Obama Covers His Ass And Tells How Great Things Are In A Speech On Defeating Isis

[Jroc]

I have two words. FAILED PRESIDENCY.

and failing the people and the country he represents

just awful he's more worried about claiming they aren't the Islam religion.

If and when an American group of some kind (let's just say the Christian Identity Movement) assaults and kills a Black or Hispanic person and then releases a statement saying that they're a Christian group that's trying to reestablish White supremacy in this country, would you have a problem if people referred to them as Christians and that they represented Christianity?

When they can point to Biblical scripture which commands them, actually commands them, to wage such a war, then you might have a leg to stand on.

Go read the Qur'an and Hadiths and learn what you're writing about. Facile comparisons don't work. You can't map Islam to Christianity. Using a Christian religious model, how Christianity is practiced and them simply swapping out Baptist and dropping Islam in it's place doesn't work.

You're missing the point. Any wacko or ideologically extreme group can (and probably WILL) claim to be acting in the furtherance of some heretofore previously respected religion. It happens all the time.

In fact, America has its own religious extremists who generally act within the confines of the law, but it's certainly not a forgone conclusion that that will always be the case. When we have religious leaders who get on the airwaves and accuse women and medical personnel of engaging in murdering babies in regard to abortion, it shouldn't surprise anyone when a man like Eric Rudolph kills people as a result.

I dare say that if America's religious extremists ever managed to attain power in some future time, we would see them act in much the same way as Iran's ayatollahs.

Notice how these liberals throw out straw man arguments when they have nothing else. This guy here would be defending and making excuses for Adolf Hitler during WWII

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9788429

And how many states joined W and his father? Why would that 'crush' anyone, you freaking retard?

Bush 41 had a real coalition that paid for the liberation of Kuwait. Bush 43 had a coalition of the bribed. 41 was a huge military success. 43 was a huge military blunder that harmed the effort in Afghanistan.

It is crushing the Obama Haters because it will succeed and the haters were hoping for an IS terrorist permanent victory in Syria and Iraq for domestic political reasons.





9794501

Notice how these liberals ignore when they don't have an response

I have responses - where are you?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9788429

No, but having the active support and approval of MILLIONS of other muslims and muslim groups DOES make it part of that faith.

No it doesn't. That is a bigoted outlook. The same principle that applies to terrorists hijacking a religion applies to financial supporters of the terrorists also. Those actions are not performed as part of religion - they are performed as part of terrorism. They cross a line and are not taking their professed religion with them.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9792487

go find a job being yourself, a WHINY horses ass.

Its clear by your dumbfounded response that you are unable to deny what I am telling you is the truth:

"The point is you Obama Haters attack the current president for saying damn near verbatim what Bush 43 said."

 

[JimBowie1958]

9788429

And how many states joined W and his father? Why would that 'crush' anyone, you freaking retard?

Bush 41 had a real coalition that paid for the liberation of Kuwait. Bush 43 had a coalition of the bribed. 41 was a huge military success. 43 was a huge military blunder that harmed the effort in Afghanistan.

It is crushing the Obama Haters because it will succeed and the haters were hoping for an IS terrorist permanent victory in Syria and Iraq for domestic political reasons.

Lol, 43 was not a crushing blunder, moron. STAYING TO REBUILD WAS THE BLUNDER, and one I doubt we will often repeat again, God willing.

Bomb them into the Stone Age and leave them there from here on out. **** the bastards.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9798032

Lol, 43 was not a crushing blunder, moron. STAYING TO REBUILD WAS THE BLUNDER, and one I doubt we will often repeat again, God willing.

Bomb them into the Stone Age and leave them there from here on out. **** the bastards.

Did you fully support Bush 43 ahead of the invasion?

 

[JimBowie1958]

9798032

Lol, 43 was not a crushing blunder, moron. STAYING TO REBUILD WAS THE BLUNDER, and one I doubt we will often repeat again, God willing.

Bomb them into the Stone Age and leave them there from here on out. **** the bastards.

Did you fully support Bush 43 ahead of the invasion?

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9798102

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

The US and UK invasion in March 2003 toppled the government in its quest for the cache of 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' that Bush said he had intel that 'left no doubt' they were being hidden from UN inspectors in March 2003.

The announced intent of the invasion was to 'topple the regime' as well as secure the oil infrastructure and then look for the WMD ... since Rumsfeld knew where they were .... " in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat ." .

So what did you think Bush was going to do? Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own? Did you think the military plan in March 2003 was to Bomb them into the Stone Age?

How could you support a major ground invasion and not know that the goal was occupation and setting up a democratic representative government to replace the authoritarian rule of Saddam Hussein? How did you miss the Bush Admin's intent?

You don't need a couple hundred thousand ground troops and all that rolling equipment if the plan is to bomb them into the stone ages. \\Why did you support a ground invasion then, I guess is the better question.

 

[JimBowie1958]

9798102

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

The US and UK invasion in March 2003 toppled the government in its quest for the cache of 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' that Bush said he had intel that 'left no doubt' they were being hidden from UN inspectors in March 2003.

