- Thread starter
- #301
Very good point. And this was the most blatant up front 'War for Oil' i've ever seen. Shame on the Liberal Press and all others who were cheerleading for this war.
At least a "War for Oil" makes sense for the national interest. Unlike a war in which a tin-pot dictator, bottled up in his own country, is touted as an "immediate threat" to the U.S. with nuclear fears added that couldn't have reached fruition for a decade or more.
to start with there has never been a deceleration of war. This was and still is my biggest concern. Its not Obama's place in life to decide when, where and how our military is used except when certain conditions are met
Qaddafi nor Egypt had met those special conditions