Soviets. He gave a falling empire a push, but left us with crippling deficits as far as they eye could see. He was the first Republican president to completely abandon pay-as-you-go. We know the Dems spend like drunken sailors, but we depend on the GOP to be prudent.

So why did Reagan double Carter's spending and debt?

What a fucking disaster. The US has never recovered from his policies.

So much ignorance, and so little time to correct it. Reagan increased the national debt by about $1.5 trillion dollars in eight years. Just about the same amount that Clinton raised the national debt in his eight years. Yet, Clinton had no terrible economic mess to correct, instituted a huge tax increase in his first year in office, and still matched Reagan in the deficit spending arena.

For the ignorant asses that have little knowledge of government spending, the big drivers of the national debt are the entitlement programs, and that is what drove the debt in the 80's and 90's. A Republican congress drug Clinton, screaming, kicking and shutting down the government, to welfare reform, and that allowed Clinton to falsely claim that he left a surplus for Bush.

You need to get past the smoke and mirrors of Democrat rhetoric, and actually learn what the real facts are.

Ignorance is the word...

Where did our debt come from? When did massive debt become part of the American economy?

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

And where was all this angst and concern about debt from conservatives when Bush and Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress for almost a decade??? When Bush was starting a 3 trillion dollar war of ideology in Iraq, there was not a fucking PEEP from you right wingers, just cheers and 'bring 'em on'... And where was this less government mantra? You right wingers LOVED BIG government and government intervention into people lives... the Patriot Act, trashing habeas corpus, the Geneva Conventions and the US War Crimes Act.

And what was the concern in the Bush administration about debt and deficits? NONE...Bush's solution was to eliminate the voices of concern.

Paul O'Neill was fired from his job as George Bush's Treasury Secretary for disagreeing too many times with the president's policy on tax cuts.

The president had promised to cut taxes, and he did. Within six months of taking office, he pushed a trillion dollars worth of tax cuts through Congress.

But O'Neill thought it should have been the end. After 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan, the budget deficit was growing. So at a meeting with the vice president after the mid-term elections in 2002, O'Neill argued against a second round of tax cuts.

"Cheney, at this moment, showed his hand. He said to O'Neill: 'You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.' … O'Neill was speechless."

"It was not just about not wanting the tax cut. It was about how to use the nation's resources to improve the condition of our society," says O'Neill. "And I thought the weight of working on Social Security and fundamental tax reform was a lot more important than a tax reduction."

 

[Dot Com]

Infantile is trying to push back to Reagan to spin
attention away from Papa Obama's failed Arab Spring

---just saying---


If Papa Obama wins
then life goes on, does it not...

First, I will pray for our country, we will need it.


Second, I will adjust my investments and protect
my family's assets, accordingly

you a "baser" are you? thats a pretty infantile avey for a man of the cloth to sport. and "protecting your investments"? Do what Romney did

 

[Politico]

... is Gaddafi still alive - seems Obama finished the job Reagan only threw a bomb at.

If Reagan had wanted him dead he would have been. The difference is he wasn't an idiot. He knew removing him would cause immense problems. You know..like we are having right now. Like it or not the reality is people like Ghaddafi and Mubarek serve a function.