Obama's anti-terrorism policy is "what exactly"?

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

 

[Antiderivative]

Dems have proven time and time again that they love warmongering and hate civil liberties.

You are right, it is a first class example of hypocrisy.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Dems have proven time and time again that they love warmongering and hate civil liberties.

You are right, it is a first class example of hypocrisy.

Thank you for helping me make my point.

 

[Avorysuds]

Obama 2012! War forever!

 

[NYcarbineer]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye.

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

Check up on your own hypocrisy.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye.

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

Check up on your own hypocrisy.

care to enlighten me? You might as well since your ignoring the substance.

Ps. I edited my post for the reading comprehension impaired. Hope that cleared it up for ya

 

[Mr. Shaman]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"

Sorry, Grandfeathers....ya' don't get to create "quotes" (like FAUX Noise creates "news"), without an article that references those "quotes"....or, their source.

As-far-as "cowboy diplomacy" goes.....what's the difference between a War of Choice, like Iraq.....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPJCPcYCupY]YouTube - ‪WMD LIES - Bush Cheney Rumsfeld - THE ULTIMATE CLIP (Edited)‬‏[/ame]

.....and, our glorious "cowboy"-days.....

....South-O'-The-Border????

​

 

[Sallow]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

This argument is so over used. It's like your "damn I don't have an answer that flies" answer.

Care to try again? Isn't murder murder no matter what country your from? What about their rights? Only Iraq's deserved the rights you guys cried about? Your hypocrisy bleeds from your post.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

This argument is so over used. It's like your "damn I don't have an answer that flies" answer.

Care to try again? Isn't murder murder no matter what country your from? What about their rights? Only Iraq's deserved the rights you guys cried about? Your hypocrisy bleeds from your post.

I guess that was just a "hit and run" post you made. Figures

Riddle me this batman.... How does bombing Lybia for humanitarian reasons help the war on terror?

 

[Sallow]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

This argument is so over used. It's like your "damn I don't have an answer that flies" answer.

Care to try again? Isn't murder murder no matter what country your from? What about their rights? Only Iraq's deserved the rights you guys cried about? Your hypocrisy bleeds from your post.

No I don't "care to try again". Because that's ridiculous.

The number one reason we are getting terrorism from the middle east is because of the number of people we are directly responsible for killing there. That extends further back then the invasion and conquering of Iraq. Iraq's been America's whipping boy for quite some time..but people all over the Middle East have been dying due to America's involvement in the area..and there have been some pretty murderous regimes set up in the Middle East that were supported by the United States. Iran under the Shah comes to mind.

You posting this ridiculous thread..not because you care..because it's obvious you don't.

You are posting it to troll.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

This argument is so over used. It's like your "damn I don't have an answer that flies" answer.

Care to try again? Isn't murder murder no matter what country your from? What about their rights? Only Iraq's deserved the rights you guys cried about? Your hypocrisy bleeds from your post.

No I don't "care to try again". Because that's ridiculous.

The number one reason we are getting terrorism from the middle east is because of the number of people we are directly responsible for killing there. That extends further back then the invasion and conquering of Iraq. Iraq's been America's whipping boy for quite some time..but people all over the Middle East have been dying due to America's involvement in the area..and there have been some pretty murderous regimes set up in the Middle East that were supported by the United States. Iran under the Shah comes to mind.

You posting this ridiculous thread..not because you care..because it's obvious you don't.

You are posting it to troll.

I am posting it because its fact. Obama is Doing the same thing only on a broader scale that Bush was vilified for yet you guys say nothing. That is not trolling it is fact and I would like to know why? Why is it swept under the rug now? Of course I wasnt here when Bush was in office but I bet this board was on fire with "Bush is a war monger and a killer" threads from the left. Yet now I never see any such threads from the left because Obama is potus?

 

[Sallow]

This argument is so over used. It's like your "damn I don't have an answer that flies" answer.

Care to try again? Isn't murder murder no matter what country your from? What about their rights? Only Iraq's deserved the rights you guys cried about? Your hypocrisy bleeds from your post.

No I don't "care to try again". Because that's ridiculous.

The number one reason we are getting terrorism from the middle east is because of the number of people we are directly responsible for killing there. That extends further back then the invasion and conquering of Iraq. Iraq's been America's whipping boy for quite some time..but people all over the Middle East have been dying due to America's involvement in the area..and there have been some pretty murderous regimes set up in the Middle East that were supported by the United States. Iran under the Shah comes to mind.

You posting this ridiculous thread..not because you care..because it's obvious you don't.

You are posting it to troll.

I am posting it because its fact. Obama is Doing the same thing only on a broader scale that Bush was vilified for yet you guys say nothing. That is not trolling it is fact and I would like to know why? Why is it swept under the rug now? Of course I wasnt here when Bush was in office but I bet this board was on fire with "Bush is a war monger and a killer" threads from the left. Yet now I never see any such threads from the left because Obama is potus?

What fact?

Your world is devoid of facts.

Obama is doing the same thing on a broader scale? What are you insane?

 

[Robert]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

And Libya, Syria and Yemen do? .....Really?

 

[Si modo]

Blame it on Bush.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

No I don't "care to try again". Because that's ridiculous.

The number one reason we are getting terrorism from the middle east is because of the number of people we are directly responsible for killing there. That extends further back then the invasion and conquering of Iraq. Iraq's been America's whipping boy for quite some time..but people all over the Middle East have been dying due to America's involvement in the area..and there have been some pretty murderous regimes set up in the Middle East that were supported by the United States. Iran under the Shah comes to mind.

