Obama fails: North Korea attacks South Korea, Iran to aquire nuke

[bucs90]

History will see some future catastrophic military event as being rooted and caused by the outright embarrassment of a foreign policy that Barack Insane Obama has attempted.

Iran's president called him out as a political newcomer. Actually made fun of him, saying something about the sweat behind his ears as a newcomer or something. That SOB in Iran out-maneuvered the President of the United States, politically, to align with strong allies of ours- Brazil and Turkey- to buy enough time and create enough smoke and mirrors to finish his nuke. Israel will act on this. Obama looks like the foolish linebacker in a football game who bit on a reverse and is still looking for the ball. What a clown. What a joke. Did you liberal retards have no clue about the evil in this world when you elected him? Experience is necessary for a reason. Obama's soft stance made Turkey and Brazil have no fear of aligning with a dictator. And you think Venezuela had no influence over close neighbor Brazil's move?

And now, Hillary Clinton confirms today tha a South Korean vessel was sunk by a North Korean submarine torpedo. S. Korea is going to the UN Security Council with the incident. North Korea's Kim Jong Ill stated ANY sanctions or military response would be met with "all out war". He's toying with Obama. Sink a S. Korean ship, threaten all-out war for any retaliation. And what will Obama do? He'll give a speech of disapproval. The South Koreans will live in fear of whats next. Our troops on the N/S Korean border will be on high alert, but without presidential leadership or a mission statement. Kim Jong Ill is absolutely mocking our president. He fired a torpedo and sunk a ship of one of our strongest allies, and dares us to retaliate.

And now, this morning, on MSNBC's meet the press, PA D-Senate primary winner Sestak (spell check on name) admitted to the MSNBC host that the Obama administration offered him the job of Secretary of the Navy if he would agree not to run against Arlen Spector.

You must be joking. Obama, in an attempt to keep a Senator he could control politically, offered the job of Secretary of the Navy to a politican as a deal to not run against Spector. Given, Sestak (spell check) was in the Navy 31 years. But is Obama naming Naval secretary based on best person for the job..........or based on what politician he can most advantageously bribe with the job? Chicago politics at work now influencing the military in a time of war. Disgusting.


So.......Iran out-maneuver's Obama and aligns with allies to buy time. North Korea fires torpedo, sinks South Korean ship, threatens all-out war if Obama so much as requests sanctions- a triple-dog-dare apparantly. Then, it's revealed Obama offered a senate primary candidate the Secretary of the Navy job in exchange for that politician to not run against Arlen Spector.


How much lower can this country be dragged? We got 2.5 more years to find out.
You've got

 

[Mr Natural]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

 

[VaYank5150]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Why is this so hard for cons to understand?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama's foreign policy is the same as Bush's foreign policy.

 

[elvis]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

and the guy before the last guy.

 

[my2¢]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Why is this so hard for cons to understand?

Because it is their turn to blame America first.

 

[bucs90]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

 

[bucs90]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Why is this so hard for cons to understand?

Two reasons:

1- There have been more attacks and attempted attacks on US soil by Islamic jihadists in 1.5 years under Obama than there was in 8 years under Bush. Fact.

2- The one attack, 9-11, that Bush had was the direct result of Bill Clinton being more busy with BJ's than giving the order for the CIA to kill OBL, when the CIA literally had him in the crosshairs of a rifle.

 

[rightwinger]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

 

[elvis]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

as long as you count oklahoma city, wtc '93, etc, for clinton.

 

[bucs90]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

Bush didn't "allow" any attacks. They happened during his presidency, yes. If anyone "allowed" anything.......it would be Bill Clinton. Who literally told the CIA "Do not kill Bin Laden" when they had 2 chances to do it. In the crosshairs. Shot ready. Clinton: Don't take the shot. Why? It would ignite jihad, which he didn't want to deal with because he was getting BJ's and impeachment. Could Clinton forsee 9-11? No. So he also didn't cause 9-11, but he did literally "allow" Bin Laden to carry on with his activities, which led to 9-11.

