Lt. Army Colonel: "Obama Tried To Romance Putin And He Got Date-Raped"

[eagle1462010]

That is what dictators do............suppress anyone who disagrees with them. So yes, he kept it under control by killing all who dared to challenge his power. That hasn't changed throughout the history of mankind. People die in Wars...........and your constant saying of Bush Lied people died doesn't change the fact that your side were on board with the Rhetoric of Saddam before Bush ever took one day in office.

Point is, no one was willing to send troops to die to free the IRaqi people if they weren't willing to free themselves.
That's why Bush lied about WMD's and links to Al Qaeda. Bush Lied. People Died.

You recanted on that somewhat already, even though it is wishy washy at best. You know your hero's Abetted in the talking points that led to a War in Iraq. No matter what slogan you use that will never change.

what Clinton didn't do was send in four divisions and result in 4500 people being killed. Bush Lied. People Died.

To the point get in and get out never works.............how so........you go in.........take some of them out and then withdraw and not fight a war of insurgency on THEIR TERMS.............We never needed to Nation build.........we only needed to kill the enemy and then leave.................That is why we are still there, and that is why if we leave they will fall...

So you do that, someone else takes power that is just as bad. Or worse. As bad as Saddam was, he wasn't crazy like ISIL is. Bush Lied. People Died.

Clinton was not in office after 9/11..............were 3000 of our people had been killed.

 

[whitehall]

Found on the bathroom wall in the Kremlin "call Hussein to pull that train".

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Eagl 10458175

The Commander N Chief does pull the trigger, but the Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board. When they found out it wasn't politically correct they jumped ship and made up excuses for their support. Nothing more and nothing less.

Your point that, "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is narrowly convoluted by a certain reality that there were two Bush public projections on Iraq policy being floated during the run up to the invasion of Iraq. There was tough guy Decider Bush coming down hard on Saddam Hussein and appearing quite eager to take the nation to what he thought would be a quick and popular war to take Saddam down even before getting Bin Ladin. This is the Cheney/Bush persona.

On the other hand there was the 'peacemaker' Bush seeking to avoid war through the UNSC with Colin Powell and all that. We know now what was suspected at the time that peacemaker Bush went down this route primarily so Tony Blair could his Parliament to allow Blair to ride shotgun on the US invasion of Iraq. This is the Blair/Bush persona.

Cheney/Bush got all the hoopla in the pro-war main stream media of course. But Blair/Bush was quite active in the background.

I say your point i "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is convoluted Eagle1 because Dens and Clinton's and myself included was on board with the Blair/Bush persona.

We preferred that UN inspections were given a full opportunity to disarm Iraq peacefully first and deal with regime change later, regime change not by full blown invasion but by supporting Iraqis who would show a desire to do it.

It is a misnomer to argue that Dems were on board with Cheney/Bush because they quite frankly we're not.

 

[JoeB131]

Which is like Libya right.............

Which is like Obama demanding Egypt allow the Muslim brotherhood in the political process.

How stable is Libya now...............How did that go........

Saddam was called the Butcher for what reason..................................It sure as hell wasn't because he worked at a meat market.............To say he isn't in the same catagory as ISIS and ISIL isn't correct.

ISIS was already brewing because of the war in Syria as well. Just under different names............As half the population of Syria has been displaced.

And again, why is any of this our problem?

I think Obama erred in supporting the rebellion against Khadafy, for what that is worth. But Khadafy and Mubarek were probably going down, regardless.

 

[eagle1462010]

Eagl 10458175

The Commander N Chief does pull the trigger, but the Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board. When they found out it wasn't politically correct they jumped ship and made up excuses for their support. Nothing more and nothing less.

Your point that, "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is narrowly convoluted by a certain reality that there were two Bush public projections on Iraq policy being floated during the run up to the invasion of Iraq. There was tough guy Decider Bush coming down hard on Saddam Hussein and appearing quite eager to take the nation to what he thought would be a quick and popular war to take Saddam down even before getting Bin Ladin. This is the Cheney/Bush persona.

On the other hand there was the 'peacemaker' Bush seeking to avoid war through the UNSC with Colin Powell and all that. We know now what was suspected at the time that peacemaker Bush went down this route primarily so Tony Blair could his Parliament to allow Blair to ride shotgun on the US invasion of Iraq. This is the Blair/Bush persona.

Cheney/Bush got all the hoopla in the pro-war main stream media of course. But Blair/Bush was quite active in the background.

I say your point i "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is convoluted Eagle1 because Dens and Clinton's and myself included was on board with the Blair/Bush persona.

We preferred that UN inspections were given a full opportunity to disarm Iraq peacefully first and deal with regime change later, regime change not by full blown invasion but by supporting Iraqis who would show a desire to do it.

It is a misnomer to argue that Dems were on board with Cheney/Bush because they quite frankly we're not.

