Obama Schooling Republicans On Foreign Policy

Anyone remember how easily we defeated Sadam's army? Anyone remember when the statute of Sadam was pulled down? Anyone remember the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner behind Bush? Of course we do, esp the left because they love to toss it back in the right's face! However, they forget the sense of accomplishment back then (by both the right and left). We thought it was as easy as Desert Storm, but we were wrong. The struggle was just about to begin. The feeling of accomplishment was lost quickly and forgotten!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7g_lxhNUUM]Five Years On: The man who toppled Saddam - 09 Apr 08 - YouTube[/ame]


I believe that is what is happening now! The news is playing heart warming stories of the Islamic Rebels taking for Tripoli (just as they did with the fall of Sadam). They are making it like a Democratic free country will emerge! What they are not seeing is Libya, while ruled by an iron and unjust fist was relatively stable. It was a poor country, but it's citizens weren't starving or without water. It had less crime, AIDS, poverty and the HIGHEST standard of living of any country on the entire AFRICAN continent! That somewhat stable society has been dismantled. No one knows what will emerge, however, if it follows the trend of other African countries after a coup, you can expect violence, political and ethnic civil war, atrocities committed on both sided, famine, rape and a 10 fold increase in poverty. This is far from a MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!! In fact, Obama should learn from Bush's blunder when declaring victory to early!

In fact, while Gaddiff was in power, Libya was NOT an Al Qaeda sanctuary and they weren't developing WMD!!! They weren't a threat to us. That could and probably will change.

Now to the rebels. We don't know who they are! We don't know if they will move in Sharia law, but there are already signals that it will be part of it's structure (much like the Taliban coming to power in Afghanistan after we helped them remove the Soviets). Who says they will be pro-american? The Ficticious country of Kosovo is far from pro-American. In fact they are a Islamic terrorist hotbed! Afghanistan worked with OBL to launch 9/11! Kuwait backstab us! Sadam was disloyal after we armed him to the teeth against Iran! So what makes you think these Libyanese rebels will be any different? In fact, the greatest amount of foreign fighters in Iraq came from the Libyanese rebel ranks! THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN FIGHTING US FOR YEARS!!!

Now to the Libyanese society. It's a tribal society. They are more loyal to their tribe than to the country (sounds like Afghanistan). Gaddiff kept them all in check. Now there is a power vacuum and their will be a power struggle! Expect ethic fighting for supremacy!

I caution libtards to scream victory too early! It can and most likely will bite you in the ARSE!
 
Gaddafi isn't gone, so you are followng war propaganda by the MSM. Funny how his son was "captured" as confirmed by the ICC and then suddenly he appears in Tripoli to take western media sources around and talk with them. You shouldn't drink the kool-aid.
While ZERO American lives MAY be true, what of the civilians that were killed in the NATO bomb raids over Lybia?
Which also happen to be in breach of the UN resolution. Which also happens to be unconstitutional in this country.

Really though, who cares? We have transcended the law and are now operating openly above it when we deem it convenient.

I didn't bring up Iraq. And I am not saying the last administration, or any other republican can/should/would anything. I'm talking about this administration and the bombing of Libya in defiance of the Un resolution.

Ser. I didn't expect any two party politic endorsers to answer the questions. Especially when the original post is built on fallacy.

I'm sorry i din't see your question. I believe the NATO forces did a good job at keeping civilian deaths as little as possible.
 
Bush could have used Obama. Evil Dictator gone and price tag 1 billion and ZERO American lives.

Obama nearly screwed up the Libya situation. Obama dithered while McCain had to tell him to support the rebels. That lag got a huge amount of the rebels killed & nearly cost them the war.

Republicans had the better plan. Obama should have learned from the way Republicans overthrew Egypts dictator with no US casualties unlike Obama's in Libya. For 5 years Republicans secretly backed uprising in Egypt planning for regime change.

The Daily Telegraph
The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change” for the past three years, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

The American Embassy in Cairo helped a young dissident attend a US-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.

On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011.

He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph.

Secret US document discloses support for protesters behind the Egypt uprising.
xxxxxxxxxxxx contended that the GOE will never undertake significant reform, and therefore, Egyptians need to replace the current regime with a parliamentary democracy. He alleged that several opposition parties and movements have accepted an unwritten plan for democratic transition by 2011;.....

xxxxxxxxxxxx claimed that several opposition forces -- including the Wafd, Nasserite, Karama and Tagammu parties, and the Muslim Brotherhood, Kifaya, and Revolutionary Socialist movements -- have agreed to support an unwritten plan for a transition to a parliamentary democracy, involving a weakened presidency and an empowered prime minister and parliament, before the scheduled 2011 presidential elections

The "Secret Document" mentioned this "Revolutionary Activist" speaking at a late January Congressional hearing on House Resolution 1303 regarding religious and political freedom in Egypt.

This Resolution H. Res. 1303: Calling on the Egyptian Government to respect human rights and freedoms of religion was introduced Jun 24, 2008 by Rep. Frank Wolf [R-VA10].

It was also introduced in several previous secessions of congress. On Jul 28, 2005 it was introduced as H. Res. 413: Expressing the concern of House of Representatives regarding the amount of United States foreign assistance provided to Egypt over the past 25 years without meaningful political reforms by the Government of Egypt, by Rep. Ted Poe [R-TX2].

The overthrow of Egypt's dictator was the Republican perfectly executed master plan. Obama's lack of leadership nearly cost Libya's rebels the war. Obama is not an effective leader.

Republicans relied heavily on our relationship with Egypt's military. We counted on our influence of democratic civilian control of our military to influence their military officials over our 30 year joint military cooperation. So far it seems to have paid off. Egypt's military has played ball with the plan.

Pentagon Faces Test of Influence With Ally
The officer corps of Egypt’s powerful military has been educated at defense colleges in the United States for 30 years. The Egyptian armed forces have about 1,000 American M1A1 Abrams tanks, which the United States allows to be built on Egyptian soil. Egypt permits the American military to stage major operations from its bases, and has always guaranteed the Americans passage through the Suez Canal.

The relationship between the Egyptian and American militaries is, in fact, so close that it was no surprise on Friday to find two dozen senior Egyptian military officials at the Pentagon, halfway through an annual week of meetings, lunches and dinners with their American counterparts.

By the afternoon, the Egyptians had cut short the talks to return to Cairo, but not before a top Defense Department official, Alexander Vershbow, had urged them to exercise “restraint,” the Pentagon said.
 
Last edited:
Yea, cuz the issues around Libya were exactly the same as Iraq or Afghanistan.

Does it hurt to be as dumb as you are? Genuine question. Maybe Obamacare can help with some pain relief - if not for you, than for the rest of us.

Thank you. Obama is doing bertter in Iraq Afghanistan and in killing Osama Bin Laden.

The Obama doctrine: Leading from behind

Obama may be moving toward something resembling a doctrine. One of his advisers described the president’s actions in Libya as “leading from behind.”

— Ryan Lizza, the New Yorker, May 2 issue
The Obama doctrine: Leading from behind - The Washington Post

First off, that's not his 'doctrine' just because some wingnut blogger calls it that. It was used in this instance, and extremely effectively and successfully.

Sorry that burns your butt. :lol:

Secondly, the fact that we did not lead this effort but did "lead from behind" has resulted in no one in Tripoli chanting "Death to America!".

$1 billion to get rid of a ruthless dictator? I'll take that any day of the week.
 
Gaddafi isn't gone, so you are followng war propaganda by the MSM. Funny how his son was "captured" as confirmed by the ICC and then suddenly he appears in Tripoli to take western media sources around and talk with them. You shouldn't drink the kool-aid.
While ZERO American lives MAY be true, what of the civilians that were killed in the NATO bomb raids over Lybia?
Which also happen to be in breach of the UN resolution. Which also happens to be unconstitutional in this country.

Really though, who cares? We have transcended the law and are now operating openly above it when we deem it convenient.

I didn't bring up Iraq. And I am not saying the last administration, or any other republican can/should/would anything. I'm talking about this administration and the bombing of Libya in defiance of the Un resolution.

Ser. I didn't expect any two party politic endorsers to answer the questions. Especially when the original post is built on fallacy.

I'm sorry i din't see your question. I believe the NATO forces did a good job at keeping civilian deaths as little as possible.

