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

[Dr.Drock]

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?

The only way to wage war is if shoelaces are scraping the sand?

Here's his policy (one republicans should be familiar with); "kill them all and let god sort them out."

Even if in the process we're funding Al-Qaeda and propping up the next generation's monsters.

 

[Sallow]

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.

The people in the middle east are just as pleased as Americans are when a terrorist gets offed.

They kill many more of the people there then they do the people here. Shocking as that news may be to you.

 

[Sallow]

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

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

The only way to wage war is if shoelaces are scraping the sand?

Here's his policy (one republicans should be familiar with); "kill them all and let god sort them out."

Even if in the process we're funding Al-Qaeda and propping up the next generation's monsters.

Naw.

The way we SHOULD have waged war in Afghanistan was to clear the camps..set up spook units and hit them from the air. THAT would have been effective. We would have been seen as lethal and invisible. Bush turned that whole thing into a fiasco after some pretty good initial success. And he let Osama bin Laden go..not just in Afghanistan..but everywhere. Bush didn't catch the guy. Instead he went with the PNAC plan to "crush" the already crushed Soviet Union...and attack Iraq.

President Obama's on the right track..although he should get the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Supporting real democratic reform in the middle east and killing terrorists from the skies and with spook units.

I like it.

 

[Robert]

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?

How many billions have been spent killing civilians on the behest of Obama? Who claims that he need not consider the war powers act which you on the left demanded of the previous administration.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

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.

The people in the middle east are just as pleased as Americans are when a terrorist gets offed.

They kill many more of the people there then they do the people here. Shocking as that news may be to you.

Really, the people in the middle east are happy?

let me quote your statement from the previous page............

"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. "


which statement is true?

 

[Sallow]

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

 

[Sallow]

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

The people in the middle east are just as pleased as Americans are when a terrorist gets offed.

They kill many more of the people there then they do the people here. Shocking as that news may be to you.

Really, the people in the middle east are happy?

let me quote your statement from the previous page............

"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. "


which statement is true?

Pleased does not equal happy.

And they aren't going to be dancing in the streets anytime soon.

There's alot of bad blood between the US and the Middle East.

Last time I checked..no Middle Eastern country has bases on US soil.

 

[Sallow]

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

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

How many billions have been spent killing civilians on the behest of Obama? Who claims that he need not consider the war powers act which you on the left demanded of the previous administration.

I dunno. How many? Obama up to Bush's count yet?

And if the Republicans are so hot under the collar about Libya..vote on a resolution to stop it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The people in the middle east are just as pleased as Americans are when a terrorist gets offed.

They kill many more of the people there then they do the people here. Shocking as that news may be to you.

Really, the people in the middle east are happy?

let me quote your statement from the previous page............

"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. "


which statement is true?

Pleased does not equal happy.

And they aren't going to be dancing in the streets anytime soon.

There's alot of bad blood between the US and the Middle East.

Last time I checked..no Middle Eastern country has bases on US soil.

I cracked the nuts of your argument and all you can do is play semantics with words? Come on now. Hell I even gave you a thumbs up for your idea on the stealth approach. I can admit when someone has a valid point.

 

[uscitizen]

The Obama anti terrorism plan is the same as the Bush one and the Tea Partiers recently reendorsed the partiot act.

 

[Sallow]

The Obama anti terrorism plan is the same as the Bush one and the Tea Partiers recently reendorsed the partiot act.

No it isn't.

The Bush plan was to knock over countries.

The Obama plan is to kill terrorists.

 

[Sallow]

Really, the people in the middle east are happy?

let me quote your statement from the previous page............

"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. "


which statement is true?

Pleased does not equal happy.

And they aren't going to be dancing in the streets anytime soon.

There's alot of bad blood between the US and the Middle East.

Last time I checked..no Middle Eastern country has bases on US soil.

I cracked the nuts of your argument and all you can do is play semantics with words? Come on now. Hell I even gave you a thumbs up for your idea on the stealth approach. I can admit when someone has a valid point.

It seems you needed a little clarification. While the people of the Middle East are pleased terrorists..that kill them..are getting killed..they still aren't happy with the United States.

Look at it this way..the Arab league is backing American action in Libya..while complaining about civilian casualties.

They want Gaddafi out..they just don't want any of the heavy lifting or baggage that comes with that.

 

[Dr.Drock]

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

The only way to wage war is if shoelaces are scraping the sand?

Here's his policy (one republicans should be familiar with); "kill them all and let god sort them out."

Even if in the process we're funding Al-Qaeda and propping up the next generation's monsters.

Naw.

The way we SHOULD have waged war in Afghanistan was to clear the camps..set up spook units and hit them from the air. THAT would have been effective. We would have been seen as lethal and invisible. Bush turned that whole thing into a fiasco after some pretty good initial success. And he let Osama bin Laden go..not just in Afghanistan..but everywhere. Bush didn't catch the guy. Instead he went with the PNAC plan to "crush" the already crushed Soviet Union...and attack Iraq.

President Obama's on the right track..although he should get the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Supporting real democratic reform in the middle east and killing terrorists from the skies and with spook units.

I like it.

Warmongering if Pakistan/Afghanistan/Syria/Yemen/Libya isn't on the right track, unless you're a warmonger.

He's creating terrorists all over the middle east, just like we did in Afghanistan in the late 70's and mid 80's.

 

[Sallow]

The only way to wage war is if shoelaces are scraping the sand?

