Mac1958
Diamond Member
.
Wait, let me add one:
Invade, destroy and occupy countries that annoy you (as long as they can't fight back). This is our planet and everyone must do things our way. Fill American body bags, destroy American military lives and families, waste trillions. Then tell us how you support the troops.
No charge for that one.
.
That does explain Libya, doesn't it.
By the way, thanks for caring enough about the question to provide a well reasoned and thoughtful answer.
I disagreed with Obama's approach to Libya. Since I have no sheep-like allegiance to either ridiculous party, I'm more than happy to criticize Obama when I disagree with him, which is often. If it turns out that we're attempting some kind of nation-building in Libya (especially if our troops in are in any kind of danger whatsoever - I actually DO care about them), no one will be louder in disagreement than me.
Also, if the phrases "Invade, destroy and occupy countries that annoy you (as long as they can't fight back). This is our planet and everyone must do things our way. Fill American body bags, destroy American military lives and families, waste trillions. Then tell us how you support the troops" mean nothing to you, if that's all okay with you, then we'll just have to disagree. There's plenty in there that I would think most people would consider a negative.
To your point, while I disagreed with Obama's sticking our nose into Libya's business, I don't recall us invading, occupying and blowing the crap out of that country. Nor do I remember seeing American body bags or multi-hundred billion dollar price tags as a result of Obama's actions. The next time I'm in an airport - which will actually be in about 4 hours - and I see a soldier with artificial legs being pushed in his wheelchair down the corridor by his young son, I won't be wondering if that happened in Libya.
Since you appear to be equating Libya with Iraq & Afghanistan, perhaps you can provide contrary evidence. My guess is that you can't.
.
Last edited: