So, is the left denouncing Obama's "unlawful" war in Libya?

[Uncensored2008]

As for WWII, I was under the impression it was started by the Japanese.

But George Bush started the Iraq war.....

There truly is NO hypocrisy like demopocrisy.

 

[noose4]

As for WWII, I was under the impression it was started by the Japanese.

But George Bush started the Iraq war.....

There truly is NO hypocrisy like demopocrisy.

The Iraqi's bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you totally agreed with the Iraq war too? And next we're headed to S. Korea, then China, then Darfur, Then Ivory Coast... if this is about not allowing dictators to kill their own, we had better get a move on.

What you need to understand is that to partisan sycophants like Truthinessmatters, BlindBoo, et al; the only consideration is the impact on the party.

If the sun rising in the East serves the party, then they will say, and believe that the sun rises in the East. If it doesn't serve the party, then they will say AND BELIEVE that the sun rises in the West.

They live to serve the party and say whatever they need to in order to serve the party. Reality, fact and truth aren't even a consideration. The party defines reality for them.

 

[georgephillip]

Politics really can be a lot of fun. It often exposes the liars & hypocrites. And that's always fun. This Libyan War is supposedly not about the Oil but instead is all about helping those poor abused Libyan People. Yea it's hard to believe that anyone believes that. What happened to all those "NO WAR FOR OIL!" peeps? Where did they go? Now that a 'D' is doing the bombing,it definitely has nothing to do with Oil and is only about helping those poor abused Libyan People. Why such a change of heart? Seems way too convenient to me. So we jump in the middle of a Foreign Civil War but it has absolutely nothing to do with Oil? Yea can't get much more dishonest & hypocritical than this. Shame Shame on the Left/Democrats.

You have a point, where are all the "NO WAR FOR OIL" guys? did they miss the bus on this one?

Do you mean the corporate bus?

"Such a tragically criminal imposition of political abuse (by Gaddafi) on the Libyan experience is a painful reality that exists beyond any reasonable doubt, but does it validate a UN authorized military intervention carried out by a revived partnership of those old colonial partners, France and Britain, and their post-colonial American imperial overseer?

"From a personal perspective, my hopes are on the side of the Libyan rebels, despite their reliance on violence and the opaqueness of their political identity.

"As many credible exile Libyan voices attest, it would seem highly likely that a rebel victory would benefit the people of Libya and would be a step in the right direction for the region, especially the Arab world, but does this entail supporting Western-led military intervention even if it is backed by the United Nations?

"I think not."

 

[Uncensored2008]

It's hilarious that partisan hacks like LibApoc get on here and type their little rants about how the Dems are evil.

I don't think that you're evil.

When ants invade my kitchen, I don't view the little worker ants as "evil," they are mere drones, programmed by pheromones to do a task.

The same is true of you leftists, you are simply unthinking drones, doing as the party instructs.

You're not evil, you don't even have the capacity to grasp such a concept. You simply serve the party.

Oh BTW, I still spray the ants with bug killer.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It's hilarious that partisan hacks like LibApoc get on here and type their little rants about how the Dems are evil. Barry Oblammy tried to make you fuckers happy...and this is what we get. He just can't win in your eyes...I'm not sure why he ever tried.

He's basically a 3rd Bush term. Why would I vote for him again?

Partisan hacks like LibApoc?

The whole thing he's attacking is how partisan dems are towards warmongering. They cheer it when a D does it and freak out when a R does it.

LibApoc attacks republicans for their hypocrisy as well. When a D increases spending, welfare, social security it's a travesty according to reps, when a R does it they make light of it and excuse it by saying a D would be doing it even more so.

He goes after both sides and I've seen him do it dozens of times, making him amongst the tiny minority on this board.

Point me to a few. I'd love to see 'em. I'm betting there's more context needed.
If he was, I'd be on his side. I'm a centrist and it'd be great if the board didn't do this bs dems vs republicans tug of war every hour.

The problem is (and it looks like this is what you did) when someone like myself or LibApoc attacks a democrat or republican the person being attacked automatically assumes the person likes/agrees with/votes for the other party they aren't attacking.

I don't like either party because they all do the exact same thing on every issue. But the parties and the media don't get attention by talking about things they agree on. They all increase spending/debt/welfare/social security/leave borders open/meddle in the middle east, but what they have to do is when they aren't in power pretend they're against what the other side is doing it so that they can get the opportunity to do the same things once they're in power.

If either party actually improved the situations of the majority of americans than you wouldn't see us recycling back and forth between parties in the neverending manner that we do. If things were good with reps in power we'd keep voting for them, they were good with dems in power we'd keep voting for them and on and on and on.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Point me to a few. I'd love to see 'em.

Point me to a post by you that is "centerist?"

In that tug of war, you're over pulling with everything you have on the "D" side - every time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Iraqi's bombed Pearl Harbor?

The Japanese invaded Kuwait?

 

[noose4]

The Iraqi's bombed Pearl Harbor?

The Japanese invaded Kuwait?

Kuwait is part of the U.S.?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I <3 This Thread!

Obama's only making more Libyans!!