Here's his policy (one republicans should be familiar with); "kill them all and let god sort them out."

Even if in the process we're funding Al-Qaeda and propping up the next generation's monsters.

Naw.

The way we SHOULD have waged war in Afghanistan was to clear the camps..set up spook units and hit them from the air. THAT would have been effective. We would have been seen as lethal and invisible. Bush turned that whole thing into a fiasco after some pretty good initial success. And he let Osama bin Laden go..not just in Afghanistan..but everywhere. Bush didn't catch the guy. Instead he went with the PNAC plan to "crush" the already crushed Soviet Union...and attack Iraq.

President Obama's on the right track..although he should get the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Supporting real democratic reform in the middle east and killing terrorists from the skies and with spook units.

I like it.

Warmongering if Pakistan/Afghanistan/Syria/Yemen/Libya isn't on the right track, unless you're a warmonger.

He's creating terrorists all over the middle east, just like we did in Afghanistan in the late 70's and mid 80's.

Actually..no.

The plan is to kill terrorists where they pop up..not fund them..like in Afghanistan.

It's the "swatting mosquitoes" plan Bush didn't want to do.

If some idiot wants to spout off about how he's going to blow up US civilians after doing a few "proof of concept" runs on his own people..he's going to find a bomb up his ass.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Naw.

The way we SHOULD have waged war in Afghanistan was to clear the camps..set up spook units and hit them from the air. THAT would have been effective. We would have been seen as lethal and invisible. Bush turned that whole thing into a fiasco after some pretty good initial success. And he let Osama bin Laden go..not just in Afghanistan..but everywhere. Bush didn't catch the guy. Instead he went with the PNAC plan to "crush" the already crushed Soviet Union...and attack Iraq.

President Obama's on the right track..although he should get the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Supporting real democratic reform in the middle east and killing terrorists from the skies and with spook units.

I like it.

Warmongering if Pakistan/Afghanistan/Syria/Yemen/Libya isn't on the right track, unless you're a warmonger.

He's creating terrorists all over the middle east, just like we did in Afghanistan in the late 70's and mid 80's.

Actually..no.

The plan is to kill terrorists where they pop up..not fund them..like in Afghanistan.

It's the "swatting mosquitoes" plan Bush didn't want to do.

If some idiot wants to spout off about how he's going to blow up US civilians after doing a few "proof of concept" runs on his own people..he's going to find a bomb up his ass.

Well sadly that isn't the case, look no further then Libya where the commanders came right out and admitted the fighters we were funding had Al-Qaeda ties.

In this so called adventure known as the war on terror we've killed a lot more innocent people than we have terrorists in the last decade, thus creating far more terrorists than there was beforehand.

 

[Sallow]

Warmongering if Pakistan/Afghanistan/Syria/Yemen/Libya isn't on the right track, unless you're a warmonger.

He's creating terrorists all over the middle east, just like we did in Afghanistan in the late 70's and mid 80's.

Actually..no.

The plan is to kill terrorists where they pop up..not fund them..like in Afghanistan.

It's the "swatting mosquitoes" plan Bush didn't want to do.

If some idiot wants to spout off about how he's going to blow up US civilians after doing a few "proof of concept" runs on his own people..he's going to find a bomb up his ass.

Well sadly that isn't the case, look no further then Libya where the commanders came right out and admitted the fighters we were funding had Al-Qaeda ties.

In this so called adventure known as the war on terror we've killed a lot more innocent people than we have terrorists in the last decade, thus creating far more terrorists than there was beforehand.

We aren't "funding" any fighters..we are keeping people from getting slaughtered. Hopefully Gaddafi gets his ass blown up as a conciliation prize.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Actually..no.

The plan is to kill terrorists where they pop up..not fund them..like in Afghanistan.

It's the "swatting mosquitoes" plan Bush didn't want to do.

If some idiot wants to spout off about how he's going to blow up US civilians after doing a few "proof of concept" runs on his own people..he's going to find a bomb up his ass.

Well sadly that isn't the case, look no further then Libya where the commanders came right out and admitted the fighters we were funding had Al-Qaeda ties.

In this so called adventure known as the war on terror we've killed a lot more innocent people than we have terrorists in the last decade, thus creating far more terrorists than there was beforehand.

We aren't "funding" any fighters..we are keeping people from getting slaughtered. Hopefully Gaddafi gets his ass blown up as a conciliation prize.

Do you ever pull your head out of the sand?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Actually..no.

The plan is to kill terrorists where they pop up..not fund them..like in Afghanistan.

It's the "swatting mosquitoes" plan Bush didn't want to do.

If some idiot wants to spout off about how he's going to blow up US civilians after doing a few "proof of concept" runs on his own people..he's going to find a bomb up his ass.

Well sadly that isn't the case, look no further then Libya where the commanders came right out and admitted the fighters we were funding had Al-Qaeda ties.

In this so called adventure known as the war on terror we've killed a lot more innocent people than we have terrorists in the last decade, thus creating far more terrorists than there was beforehand.

We aren't "funding" any fighters..we are keeping people from getting slaughtered. Hopefully Gaddafi gets his ass blown up as a conciliation prize.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/world/africa/06diplo.html

Yes, yes we are funding them.

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

Keep people from getting slaughtered by funding Al-Qaeda? That's the new strategy?


Sad what partisan politics do to the human mind . Some things used to be indefensible, not in today's american spectrum.