My point was explained in the video.....Showing prominent Dems including Clinton stating that Saddam was a threat with WMD's. That was going on before 9/11 ever happened and until after we went into Iraq. Bush pulled the trigger, and there is no doubt on that, but the Dems helped pack the barrel to help prime the musket to fire.

Whether you agreed or not is not in question. Hell I didn't agree with the Nation building process, as I knew we would get stuck there just because it is the middle east. That doesn't change the fact that your side was saying the same damn thing leading up the the War. Why was the Clinton Administration reporting the same things Bush was doing before any of this.............................

He was saying back then via his intel that they were building WMD's during the time of No Fly Zones...........

So please spare me that this was ALL BUSH...............

 

[eagle1462010]

Which is like Libya right.............

Which is like Obama demanding Egypt allow the Muslim brotherhood in the political process.

How stable is Libya now...............How did that go........

Saddam was called the Butcher for what reason..................................It sure as hell wasn't because he worked at a meat market.............To say he isn't in the same catagory as ISIS and ISIL isn't correct.

ISIS was already brewing because of the war in Syria as well. Just under different names............As half the population of Syria has been displaced.

And again, why is any of this our problem?

I think Obama erred in supporting the rebellion against Khadafy, for what that is worth. But Khadafy and Mubarek were probably going down, regardless.

AKA are you throwing Obama under the bus for his involvement then....................... or erred.............

 

[eagle1462010]

Eagl 10458175

The Commander N Chief does pull the trigger, but the Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board. When they found out it wasn't politically correct they jumped ship and made up excuses for their support. Nothing more and nothing less.

Your point that, "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is narrowly convoluted by a certain reality that there were two Bush public projections on Iraq policy being floated during the run up to the invasion of Iraq. There was tough guy Decider Bush coming down hard on Saddam Hussein and appearing quite eager to take the nation to what he thought would be a quick and popular war to take Saddam down even before getting Bin Ladin. This is the Cheney/Bush persona.

On the other hand there was the 'peacemaker' Bush seeking to avoid war through the UNSC with Colin Powell and all that. We know now what was suspected at the time that peacemaker Bush went down this route primarily so Tony Blair could his Parliament to allow Blair to ride shotgun on the US invasion of Iraq. This is the Blair/Bush persona.

Cheney/Bush got all the hoopla in the pro-war main stream media of course. But Blair/Bush was quite active in the background.

I say your point i "Dems and Clintons were most definitely on board" is convoluted Eagle1 because Dens and Clinton's and myself included was on board with the Blair/Bush persona.

We preferred that UN inspections were given a full opportunity to disarm Iraq peacefully first and deal with regime change later, regime change not by full blown invasion but by supporting Iraqis who would show a desire to do it.

It is a misnomer to argue that Dems were on board with Cheney/Bush because they quite frankly we're not.

Trip down memory lane

 

[whutTHEYsay]

eagl 10458914

We know they destroyed what was agreed to. But there are those who believe Syria didn't give full disclosure.

There will always be those who believe Syria will never give full disclosure.

So do you believe getting the 1300 tons of actual deadly agents destroyed was in the middle of a civil war a good thing or a bad thing or meaningless because of a late disclosure by the Syrians that is still being checked out.

Syria did join the CW convention and that is a big deal.

You must recall that prior to the redline drawn by Obama and the threat iof US strikes, Assad and Putin would not officially acknowledge that CW existed in Syria at all. Putin flipped his position in a cave to Obama's long time requests that Putin work with the west and US to get the threat of CW out of that raging civil war.


And you find a little something to poop on the massive progress made last year of unprecedented CW elimination in the midst of a civil war.

 

[eagle1462010]

eagl 10458914

We know they destroyed what was agreed to. But there are those who believe Syria didn't give full disclosure.

There will always be those who believe Syria will never give full disclosure.

So do you believe getting the 1300 tons of actual deadly agents destroyed was in the middle of a civil war a good thing or a bad thing or meaningless because of a late disclosure by the Syrians that is still being checked out.

Syria did join the CW convention and that is a big deal.

You must recall that prior to the redline drawn by Obama and the threat iof US strikes, Assad and Putin would not officially acknowledge that CW existed in Syria at all. Putin flipped his position in a cave to Obama's long time requests that Putin work with the west and US to get the threat of CW out of that raging civil war.


And you find a little something to poop on the massive progress made last year of unprecedented CW elimination in the midst of a civil war.

Back when this was going on I said that is the best deal we could have gotten out of it. Getting rid of those agents was a good thing.

I suggested the same before the deal even happened right here on this board.

 

[eagle1462010]

Have you taken that trip down memory lane with Clinton...................

He still snubbed or noses after the strikes by Clinton to DESTROY WMD'S..........It wasn't until Bush ordered troops into the region that Saddam was finally willing to allow more inspections that he thwarted since Clinton even after the strikes.

