Obama starts his 4th war, for a total of SIX!

[Sallow]

You could call the American Left intellectually dishonest for supporting Obama but calling Bush a war criminal for the same actions, but dishonest is more accurate

President Obama initated a conflict unilaterally ordering American ground troops to invade and conquer another country, when, exactly?

 

[Si modo]

You could call the American Left intellectually dishonest for supporting Obama but calling Bush a war criminal for the same actions, but dishonest is more accurate

President Obama initated a conflict unilaterally ordering American ground troops to invade and conquer another country, when, exactly?

Unilateral? I guess you missed the congressional vote.

 

[xsited1]

Obama starts his 4th war, for a total of SIX!

Who would Obama bomb? Looks like everyone.

Maybe we should have a thread where everyone predicts who Obama is going to bomb next. I predict the next country to be bombed will be Texas.

 

[rightwinger]

so, where in the constitution does it give the executive branch the authority to be in 6 wars with only 1/3 of the wars being congress approved? Am I missing something?

Welcome to the 21st century war on terrorism. You got to hit them where they are. Didn't you hear Bushs speech after 9-11? The rightwing loved it when it was Republicans doing it

so whats the limit then?

Is there a limit on where terrorists hide?


We know where they weren't hiding.........Iraq

 

[Sallow]

You could call the American Left intellectually dishonest for supporting Obama but calling Bush a war criminal for the same actions, but dishonest is more accurate

President Obama initated a conflict unilaterally ordering American ground troops to invade and conquer another country, when, exactly?

Unilateral? I guess you missed the congressional vote.

Where and when?

Simple enough.

 

[Moonglow]

Obama is not a leftists, he is a centrists~duh!

 

[Moonglow]

Obama starts his 4th war, for a total of SIX!

Who would Obama bomb? Looks like everyone.

Maybe we should have a thread where everyone predicts who Obama is going to bomb next. I predict the next country to be bombed will be Texas.

Reagan would have loved Obama. A man after his own heart when it comes to bombing countries.

 

[kiwiman127]

I guess I'm having a rough time understanding why anyone who remembers 9/11 or Blackhawk Down would be upset about what Obama is doing regarding the drone attacks on terrorist.
I don't like Obama's fiscal policies or the fact the guy had a "mandate" firmly attached to his health care plan, but I sure the hell support his efforts to defeat terrorism worldwide.
Obama is going covert and with the excellent intelligence the US got when bin Laden was killed, our intelligence community can go after the top leadership of al Qaeda with more precision and can do it in a more cost effective manner. No troops have been lost in these covert attacks, plus being as we have a huge financial debt, it's also more cost effective. What's there not to like?
I always supported our invasion of Afghanistan but I got pissed when the US diverted much of it's intelligence and assets to invade Iraq. Afghanistan was all about terrorism, Iraq wasn't.
I don't want anymore terroristic attacks on the UK, Spain and Number 1, I don't want anymore attacks on the US. Covert attacks are helping to preserve America's security.
Finally Libya. We have no business being involved, I see it as a European problem, it's in their backyard and they are fully capable to handle the problem themselves.

 

[FA_Q2]

Ok... why was it OK when Bush went after Al Quaida, but it's not when Obama does it? Why do you love terrorists? I don't get it.

I can ask the same question of you? Why is it OK when Obama bombs people but when Bush bombed other countries you the left called it treason. You democrats have been slamming bush for years about his policies and screaming whenever he used any force. Now, when the grate Obama does it, everything is suddenly kosher. That is bullshit.
And then there is Libya. What terrorist threat did Libya pose to the US? Double standard bullshit. I support Obama's decision to take out terrorists just like I support Bushes. I cannot support Obama getting involved in conflicts that have no bearing on that goal though and hitting countries that contain no threat to the US just like I do not support Bushes bugling in Iraq. The left hacks here seem to have an issue with consistency though. I believe that was the original point in the OP specifically pointed out that the anti-war left was still supporting him. That support is there even after he act EXACTLY LIKE BUSH.

Obama's not conquering other countries. Even one that did nothing to us.

Both Afghanistan and Iraq were total clusterfucks.

And nothing Obama's done in this regard comes close.

So, that is a yes. It is OK for Obama but not for republicans.

Iraq, I agreed on. It says that quite clearly in my last post. Afghanistan was a necessity though and for those of you that do not see that you are hopelessly lost. The war was not fought properly, mainly as a function of Iraq, but it was a necessity. The interesting thing is that the left started with a mantra of that was the right place to be and supported that war. Now they claim that it should have never happened and it was, of course, all bushes fault.
Obama sure is bombing countries that did nothing to us. Libya anyone!?!?

 

[Si modo]

President Obama initated a conflict unilaterally ordering American ground troops to invade and conquer another country, when, exactly?

Unilateral? I guess you missed the congressional vote.

Where and when?

Simple enough.

You said Bush did it unilaterally. He didn't.
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You could call the American Left intellectually dishonest for supporting Obama but calling Bush a war criminal for the same actions, but dishonest is more accurate

President Obama initated a conflict unilaterally ordering American ground troops to invade and conquer another country, when, exactly?