This thread is veering towards a who prevented/caused what attack, etc, when the thread is about international dimplomacy and bribery of massive scales. Failed attempts to negotiate with Iran. Blatant mockery North Korea is making of our alliance with South Korea. And promising secretary of the Navy job to a politician in exchange for not running against Obama allie Arlen Spector. Shameful stuff.

 

[bucs90]

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

as long as you count oklahoma city, wtc '93, etc, for clinton.

WTC 93 NEVER HAPPENED. Just ignore it. You didn't see that.

See, if liberals acknowledge WTC 93, they can't blame Bush for Islamic terror.

Also, they can't ignore the tragic combination below:

1- Osama Bin Laden said in an international television interview (with NBC I believe) that his intention and dream was to topple the WTC. That was in like 1995 or something.

2- Clinton had two chances to allow the CIA to assasinate OBL, and said no for whatever reason.

Ooops.

 

[rightwinger]

Number of attacks or severity? Bush had 1. Obama has had Major Hassan, NYC, the Wichita military recruiter jihadist attacks, the Austin IRS building terrorist attack, the underwear bomber, etc. Also, our law enforcement people are much more prepared and trained for this stuff now. Thats why some attacks, like the Fort Dix and Dallas plots, were stopped.

Bush did have 9-11. Too bad Clinton chose BJ's over taking out Bin Laden when the CIA literally reported they had him, LITERALLY, in the cross-hairs of a rifle and Clinton wouldn't approve the order to take him out. That one backfired on us with 9-11.

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

Bush didn't "allow" any attacks. They happened during his presidency, yes. If anyone "allowed" anything.......it would be Bill Clinton. Who literally told the CIA "Do not kill Bin Laden" when they had 2 chances to do it. In the crosshairs. Shot ready. Clinton: Don't take the shot. Why? It would ignite jihad, which he didn't want to deal with because he was getting BJ's and impeachment. Could Clinton forsee 9-11? No. So he also didn't cause 9-11, but he did literally "allow" Bin Laden to carry on with his activities, which led to 9-11.

This thread is veering towards a who prevented/caused what attack, etc, when the thread is about international dimplomacy and bribery of massive scales. Failed attempts to negotiate with Iran. Blatant mockery North Korea is making of our alliance with South Korea. And promising secretary of the Navy job to a politician in exchange for not running against Obama allie Arlen Spector. Shameful stuff.

Sure, Bush didn't "allow" them much in the same way Obama "allowed" the Ft Hood attack

Spin much?

Bill Clinton came closer to killing bin Laden than Bush did. It was Bush who pulled back his troops at Tora Bora and allowed Bin Laden to escape

 

[rightwinger]

WTC 93 NEVER HAPPENED. Just ignore it. You didn't see that.

WTC 93 happened, we caught the perpetrators, tried and convicted them

How did Bush do with Osama Bin Laden?

Osama Bin Laden said in an international television interview (with NBC I believe) that his intention and dream was to topple the WTC. That was in like 1995 or something.

Link to the NBC interview?

Clinton had two chances to allow the CIA to assasinate OBL, and said no for whatever reason

Could I get a source on that other than a rightwing website?

 

[rightwinger]

bucs90...here is a link you can start with..

snopes.com: Clinton Administration and Terrorists

 

[elvis]

Didn't Bush allow four separate attacks on 9-11? That is what I counted

Did you forget the Anthrax attacks? Shoe Bomber? Fort Dix? Lackawanna 6?

What about the terrorist attacks on abortion clinics that were ignored by the Bush administration?

Bush didn't "allow" any attacks. They happened during his presidency, yes. If anyone "allowed" anything.......it would be Bill Clinton. Who literally told the CIA "Do not kill Bin Laden" when they had 2 chances to do it. In the crosshairs. Shot ready. Clinton: Don't take the shot. Why? It would ignite jihad, which he didn't want to deal with because he was getting BJ's and impeachment. Could Clinton forsee 9-11? No. So he also didn't cause 9-11, but he did literally "allow" Bin Laden to carry on with his activities, which led to 9-11.