 

[eagle1462010]

Clinton felt so strongly that Iraq had WMD's that he attacked Iraq long before Bush ever took office.

 

[The Rabbi]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

 

[The Rabbi]

It's called "white privilege." Google is sometime.

What on earth related to white privilege says today's whites are responsible for slavery?

You making shit up again Rabbi?

Not responsible, numbskull. But beneficiaries of it and thereofre responsible for providing reparations.

Please try to keep up Rabbi

I challenged the claim that liberals say today's whites are responsible for slavery and you start babbling about beneficiaries.

Can't stay on topic can you

You issued a straw man fallacy and got called on it.
Tough luck.

I issued no fallacy at all. I challenged the statement that liberals say today's whites are responsible for slavery

Do you even know what a Strawman fallacy is or are you just mimicking what other posters say?

Please post which conservatives have claimed liberals say that.

 

[eagle1462010]

Obama 8217 s Blurry Red Line

 

[Discombobulated]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

 

[eagle1462010]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

He is concerned with his economy and the ruble. But he is willing to take the hit in order to keep Crimea.........His designs on the Ukraine are temporarily thwarted.

Had the international community not taken action he would have probably moved in and taken the Ukraine by force. He tested the waters to see the resolve of the west against him. They called and now it is his move.

Time will tell. He will still support the rebels in the Ukraine whether or not his forces take part in any future battles though.

 

[The Rabbi]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

He is concerned with his economy and the ruble. But he is willing to take the hit in order to keep Crimea.........His designs on the Ukraine are temporarily thwarted.

Had the international community not taken action he would have probably moved in and taken the Ukraine by force. He tested the waters to see the resolve of the west against him. They called and now it is his move.

Time will tell. He will still support the rebels in the Ukraine whether or not his forces take part in any future battles though.

The West cannot afford to destablize Russia. Putin knows that. He might be replaced by someone worse. He will bide his time. The sanctions hurt western countries as well. Eventually the move will be made to remvoe them, either overtly or covertly. The French and Germans have a long history of trading with the enemy.

 

[eagle1462010]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

He is concerned with his economy and the ruble. But he is willing to take the hit in order to keep Crimea.........His designs on the Ukraine are temporarily thwarted.

Had the international community not taken action he would have probably moved in and taken the Ukraine by force. He tested the waters to see the resolve of the west against him. They called and now it is his move.

Time will tell. He will still support the rebels in the Ukraine whether or not his forces take part in any future battles though.

The West cannot afford to destablize Russia. Putin knows that. He might be replaced by someone worse. He will bide his time. The sanctions hurt western countries as well. Eventually the move will be made to remvoe them, either overtly or covertly. The French and Germans have a long history of trading with the enemy.

I agree as the EU needs the oil from the pipelines from Russia..............It will not last, but goes on for now. OPEC will not keep it up either.............It's only a matter of time.

In the end, he will keep Crimea..............and he will continue to support the rebels in the Ukraine.

 

[Discombobulated]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

He is concerned with his economy and the ruble. But he is willing to take the hit in order to keep Crimea.........His designs on the Ukraine are temporarily thwarted.

Had the international community not taken action he would have probably moved in and taken the Ukraine by force. He tested the waters to see the resolve of the west against him. They called and now it is his move.

Time will tell. He will still support the rebels in the Ukraine whether or not his forces take part in any future battles though.

Tested our resolve......resolve to do what? Short of committing ground forces to drive the Russians out of the eastern Ukraine what do you imagine would prompt the Russians to alter their policy?

 

[eagle1462010]

So the current economic collapse in Russia is proof that Obama got his ass handed to him by Putin.

Brilliant.

When is Putin's withdrawal date from Crimea?

Putin isn't going to change his policy when the Republicans are in the White House. He plans for the future, not just the next election, Putin takes the long view and isn't too concerned about the price of oil either. He has the Crimea now and there's really nothing anyone can do about it; five years from now you'll be asking when Putin will withdraw from the rest of the Ukraine.

He is concerned with his economy and the ruble. But he is willing to take the hit in order to keep Crimea.........His designs on the Ukraine are temporarily thwarted.

Had the international community not taken action he would have probably moved in and taken the Ukraine by force. He tested the waters to see the resolve of the west against him. They called and now it is his move.

Time will tell. He will still support the rebels in the Ukraine whether or not his forces take part in any future battles though.

Tested our resolve......resolve to do what? Short of committing ground forces to drive the Russians out of the eastern Ukraine what do you imagine would prompt the Russians to alter their policy?

You misunderstand..............they would have already done even more had the west not reacted..............Had we said or done nothing Putin may have used it for a green light.

COLD WAR TRAINING OPERATION ANACONDA POLAND.