When he became POTUS on Jan 21, 2009, he got to wear the Big Boy pants, Dear.

 

[rdean]

how is it six? I must have missed one or two there.

First you ignore what Republicans have said and done previously, then you say, "I hate Obama". Then you take the opposite of your previous position. Then you double it. Then that becomes the "official" Republican Position against anything Obama.

SOP!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama bombs, they're just different

 

[Toome]

And here I thought I knew the definition of war. Silly me.

 

[FireFly]

4 are police actions....war entails boots on the ground...Yugoslavia, the Balkans etc are redundant...Iraq and Afghanistan are the stupidest wars, and the worst run wars ever, thanks to W. Booosh, the stupidest President ever, and are legacies of Raygun, who started the stupidest, most dangerous political movement ever. Death to Voodoo, and thanks for the SECOND Pub Great Depression. Greedy bastids and morons.

WTF! So since Japan only bombed Pear Harbor but had no boots on the ground, they were not really at war with US? Then when we dropped a couple of Nukes on Japan without boots on the ground, we were not at war with them?

Al Qaeda hit us from the air on 9/11, so are we at war with them?

 

[Momanohedhunter]

US Drones just dropped some bombs on somalia...

And the anti-war left still loves him.

U.S. drone targets two leaders of Somali group allied with al-Qaeda - The Washington Post

Not wars now, kinetic military actions.

 

[The Gadfly]

Geez, the hypocrisy level in here is ridiculous...on BOTH sides. Those of you on the right who said "Back your Commander-in Chief"....that was good advice, and it applies now as well. I don't especially care for Obama, but as of today he happens to be the man behind the desk where the buck stops. He has access to intel the rest of us don't, so let the man do his job (he has no doubt already found that's harder to do, than being a critic). Those of you on the Left, you are no better. What was a "war crime" when Bush did it, is now "fighting terrorism" when your guy does it. I see you don't like the constant carping you dished out; hopefully you've learned something. Your side is in charge-you own it. Deal with it.

There is no limit and no closed season on terrorists....and there should not be. When and where they stick their heads up, we kill them, and I'm fine with that, no matter WHO is giving the orders.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Geez, the hypocrisy level in here is ridiculous...on BOTH sides. Those of you on the right who said "Back your Commander-in Chief"....that was good advice, and it applies now as well. I don't especially care for Obama, but as of today he happens to be the man behind the desk where the buck stops. He has access to intel the rest of us don't, so let the man do his job (he has no doubt already found that's harder to do, than being a critic). Those of you on the Left, you are no better. What was a "war crime" when Bush did it, is now "fighting terrorism" when your guy does it. I see you don't like the constant carping you dished out; hopefully you've learned something. Your side is in charge-you own it. Deal with it.

There is no limit and no closed season on terrorists....and there should not be. When and where they stick their heads up, we kill them, and I'm fine with that, no matter WHO is giving the orders.

Ahhhhh but Mom, it's so much darn fun to use the Left's own words against them!

 

[FA_Q2]

Geez, the hypocrisy level in here is ridiculous...on BOTH sides. Those of you on the right who said "Back your Commander-in Chief"....that was good advice, and it applies now as well. I don't especially care for Obama, but as of today he happens to be the man behind the desk where the buck stops. He has access to intel the rest of us don't, so let the man do his job (he has no doubt already found that's harder to do, than being a critic). Those of you on the Left, you are no better. What was a "war crime" when Bush did it, is now "fighting terrorism" when your guy does it. I see you don't like the constant carping you dished out; hopefully you've learned something. Your side is in charge-you own it. Deal with it.

There is no limit and no closed season on terrorists....and there should not be. When and where they stick their heads up, we kill them, and I'm fine with that, no matter WHO is giving the orders.

I agree with all except the bold part. It is a patriotic duty to stand up and be heard and one of the BIGGEST issues that was destructive to our country during the Bush years was to try and scilence opposition with that type of rhetoric. This country was founded on free speech and there is no one to stop wonton warmongering if no one speaks up about it.

 

[The Gadfly]

Geez, the hypocrisy level in here is ridiculous...on BOTH sides. Those of you on the right who said "Back your Commander-in Chief"....that was good advice, and it applies now as well. I don't especially care for Obama, but as of today he happens to be the man behind the desk where the buck stops. He has access to intel the rest of us don't, so let the man do his job (he has no doubt already found that's harder to do, than being a critic). Those of you on the Left, you are no better. What was a "war crime" when Bush did it, is now "fighting terrorism" when your guy does it. I see you don't like the constant carping you dished out; hopefully you've learned something. Your side is in charge-you own it. Deal with it.

There is no limit and no closed season on terrorists....and there should not be. When and where they stick their heads up, we kill them, and I'm fine with that, no matter WHO is giving the orders.

Ahhhhh but Mom, it's so much darn fun to use the Left's own words against them!

It is, but that's no reason to do what some of them did, and hope for America's military policies to fail, because we don't like the current president. I want to win next year too, but not by undermining our foreign policy. On that front, we need to put country before politics.