How does a humanitarian effort, which is suppose to protect civilians (all humans I would think) kill even ONE civilian and still consider itself a humanitarian effort. That is the most ridiculous thought process I've ever encountered.
 
Thank you. Obama is doing bertter in Iraq Afghanistan and in killing Osama Bin Laden.

Yeah Right!

obamavsbush.jpg
yeah that's what happens when you spend seven years NOT fighting a war, letting your enemy get stronger while you're off nationbuilding in Iraq.
 
Thank you. Obama is doing bertter in Iraq Afghanistan and in killing Osama Bin Laden.

Yeah Right!

obamavsbush.jpg

It is horrible that we had to waste an additional 1089 American lives because of Bush's botched strategy in Afghanistan. After Bush abandoned the war on terror in Afghanistan to pursue his strategic and political blunder in Iraq the Taliban recaptured lost territory and reclaimed power in the outer provinces.

At least Obama understood that the war on terror involved actually going after terrorists where they lived and not settling old beefs in iraq

"Saddam tried to kill my daddy!" :(
 
Bush could have used Obama. Evil Dictator gone and price tag 1 billion and ZERO American lives.
Where's Qaddafi?.......You don't even know.

Yeah, almost a billion dollars, and for what?

We don't even have a clue as to who these rebels are. For all we know, we just handed the Jihadi's (if the mission ends up being successful) their own damn country, with rich oil reserves to help finance their war against the United States.

Funny thing is, they called this a "humanitarian mission". What a fuckin' joke.......1 hospital left standing in Tripoli, and a 2 million persons population........Thanks to Obama and the UN, they destroyed all the hospitals and aid stations in the area......Sad this morning watching FOX news, and seeing a three year old gunshot victim die right before our eyes because there was nowhere to take the wounded.

And meanwhile, the Syrian government continues to wantonely murder their own citizens...I guess Obama just picks and chooses his "humanitarian missions" based on political need.......What a fuckin' joke.
 
Yeah Right!

obamavsbush.jpg

It is horrible that we had to waste an additional 1089 American lives because of Bush's botched strategy in Afghanistan. After Bush abandoned the war on terror in Afghanistan to pursue his strategic and political blunder in Iraq the Taliban recaptured lost territory and reclaimed power in the outer provinces.

At least Obama understood that the war on terror involved actually going after terrorists where they lived and not settling old beefs in iraq

"Saddam tried to kill my daddy!" :(

Bill Clinton attacked Iraq to AVENGE Saddam's attack on Bush Senior by bombing Iraq in 1993.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mpWa7wNr5M&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq 1993[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were crying G.W. Bush had to go way back to the Reagan administration & dredge up the time when Saddam attacked his own citizens to justify his attack on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1996 for the same thing because Saddam attacked one of his own cities? :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBCclD33wQU&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1996[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were screaming G.W. Bush can't attack Iraq because of their failure to comply with a UN resolution or because he might develop a bomb. Other countries have WMD's why not go after them? It is the UN's responsibility to enforce their resolutions on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1998 for the same thing because Saddam obstructed UN weapons inspections :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1998[/ame]

:cuckoo: The crazy moon-bat-shit thoughts swirling inside democrats dis-functional brains is truly unreal!!! :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
It is horrible that we had to waste an additional 1089 American lives because of Bush's botched strategy in Afghanistan. After Bush abandoned the war on terror in Afghanistan to pursue his strategic and political blunder in Iraq the Taliban recaptured lost territory and reclaimed power in the outer provinces.

At least Obama understood that the war on terror involved actually going after terrorists where they lived and not settling old beefs in iraq

"Saddam tried to kill my daddy!" :(

Bill Clinton attacked Iraq to AVENGE Saddam's attack on Bush Senior by bombing Iraq in 1993.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mpWa7wNr5M&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq 1993[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were crying G.W. Bush had to go way back to the Reagan administration & dredge up the time when Saddam attacked his own citizens to justify his attack on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1996 for the same thing because Saddam attacked one of his own cities? :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBCclD33wQU&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1996[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were screaming G.W. Bush can't attack Iraq because of their failure to comply with a UN resolution or because he might develop a bomb. Other countries have WMD's why not go after them? It is the UN's responsibility to enforce their resolutions on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1998 for the same thing because Saddam obstructed UN weapons inspections :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1998[/ame]

:cuckoo: The crazy moon-bat-shit thoughts swirling inside democrats dis-functional brains is truly unreal!!! :cuckoo:
Yeah, KM........Liberal revisionist history is truly mind boggling.