The announced intent of the invasion was to 'topple the regime' as well as secure the oil infrastructure and then look for the WMD ... since Rumsfeld knew where they were .... " in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat ." .

So what did you think Bush was going to do? Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own? Did you think the military plan in March 2003 was to Bomb them into the Stone Age?

How could you support a major ground invasion and not know that the goal was occupation and setting up a democratic representative government to replace the authoritarian rule of Saddam Hussein? How did you miss the Bush Admin's intent?

You don't need a couple hundred thousand ground troops and all that rolling equipment if the plan is to bomb them into the stone ages. \\Why did you support a ground invasion then, I guess is the better question.

There were plenty of reasons for us going back in, and the violations of the cease fire were enough in and of themselves, and **** the international community and what they lie saying they think.

And I am GLAD Saddam is dead and most of his cronies. But Bush should have negotiated a formal surrender by the Baathists army to seal the deal and he didn't do that.

Then he stayed to rebuild. **** that. Let them swim in their own blood. I am sick of these bastards lying, deceiving murdering people there to help them.

Oh, and **** you too, shit-for-brains.

 

[francoHFW]

tHE HATER DUPES FROM PLANET bIZARRO NEED TO BE TOLD THE ECONOMY IS GREAT AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY- ALSO THAT THE me IS LEARNING FAST THAT FUNDAMENTALISM AND POLITICS DON'T MIX...OOPS

 

[JimBowie1958]

tHE HATER DUPES FROM PLANET bIZARRO NEED TO BE TOLD THE ECONOMY IS GREAT AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY- ALSO THAT THE me IS LEARNING FAST THAT FUNDAMENTALISM AND POLITICS DON'T MIX...OOPS

roflmao, and the economy is obviously NOT great, you ******* liar, with the largest number of people rolled off the labor force pool since the stats were kept.

American citizens have seen no job gains since 2000 while nearly 6 million have gone to immigrants of all kinds instead.

You are a fool.

 

[francoHFW]

tHE HATER DUPES FROM PLANET bIZARRO NEED TO BE TOLD THE ECONOMY IS GREAT AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY- ALSO THAT THE me IS LEARNING FAST THAT FUNDAMENTALISM AND POLITICS DON'T MIX...OOPS

roflmao, and the economy is obviously NOT great, you ******* liar, with the largest number of people rolled off the labor force pool since the stats were kept.

American citizens have seen no job gains since 2000 while nearly 6 million have gone to immigrants of all kinds instead.

You are a fool.

Total bs, fool. Nothing but jobs for 4 years, and the illegal figure is total idiocy. Why? No Pub phony crises for a year, party first a-hole. Change the channel.

 

[JimBowie1958]

tHE HATER DUPES FROM PLANET bIZARRO NEED TO BE TOLD THE ECONOMY IS GREAT AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY- ALSO THAT THE me IS LEARNING FAST THAT FUNDAMENTALISM AND POLITICS DON'T MIX...OOPS

roflmao, and the economy is obviously NOT great, you ******* liar, with the largest number of people rolled off the labor force pool since the stats were kept.

American citizens have seen no job gains since 2000 while nearly 6 million have gone to immigrants of all kinds instead.

You are a fool.

Total bs, fool. Nothing but jobs for 4 years, and the illegal figure is total idiocy. Why? No Pub phony crises for a year, party first a-hole. Change the channel.

Nope, nearly 6 million jobs created and they ALL went to immigrants.

The number of adults not in the labor force pool is at record numbers, and the economic growth is shit.

The only thing up is the rigged DJIA which is fueled by $45 billion to $85 billion each month to Wall Street banksters.

So **** off, liar, everyone knows what is going on; you lying fascist bastards are saying ANYTHING to protect your ******* socialist in the White House.

 

[francoHFW]

Look up growth since the last phony Pub crisis, brainwashed dupe. All illegals? Read something, fool. That aid to the DJI is all Pubs allow, hater dupe- and they just love it, chump of the greedy idiot rich. LOL. Change the channel and get some news. Try USA Today- I suppose that's commie too. Idiot.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

9798140

There were plenty of reasons for us going back in, and the violations of the cease fire were enough in and of themselves, and **** the international community and what they lie saying they think.

Congress authorized war in October 2003 for only two reasons. To enforce 'relevant UNSC Resolutions with regard to Iraq' and to protect the national security of the United States and our allies. What happened when Reagan was President does not qualify. What happened when Clinton was President does not qualify. There had to be a current threat in March 2003 to justify use of military force to take Saddam's regime down. Or there had to be serious violation of UNSC Resolution 1441 once that resolution was passed and Bush agreed to abide by it as a UNSC permanent member state.







9798140

There were plenty of reasons for us going back in, and the violations of the cease fire were enough in and of themselves, and **** the international community and what they lie saying they think.

You are not even close to be the slightest bit right. UNSC Res 1441 trumped all those violations by giving Saddam Hussein a FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLY.




9798140

There were plenty of reasons for us going back in, and the violations of the cease fire were enough in and of themselves, and **** the international community and what they lie saying they think.