You posting this ridiculous thread..not because you care..because it's obvious you don't.

You are posting it to troll.

I am posting it because its fact. Obama is Doing the same thing only on a broader scale that Bush was vilified for yet you guys say nothing. That is not trolling it is fact and I would like to know why? Why is it swept under the rug now? Of course I wasnt here when Bush was in office but I bet this board was on fire with "Bush is a war monger and a killer" threads from the left. Yet now I never see any such threads from the left because Obama is potus?

What fact?

Your world is devoid of facts.

Obama is doing the same thing on a broader scale? What are you insane?

No, I can count the countries were in and it is certainly broader that what bush was in. How is that not a fact? You guys cried on and on about bush getting us into conflicts in 2 countries. Last time I checked we were well beyond that now.

Now let me bring this back to where we started. Why was it a crime for Bush to prosecute the war the way he did yet Obama does the same thing and its ok? Or are you just going to deflect and attempt to change the subject again?

 

[Sallow]

When Bush either detained or killed suspected terrorists our friends on the left decried these actions calling them "inhumane or barbaric". The policies were often called "cowboy diplomacy"
However it seems the cat now has a firm grip on our friends tongues. It seems rather than give the terrorists the "rightful trials" they deserve (lefts former point of view) now Obama would just rather kill them all without blinking an eye. (The rights point of view all along)

What gives with this hypocrisy? If Bush had bombed all these "innocent till proven guilty" (lefts montra) terrorists I can't even imagine the liberal outcry.

Now our commanders in the field don't even know what to do with the ones they catch because the policy is so incoherent and as a result many are released.

White House's New Anti-Terror Strategy: Kill the Suspects? - FoxNews.com

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

And Libya, Syria and Yemen do? .....Really?

How many American troops on the ground are in those countries..right now?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

How did killing people in Iraq help the "War on Terrorism"?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

And Libya, Syria and Yemen do? .....Really?

How many American troops on the ground are in those countries..right now?

Killing Muslims is killing Muslims is it not? Your contention was that it perpetuates the problem when we kill them.

 

[Sallow]

I am posting it because its fact. Obama is Doing the same thing only on a broader scale that Bush was vilified for yet you guys say nothing. That is not trolling it is fact and I would like to know why? Why is it swept under the rug now? Of course I wasnt here when Bush was in office but I bet this board was on fire with "Bush is a war monger and a killer" threads from the left. Yet now I never see any such threads from the left because Obama is potus?

What fact?

Your world is devoid of facts.

Obama is doing the same thing on a broader scale? What are you insane?

No, I can count the countries were in and it is certainly broader that what bush was in. How is that not a fact? You guys cried on and on about bush getting us into conflicts in 2 countries. Last time I checked we were well beyond that now.

Now let me bring this back to where we started. Why was it a crime for Bush to prosecute the war the way he did yet Obama does the same thing and its ok? Or are you just going to deflect and attempt to change the subject again?

Why is the invasion and conquering of Iraq a crime? Because Iraq never attacked the US mainland. It had no involvement in terrorist activities against the United States. If anything, Saddam Hussien was a US puppet that overplayed his hand by involving the Soviets. That was no justification for invading Iraq..killing well over 200,000 Iraqis, disbanding their military, selling off their industry, smashing their infrastructure and installing another government.

There's no "deflection" here. George W. Bush's administration essentially promised a quick and easy military action in Iraq which was to be paid for by Iraqi oil. They weren't talking about nation building, They weren't talking about a permanent American base. They weren't talking about a decade or so long war. And the justification was weapons of mass destruction and support for terrorism. They were utterly wrong on all counts.

And nothing President Obama's done since getting into office even remotely compares to anything President Bush did in size and scope.

Absolutely nothing.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What fact?

Your world is devoid of facts.

Obama is doing the same thing on a broader scale? What are you insane?

No, I can count the countries were in and it is certainly broader that what bush was in. How is that not a fact? You guys cried on and on about bush getting us into conflicts in 2 countries. Last time I checked we were well beyond that now.

Now let me bring this back to where we started. Why was it a crime for Bush to prosecute the war the way he did yet Obama does the same thing and its ok? Or are you just going to deflect and attempt to change the subject again?

Why is the invasion and conquering of Iraq a crime? Because Iraq never attacked the US mainland. It had no involvement in terrorist activities against the United States. If anything, Saddam Hussien was a US puppet that overplayed his hand by involving the Soviets. That was no justification for invading Iraq..killing well over 200,000 Iraqis, disbanding their military, selling off their industry, smashing their infrastructure and installing another government.

There's no "deflection" here. George W. Bush's administration essentially promised a quick and easy military action in Iraq which was to be paid for by Iraqi oil. They weren't talking about nation building, They weren't talking about a permanent American base. They weren't talking about a decade or so long war. And the justification was weapons of mass destruction and support for terrorism. They were utterly wrong on all counts.

And nothing President Obama's done since getting into office even remotely compares to anything President Bush did in size and scope.

Absolutely nothing.

Did you miss the part where Iraq broke every cease fire resolution they agreed to? Essentially putting our resolve and integrity on the line? Or how bout all the democrats that had the same evidence as republicans that led to congress approving the invasion?

Hind sight is 20/20
hypocrisy is priceless