By far, the dumbest creatures walking this earth, are modern day american liberals.

And all you have to do to see it's true, is peruse this board.
 
Bush could have used Obama. Evil Dictator gone and price tag 1 billion and ZERO American lives.

Guess what, the next time a Republican president does something you do not like it will be much easier to justify it because Obama did this without Congressional approval, and without any accountability. You supporting him means you want to make it easier for the next idiot that wants to do it.

That make you the idiot here, not Bush.
 
Last edited:
Bush could have used Obama. Evil Dictator gone and price tag 1 billion and ZERO American lives.

Guess what, the nest time a Republican president does something you do not like it will be much easier to justify it because Obama did this without Congressional approval, and without any accountability. You supporting him means you want to make it easier for the next idiot that wants to do it.

That make you the idiot here, not Bush.

agreed.

its amazing, the hypocrisy now engaged in by some on the left, they fond a good war, ( Afghanistan used to be a good war too according to them when obama took over until....).

what happened to the coalition of the 'unwilling' we heard about with bush?

what happened to; "its all about Oil"?

what happened to ( even though he did bush) the president had no authority and di not i accordance with the WPA of 73, do what was called for?

what happened to Bush lied us into war? Obama wrote an exec. declaring Libya a clear and present danger crucial to US interests? I have yet to see the evidence to back that up.
 
It is horrible that we had to waste an additional 1089 American lives because of Bush's botched strategy in Afghanistan. After Bush abandoned the war on terror in Afghanistan to pursue his strategic and political blunder in Iraq the Taliban recaptured lost territory and reclaimed power in the outer provinces.

At least Obama understood that the war on terror involved actually going after terrorists where they lived and not settling old beefs in iraq

"Saddam tried to kill my daddy!" :(

Bill Clinton attacked Iraq to AVENGE Saddam's attack on Bush Senior by bombing Iraq in 1993.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mpWa7wNr5M&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq 1993[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were crying G.W. Bush had to go way back to the Reagan administration & dredge up the time when Saddam attacked his own citizens to justify his attack on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1996 for the same thing because Saddam attacked one of his own cities? :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBCclD33wQU&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1996[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were screaming G.W. Bush can't attack Iraq because of their failure to comply with a UN resolution or because he might develop a bomb. Other countries have WMD's why not go after them? It is the UN's responsibility to enforce their resolutions on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1998 for the same thing because Saddam obstructed UN weapons inspections :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1998[/ame]

:cuckoo: The crazy moon-bat-shit thoughts swirling inside democrats dis-functional brains is truly unreal!!! :cuckoo:

I must have missed the part where Clinton sent 4000 Americans to their death
 
"Saddam tried to kill my daddy!" :(

Bill Clinton attacked Iraq to AVENGE Saddam's attack on Bush Senior by bombing Iraq in 1993.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mpWa7wNr5M&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq 1993[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were crying G.W. Bush had to go way back to the Reagan administration & dredge up the time when Saddam attacked his own citizens to justify his attack on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1996 for the same thing because Saddam attacked one of his own cities? :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBCclD33wQU&feature=related"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1996[/ame]

The lying idiotic democrat douche-bags were screaming G.W. Bush can't attack Iraq because of their failure to comply with a UN resolution or because he might develop a bomb. Other countries have WMD's why not go after them? It is the UN's responsibility to enforce their resolutions on Iraq. :cuckoo: Ooooops!!! Wait, Didn't Bill Clinton launch an attack on Iraq again in 1998 for the same thing because Saddam obstructed UN weapons inspections :cuckoo:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc"]Clinton Bombs Iraq again 1998[/ame]

:cuckoo: The crazy moon-bat-shit thoughts swirling inside democrats dis-functional brains is truly unreal!!! :cuckoo:

I must have missed the part where Clinton sent 4000 Americans to their death

Bill Clinton - "I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq"

Hillary Clinton - "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."
 

Forum List

Back
Top