No more blood and treasure for Obama's Cowboy War for Libyan Oil!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's hilarious that partisan hacks like LibApoc get on here and type their little rants about how the Dems are evil. Barry Oblammy tried to make you fuckers happy...and this is what we get. He just can't win in your eyes...I'm not sure why he ever tried.

He's basically a 3rd Bush term. Why would I vote for him again?

Partisan hacks like LibApoc?

The whole thing he's attacking is how partisan dems are towards warmongering. They cheer it when a D does it and freak out when a R does it.

LibApoc attacks republicans for their hypocrisy as well. When a D increases spending, welfare, social security it's a travesty according to reps, when a R does it they make light of it and excuse it by saying a D would be doing it even more so.

He goes after both sides and I've seen him do it dozens of times, making him amongst the tiny minority on this board.

He has repeatedly accused ALL Democrats/Liberals on the board of being hypocrites, which means whatever else he's doing,

he's lying. Which makes him a liar.

 

[Vanquish]

Point me to a few. I'd love to see 'em.

Point me to a post by you that is "centerist?"

In that tug of war, you're over pulling with everything you have on the "D" side - every time.

Most of my posts show that I'm a centrist, actually.

Let's recap:

1. Pro-Gun
2. Pro-Life
3. Hardliner on Illegal Immigration
4. Agree that $ originates with taxpayers, not the government (so tax cuts are giving people back their own money)
5. Love fiscal conservativism APPLIED fairly.

I lean a little left on some issues, but the people on this board just classify me as one side when I'm all for going where the good ideas are...regardless of the party.

I'm pissed at Barack...he's failed to get us out of the war, he's still practicing Rendition, ...again lots of fleas on that dog.

The fact that you fail to see it (and fail to prove your assertion about LibApoc (I mean the guy has a liberal slam in his screenname for god's sake)) isn't unheard of.

I'm a centrist...as centrist as they come.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It's hilarious that partisan hacks like LibApoc get on here and type their little rants about how the Dems are evil. Barry Oblammy tried to make you fuckers happy...and this is what we get. He just can't win in your eyes...I'm not sure why he ever tried.

He's basically a 3rd Bush term. Why would I vote for him again?

Partisan hacks like LibApoc?

The whole thing he's attacking is how partisan dems are towards warmongering. They cheer it when a D does it and freak out when a R does it.

LibApoc attacks republicans for their hypocrisy as well. When a D increases spending, welfare, social security it's a travesty according to reps, when a R does it they make light of it and excuse it by saying a D would be doing it even more so.

He goes after both sides and I've seen him do it dozens of times, making him amongst the tiny minority on this board.

He has repeatedly accused ALL Democrats/Liberals on the board of being hypocrites, which means whatever else he's doing,

he's lying. Which makes him a liar.

The overwhelming majority of democrats on this board and elsewhere have been hypocritical on foreign policy when it comes to how they judge what reps do and what dems do.

Most people use the term "all" when they're truly only referring to 90-95% of people not 100%. Everyone makes this error often just because it's easier to type out, myself included.

I'm sure you've said republicans do this or conservatives do that (implying 100%) when you really only meant the vast majority.

And someone lying doesn't make them a liar, we all have lied and will lie again.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Kuwait is part of the U.S.?

Libya is part of the U.S.?

 

[noose4]

Kuwait is part of the U.S.?

Libya is part of the U.S.?

where did I defend the actions in Libya?

 

[Uncensored2008]

where did I defend the actions in Libya?

Where did I defend the actions in Iraq?

 

[Vanquish]

It's ridiculous that anyone posting says "dems do this" or "repubs do that"

It's erroneous...stupid...and makes you sound like you can't support your argument.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It's ridiculous that anyone posting says "dems do this" or "repubs do that"

It's erroneous...stupid...and makes you sound like you can't support your argument.

What should we say regarding the actions of the party? "Santa Claus" did it?

 

[BlindBoo]

Nothing could be further from the truth. Most liberals did not support invading and occupying Iraq.

One more time...


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

Ho-Hum, The same old list of Statist who support the interventionist policies of the past 90 years. Got any liberals who are not actually statist and some of their quotes?

Top 10 Reasons Not to "Do" Iraq | Ivan Eland | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary

Top 10 Reasons Not to "Do" Iraq
by Ivan Eland

Ivan Eland is director of defense policy studies at the Cato Institute.

This article appeared on cato.org on August 19, 2002.

Although President Bush has not formally decided to invade Iraq, the emotional chest pounding in the press by anonymous high-level civilian hawks in his administration has reached a crescendo. And while the hawks have made it seem unpatriotic to raise questions about such an invasion since Sept. 11, a careful analysis suggests that such a high-testosterone response should be avoided for 10 reasons:

 

[LibocalypseNow]

It's all about the D & R Game. When are people gonna wake up and stop playing the Game? If an 'R' was in there doing the Bombing,the Left/D's would be up on their High Horses screeching their "NO WAR FOR OIL & "Impeachment" stuff. This is a Civil War and is all about the Oil for some Western European Nations. Obviously they wont admit it but they know i'm right. So when will be hearing that "NO WAR FOR OIL!!"& "IMPEACH OBOMBA!!" stuff?