Actually Bush sought and got UNSC Res 1441 and he agreed to it. It contained no trigger for war but if Saddam Hussein had not allowed the inspectors back in then Bush would have been justified to invade. Trouble is SH did allow the inspectors back in and by March the inspectors had reported full even pro-active cooperation from SH on the inspection process.






9798140

And I am GLAD Saddam is dead and most of his cronies. .

Then you must be 'glad' or maintain it was 'worth it' to get 4486 Americans killed and ten times that wounded so you can be 'glad' Saddam is dead.
I'd rather they all be alive and without injuries ..... and with Iraqis doing regime change on their own without US troops stuck in the middle of it.




9798140

But Bush should have negotiated a formal surrender by the Baathists army to seal the deal and he didn't do that. .

Bush should have done what he said he would do and wanted. Allow the inspections that were working just fine continue.... Nobody Dead. Iraq Disarmed Peacefully under UNSC Supervision. . Once the invasion started the results were locked into becoming the disaster that even you admit took place. There was never going to be a formal surrender of Baathists in Iraq. Hell the Shiites fought us too. You've been watching to many John Wayne Movies or something.



9798140

Oh, and **** you too, shit-for-brains.

Your capacity for sound reasoned and intelligent discussion is duly noted. Close to zero.




9798140

Then he stayed to rebuild. **** that. Let them swim in their own blood. I am sick of these bastards lying, deceiving murdering people there to help them.

Why you supported the invasion as advertised but didn't know that 'rebuilding' was part of the project once the WMD 'threat was removed, is beyond the way a normal informed person might think. You seem to have been fooled by Dubya big time. And now you take your anger out on the people who opposed the invasion in the first place. Like I said none of that makes a lick of sense.

 

[francoHFW]

I guess all stats are a conspiracy....you 20% New TP bs Gopers/ Rushbots or WHATEVER are right off the wall....GO BILLS! and good night.

 

[Jroc]

9798102

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

The US and UK invasion in March 2003 toppled the government in its quest for the cache of 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' that Bush said he had intel that 'left no doubt' they were being hidden from UN inspectors in March 2003.

The announced intent of the invasion was to 'topple the regime' as well as secure the oil infrastructure and then look for the WMD ... since Rumsfeld knew where they were .... " in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat ." .

So what did you think Bush was going to do? Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own? Did you think the military plan in March 2003 was to Bomb them into the Stone Age?

How could you support a major ground invasion and not know that the goal was occupation and setting up a democratic representative government to replace the authoritarian rule of Saddam Hussein? How did you miss the Bush Admin's intent?

You don't need a couple hundred thousand ground troops and all that rolling equipment if the plan is to bomb them into the stone ages. \\Why did you support a ground invasion then, I guess is the better question.

Obama did that actually

 

[EconChick]

9798102

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

The US and UK invasion in March 2003 toppled the government in its quest for the cache of 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' that Bush said he had intel that 'left no doubt' they were being hidden from UN inspectors in March 2003.

The announced intent of the invasion was to 'topple the regime' as well as secure the oil infrastructure and then look for the WMD ... since Rumsfeld knew where they were .... " in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat ." .

So what did you think Bush was going to do? Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own? Did you think the military plan in March 2003 was to Bomb them into the Stone Age?

How could you support a major ground invasion and not know that the goal was occupation and setting up a democratic representative government to replace the authoritarian rule of Saddam Hussein? How did you miss the Bush Admin's intent?

You don't need a couple hundred thousand ground troops and all that rolling equipment if the plan is to bomb them into the stone ages. \\Why did you support a ground invasion then, I guess is the better question.

Obama did that actually

There's no bigger idiot on this entire Board on the topic of Iraq then NotFooled. As you can see.......

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Obama did that actually

Did what actually?

This? "Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own?"

If so where?

 

[EconChick]

9798102

Yes. I did not support staying there.

An Iraqi democracy is not worth one drop of American blood.

The US and UK invasion in March 2003 toppled the government in its quest for the cache of 'the most lethal weapons ever devised' that Bush said he had intel that 'left no doubt' they were being hidden from UN inspectors in March 2003.

The announced intent of the invasion was to 'topple the regime' as well as secure the oil infrastructure and then look for the WMD ... since Rumsfeld knew where they were .... " in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat ." .

So what did you think Bush was going to do? Topple a Sunni minority regime and then sit back and let Iran and the Iraqi Shiites take over on their own? Did you think the military plan in March 2003 was to Bomb them into the Stone Age?

How could you support a major ground invasion and not know that the goal was occupation and setting up a democratic representative government to replace the authoritarian rule of Saddam Hussein? How did you miss the Bush Admin's intent?

You don't need a couple hundred thousand ground troops and all that rolling equipment if the plan is to bomb them into the stone ages. \\Why did you support a ground invasion then, I guess is the better question.

Obama did that actually

Watch NotFooled twist all things related to this thread, this topic, and anything to do with war. Watch him tell you and me who've served in the military how the military works ...how we did things in Iraq, when he's probably never even left his state.

He'll make things up out of thin air.

He's a propagandist, period. That's why he's called Tokyo Rose.