John Kerry: A Hard Working Diplomat!

[Flanders]

Remember how Bush the Younger was vilified for taking the war to the enemy in Iraq. To this day Democrats whine that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons even though every intelligence service in the world believed that Saddam did have them.

After Taqiyya the Liar took office he turned Bush’s victory into defeat. This has always been a problem for me: Do Democrats think the invasion of Iraq would have been justified if Saddam did have WMD? Answer: Apparently not.

Taqiyya, and his secretaries of state, took great pride in retreating from self-defense in the war that Islam declared. He pulled the troops out allowing ISIS to move in. Without blinking an eye he said pulling out was not his decision. I assume he does not want to take the blame for ISIS moving in:

​

And leave us not forget the ever-popular Arab Spring:

Arab Spring has stimulated terror, not democracy
Afshin Ellian Updated 10:24 am, Monday, June 23, 2014

Arab Spring has stimulated terror not democracy - SFGate​

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must have been sucking on a gin bottle when she totally misread the Arab Spring:

The United States must look past the violence and extremism that has erupted after the "Arab Spring" revolutions and boost support for the region's young democracies to forge long-term security, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday.

Clinton, seeking to reinforce the Obama administration's Middle East policy following a wave of anti-American violence and last month's deadly attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, said Washington cannot be deterred by "the violent acts of a small number of extremists."

World | Fri Oct 12, 2012 4:37pm EDT
Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers
WASHINGTON | By Andrew Quinn

Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers Reuters​

Now, Taqiyya the Liar is hellbent on handing nuclear weapons to Iran. And all the while the current secretary of state insisted that deadly poisonous gas in Syria is the real danger.

Followup question: If Democrats would not fight Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons, will they go to war against Iran when Iranians have the bombs the Administration is handing to them? Answer: Obviously not. UN-loving, New World Order, types will never defend this country unilaterally for any reason as did Bush the Younger.

When ICBMs with nuclear warheads are heading this way, I’m praying that Democrats will have time to say “I was against the war before I was for it.”

There is one thing I know as sure as I know the sun will rise tomorrow —— that cluck in the White House will never defend this country diplomatically without the UN’s approval. In short: There is no reason to believe he will defend this country militarily against a Muslim or a Communist country.

Finally, my biggest fear is that John Kerry will be working as hard for this country as he worked for the North Vietnamese in Paris in 1971 that ended in this:

​

"None of us are going be content to do something that can't pass scrutiny," said Kerry, mentioning all the experts who will review a deal if it is reached. "Everybody is negotiating hard, that's what makes this difficult."

With clock ticking, Kerry says Iran deal still has 'difficult issues,' could 'go either way'
By Barbara Boland | July 5, 2015 | 12:49 pm

With clock ticking Kerry says Iran deal still has difficult issues could go either way WashingtonExaminer.com
​

Not as hard as getting on the last chopper out of Saigon.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Boltneck's a complete idiot. How he's kept a job all these years is Gawd's own private mystery.

 

[Hossfly]

It's Bush's Fault.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Remember how Bush the Younger was vilified for taking the war to the enemy in Iraq. To this day Democrats whine that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons even though every intelligence service in the world believed that Saddam did have them.

After Taqiyya the Liar took office he turned Bush’s victory into defeat. This has always been a problem for me: Do Democrats think the invasion of Iraq would have been justified if Saddam did have WMD? Answer: Apparently not.

Taqiyya, and his secretaries of state, took great pride in retreating from self-defense in the war that Islam declared. He pulled the troops out allowing ISIS to move in. Without blinking an eye he said pulling out was not his decision. I assume he does not want to take the blame for ISIS moving in:

​

And leave us not forget the ever-popular Arab Spring:

Arab Spring has stimulated terror, not democracy
Afshin Ellian Updated 10:24 am, Monday, June 23, 2014

Arab Spring has stimulated terror not democracy - SFGate​

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must have been sucking on a gin bottle when she totally misread the Arab Spring:

The United States must look past the violence and extremism that has erupted after the "Arab Spring" revolutions and boost support for the region's young democracies to forge long-term security, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday.