This thread is veering towards a who prevented/caused what attack, etc, when the thread is about international dimplomacy and bribery of massive scales. Failed attempts to negotiate with Iran. Blatant mockery North Korea is making of our alliance with South Korea. And promising secretary of the Navy job to a politician in exchange for not running against Obama allie Arlen Spector. Shameful stuff.

Sure, Bush didn't "allow" them much in the same way Obama "allowed" the Ft Hood attack

Spin much?

Bill Clinton came closer to killing bin Laden than Bush did. It was Bush who pulled back his troops at Tora Bora and allowed Bin Laden to escape

so when clinton was offered bin laden and refused, that is better than Bush bin Laden to escape?

 

[bucs90]

Bush didn't "allow" any attacks. They happened during his presidency, yes. If anyone "allowed" anything.......it would be Bill Clinton. Who literally told the CIA "Do not kill Bin Laden" when they had 2 chances to do it. In the crosshairs. Shot ready. Clinton: Don't take the shot. Why? It would ignite jihad, which he didn't want to deal with because he was getting BJ's and impeachment. Could Clinton forsee 9-11? No. So he also didn't cause 9-11, but he did literally "allow" Bin Laden to carry on with his activities, which led to 9-11.

This thread is veering towards a who prevented/caused what attack, etc, when the thread is about international dimplomacy and bribery of massive scales. Failed attempts to negotiate with Iran. Blatant mockery North Korea is making of our alliance with South Korea. And promising secretary of the Navy job to a politician in exchange for not running against Obama allie Arlen Spector. Shameful stuff.

Sure, Bush didn't "allow" them much in the same way Obama "allowed" the Ft Hood attack

Spin much?

Bill Clinton came closer to killing bin Laden than Bush did. It was Bush who pulled back his troops at Tora Bora and allowed Bin Laden to escape

so when clinton was offered bin laden and refused, that is better than Bush bin Laden to escape?

Get out your pen and paper for a lesson:

- CIA advised they had Osama in their crosshairs. Ready to fire. Osama was unaware of his about to become room temperature status. Clinton said no. CIA left.

- Osama does 9-11. Bush sends troops after him. Osama knows we're coming. Bloody battles begin. Osama narrowly escapes during battle.

Those two scenarios are different. That lesson is free.

 

[LuckyDan]

WTC 93 NEVER HAPPENED. Just ignore it. You didn't see that.

WTC 93 happened, we caught the perpetrators, tried and convicted them

How did Bush do with Osama Bin Laden?

Osama Bin Laden said in an international television interview (with NBC I believe) that his intention and dream was to topple the WTC. That was in like 1995 or something.

Link to the NBC interview?

Clinton had two chances to allow the CIA to assasinate OBL, and said no for whatever reason

Could I get a source on that other than a rightwing website?

It helped that the FBI had an informant and that the guy who rented the Ryder truck went back for his deposit. OBL's boys weren't quite that stupid.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

How could so many believe that an inexperienced & failed "Community Organizer" would be a good leader? The answer is massive Liberal MSM propaganda. They have failed at everything so far. They just haven't done anything right. The loyal Hopey Changeys promised that their Messiah would part the seas and save the Universe. Instead he has actually made things worse. Things are getting much worse in Korea & Iran especially. This Administration is clueless. These are the same dumbos who routinely viciously attacked the previous administration on these issues. But hey on the bright side,Hillary Clinton is over in China right now handing out teddy bears and kissing their A*ses. Everything they viciously criticized the previous administration for,they have actually made worse. How sad. Make 2010 count people.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So far he's got a better record than the last guy at preventing attacks on US soil.

And what happens in Korea is Korea's problem.

Due to sheer luck, nothing that Obama has done.