Clinton, seeking to reinforce the Obama administration's Middle East policy following a wave of anti-American violence and last month's deadly attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, said Washington cannot be deterred by "the violent acts of a small number of extremists."

World | Fri Oct 12, 2012 4:37pm EDT
Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers
WASHINGTON | By Andrew Quinn

Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers Reuters​

Now, Taqiyya the Liar is hellbent on handing nuclear weapons to Iran. And all the while the current secretary of state insisted that deadly poisonous gas in Syria is the real danger.

Followup question: If Democrats would not fight Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons, will they go to war against Iran when Iranians have the bombs the Administration is handing to them? Answer: Obviously not. UN-loving, New World Order, types will never defend this country unilaterally for any reason as did Bush the Younger.

When ICBMs with nuclear warheads are heading this way, I’m praying that Democrats will have time to say “I was against the war before I was for it.”

There is one thing I know as sure as I know the sun will rise tomorrow —— that cluck in the White House will never defend this country diplomatically without the UN’s approval. In short: There is no reason to believe he will defend this country militarily against a Muslim or a Communist country.

Finally, my biggest fear is that John Kerry will be working as hard for this country as he worked for the North Vietnamese in Paris in 1971 that ended in this:

​

"None of us are going be content to do something that can't pass scrutiny," said Kerry, mentioning all the experts who will review a deal if it is reached. "Everybody is negotiating hard, that's what makes this difficult."

With clock ticking, Kerry says Iran deal still has 'difficult issues,' could 'go either way'
By Barbara Boland | July 5, 2015 | 12:49 pm

With clock ticking Kerry says Iran deal still has difficult issues could go either way WashingtonExaminer.com
​

Not as hard as getting on the last chopper out of Saigon.

What an embarrassing post. Bush has gone into a voluntary exile, as should the morons who still think he was right.

 

[Mr. H.]

Remember how Bush the Younger was vilified for taking the war to the enemy in Iraq. To this day Democrats whine that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons even though every intelligence service in the world believed that Saddam did have them.

After Taqiyya the Liar took office he turned Bush’s victory into defeat. This has always been a problem for me: Do Democrats think the invasion of Iraq would have been justified if Saddam did have WMD? Answer: Apparently not.

Taqiyya, and his secretaries of state, took great pride in retreating from self-defense in the war that Islam declared. He pulled the troops out allowing ISIS to move in. Without blinking an eye he said pulling out was not his decision. I assume he does not want to take the blame for ISIS moving in:

​

And leave us not forget the ever-popular Arab Spring:

Arab Spring has stimulated terror, not democracy
Afshin Ellian Updated 10:24 am, Monday, June 23, 2014

Arab Spring has stimulated terror not democracy - SFGate​

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must have been sucking on a gin bottle when she totally misread the Arab Spring:

The United States must look past the violence and extremism that has erupted after the "Arab Spring" revolutions and boost support for the region's young democracies to forge long-term security, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday.

Clinton, seeking to reinforce the Obama administration's Middle East policy following a wave of anti-American violence and last month's deadly attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, said Washington cannot be deterred by "the violent acts of a small number of extremists."

World | Fri Oct 12, 2012 4:37pm EDT
Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers
WASHINGTON | By Andrew Quinn

Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers Reuters​

Now, Taqiyya the Liar is hellbent on handing nuclear weapons to Iran. And all the while the current secretary of state insisted that deadly poisonous gas in Syria is the real danger.

Followup question: If Democrats would not fight Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons, will they go to war against Iran when Iranians have the bombs the Administration is handing to them? Answer: Obviously not. UN-loving, New World Order, types will never defend this country unilaterally for any reason as did Bush the Younger.

When ICBMs with nuclear warheads are heading this way, I’m praying that Democrats will have time to say “I was against the war before I was for it.”

There is one thing I know as sure as I know the sun will rise tomorrow —— that cluck in the White House will never defend this country diplomatically without the UN’s approval. In short: There is no reason to believe he will defend this country militarily against a Muslim or a Communist country.

Finally, my biggest fear is that John Kerry will be working as hard for this country as he worked for the North Vietnamese in Paris in 1971 that ended in this:

​

"None of us are going be content to do something that can't pass scrutiny," said Kerry, mentioning all the experts who will review a deal if it is reached. "Everybody is negotiating hard, that's what makes this difficult."

With clock ticking, Kerry says Iran deal still has 'difficult issues,' could 'go either way'
By Barbara Boland | July 5, 2015 | 12:49 pm

With clock ticking Kerry says Iran deal still has difficult issues could go either way WashingtonExaminer.com
​

Not as hard as getting on the last chopper out of Saigon.

What an embarrassing post. Bush has gone into a voluntary exile, as should the morons who still think he was right.

I hereby officially dedicate my 39,999th post to forcibly and open-handedly smacking you on the backside of your nappy lil' noggin'...

 

[TheOldSchool]

Remember how Bush the Younger was vilified for taking the war to the enemy in Iraq. To this day Democrats whine that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons even though every intelligence service in the world believed that Saddam did have them.

After Taqiyya the Liar took office he turned Bush’s victory into defeat. This has always been a problem for me: Do Democrats think the invasion of Iraq would have been justified if Saddam did have WMD? Answer: Apparently not.

Taqiyya, and his secretaries of state, took great pride in retreating from self-defense in the war that Islam declared. He pulled the troops out allowing ISIS to move in. Without blinking an eye he said pulling out was not his decision. I assume he does not want to take the blame for ISIS moving in:

​

And leave us not forget the ever-popular Arab Spring:

Arab Spring has stimulated terror, not democracy
Afshin Ellian Updated 10:24 am, Monday, June 23, 2014

Arab Spring has stimulated terror not democracy - SFGate​

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must have been sucking on a gin bottle when she totally misread the Arab Spring:

The United States must look past the violence and extremism that has erupted after the "Arab Spring" revolutions and boost support for the region's young democracies to forge long-term security, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday.

Clinton, seeking to reinforce the Obama administration's Middle East policy following a wave of anti-American violence and last month's deadly attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, said Washington cannot be deterred by "the violent acts of a small number of extremists."

World | Fri Oct 12, 2012 4:37pm EDT
Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers
WASHINGTON | By Andrew Quinn

Clinton says U.S. must embrace Arab Spring despite dangers Reuters​

Now, Taqiyya the Liar is hellbent on handing nuclear weapons to Iran. And all the while the current secretary of state insisted that deadly poisonous gas in Syria is the real danger.

Followup question: If Democrats would not fight Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons, will they go to war against Iran when Iranians have the bombs the Administration is handing to them? Answer: Obviously not. UN-loving, New World Order, types will never defend this country unilaterally for any reason as did Bush the Younger.

When ICBMs with nuclear warheads are heading this way, I’m praying that Democrats will have time to say “I was against the war before I was for it.”

There is one thing I know as sure as I know the sun will rise tomorrow —— that cluck in the White House will never defend this country diplomatically without the UN’s approval. In short: There is no reason to believe he will defend this country militarily against a Muslim or a Communist country.

Finally, my biggest fear is that John Kerry will be working as hard for this country as he worked for the North Vietnamese in Paris in 1971 that ended in this:

​

"None of us are going be content to do something that can't pass scrutiny," said Kerry, mentioning all the experts who will review a deal if it is reached. "Everybody is negotiating hard, that's what makes this difficult."

With clock ticking, Kerry says Iran deal still has 'difficult issues,' could 'go either way'
By Barbara Boland | July 5, 2015 | 12:49 pm

With clock ticking Kerry says Iran deal still has difficult issues could go either way WashingtonExaminer.com
​

Not as hard as getting on the last chopper out of Saigon.

What an embarrassing post. Bush has gone into a voluntary exile, as should the morons who still think he was right.

I hereby officially dedicate my 39,999th post to forcibly and open-handedly smacking you on the backside of your nappy lil' noggin'...

I hope your 40,000th post is about something less ghey.