Libtards cheer war
POSTED BY: kaneman
UPDATED: Saturday, March 26, 2011 06:52
VIEWED: 4327
PAGE 2 of 3
Jezus, who's surprised the Republicans are against it? They would never, never approve of anything Obama does or says, that's been shown clearly enough! I don't believe it's not about what they each individually think or how they each individually feel.
I don’t like to see us involved; I also don’t like to see people fighting for their rights slaughtered, so I’m on the fence. I agree with this, for the most part:Quote:
A critique of the U.S. involvement in the military intervention in Libya that will no doubt be common in coming days is that the Obama administration is making a large error by embarking on a war with a third Muslim country, as if reversing Moammar Gadhafi's momentum against the rebels will be a rerun of the debacle of the war against Saddam Hussein.
A further element of this view is that -- whatever the outcome of the Libyan intervention -- the United States' standing in the Islamic world will once again be severely damaged by an attack on a Muslim nation.
There are, of course, some real similarities between Hussein and Gadhafi -- both ruthless and erratic dictators of oil-rich regimes who fought bloody wars with their neighbors, brutalized their own populations, sought weapons of mass destruction, and sired some equally unattractive sons and heirs.
The déjà vu quality of the Libyan situation may help account for recent polls taken before the intervention which found that while Americans were either split or slightly in favor of imposing a no-fly zone over Libya, most were opposed to stronger U.S. military action
But the military intervention that President Obama authorized against Libya on Saturday -- eight years to the day after President George W. Bush announced the commencement of "Operation Iraqi Freedom" -- is a quite different operation than the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Beyond the obvious difference that Obama has not authorized the use of U.S. ground forces in Libya, there are several other differences to consider:
First, the Obama administration was handed a gift by the Arab League, which in its more than six-decade history has garnered a well-earned reputation as a feckless talking shop, but unusually took a stand one week ago by endorsing a no-fly zone over Libya.
That endorsement put the Arab League way out in front of the Obama administration, which was then dithering about whether to do anything of substance to help the rebels fighting Gadhafi.
The unexpected action by the Arab League gave the administration the impetus and diplomatic cover to then go to the United Nations Security Council to secure a broad resolution endorsing not only a no-fly zone, but also allowing member states to "take all necessary measures" to protect civilians in Libya.
This U.N. resolution is reminiscent of the one that President George H.W. Bush secured in November 1990, which gave Iraq six weeks to withdraw from Kuwait following Hussein's invasion of that country. The U.N. resolution in 1990 similarly empowered states to use "all necessary means" to force Iraq out of Kuwait if Hussein ignored the deadline.
The similarities do not end there. The coalition that massed to drive Hussein out of Kuwait involved significant forces from major Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. So too the Libyan no-fly zone will be enforced by Qatar, along with western powers such as France and the U.K.
This is all quite in contrast to George W. Bush's ineffectual attempts to gather international support for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. There was no U.N. resolution explicitly authorizing the use of military force against Hussein, and no Muslim countries participated in the American invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Indeed, before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Turkish parliament voted against allowing American troops passage across Turkey to invade northern Iraq, which put a wrench in U.S. military planning.
Underlining the fac
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't feel ambivalent about starting a world war. I think that Bush would have done it if he hadn't been such a cheapskate. He kept underfunding his war efforts by diverting funds to give to his cronies. Now Obama has the war engine revved up. There's very little use for soldiers, we're in full Sarah Connor mode, or will be pretty soon, we're Skynet.
Also bothersome is that, while the daily show spot is funny, they seem to be unwaveringly on the side of war. Pretty classic partisan blindness, they're also pretty solidly against the environment as well. It's a 180 reversal for them, because they are following the blue line, not noticing when it twists and turns.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
Niki, Right now the italics from your signature are bleeding into my post and the copyright.
Most posts your purple bleeds into the copyright. I'm looking for my bleeding green, on beta.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
LOL, many liberals are tying themselves in knots(once again) to defend this Barry character. It is more than amusing. How's all that hopey changey stuff working out for ya? 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by QuestionableQuestionality:
LOL, many liberals are tying themselves in knots(once again) to defend this Barry character. It is more than amusing. How's all that hopey changey stuff working out for ya?
Care to name them?
I've seen a few conservatards give lukewarm support to Obama's latest military actions, even while trying to figure out how to "support the troops" while decrying their commander, but I haven't seen anyone on the "liberal" side defending this.
You and KKKaney keep making the same accusations AND the same spelling mistakes. Why is that?
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
True the conservatards like war. But, that is not what libtards voted for. Gotta suck being lied to over and over again. Who is KKKaney? Glad to see you found the emoticons. Good for you.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
"Libtards" (and everyone else) should be calling for Obama's impeachment. Even if he is not the one who made the ultimate decision to send in the missles he should still be impeached, because he is Commander-in-Chief.
Impeach ?
Well, I'll SETTLE for impeachment, but after all that has passed so far, this is kind of a last straw kinda thing, and my idea of what to do about it involves rope, a short drop and a sudden stop.
It was good enough for Saddam, right ?
-Frem
I do not serve the Blind God.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Impeach ?
Well, I'll SETTLE for impeachment...
You only say that cause he's black, we'd never impeach a white Democrat.
Impeachment now is a silly notion, lets save that for his 2nd term.
H
"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
More bullshit. Let's see...by the end of Bush's term, how many Republicans were angered by/ashamed of him? How many went right on defending him anyway for partisan reasons?
Now, how many Democrats have been vocal about their dislike of Obama's actions in one respect or another? And tell me please precisely WHICH liberals here have become "pretzels" trying to defend Obama?? I haven't seen any, so you must be seeing something I'm missing.
I have tried to bring PERSPECTIVE at times, been on the fence about Afghanistan and now Libya, abhorred some of Obama's actions quite vocally at other times, and rarely given him little more than leukwarm approval, so it can't be me...so tell us who.
But then, I only voted for him because the concept of McCain/Palin was so ghastly, and he was the only other viable option. So I guess you're not talking about me, tho' so many of your opinion constantly call him my "god" or "hero" or somesuch idiocy.Quote:
Anyone have ANY idea what that's supposed to mean? Beats me [/snark]
at least I'm true
Damn, DT, apparently I STILL haven't got it right. Grrrrr...I'll keep trying. Aha...I found what's wrong with the italics. How's this one? Personally, I don't care if your color bleeds into the copyright, so don't bother trying to fix it for me. I was just letting you know, in case you were interested. For me, just like my purple, your green helps me go back to find your posts if there was something I wanted to respond to; I really like that!
Bear in mind I can't know if something in my commands is wrong if you or someone else doesn't tell me; it appears fine on my computer. Thanx for letting me know.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
You only say that cause he's black, we'd never impeach a white Democrat
YOU might not, for mine own I'd have NO damn problem with it - you really think I don't despise Woodrow Wilson or LBJ as much as I hate Nixon and Bush ?
Shit, did I not point out there was much better stuff than who he was bangin to impeach Clinton for ?
I really do think we should hold out for the rope though - make it a straight up thing, that folks know going in that should they betray that trust the consequences can and will be lethal, you remove a lot of incentive to do so.
Of course, that also ties in with my concept that no one should ever be allowed to submit, enact or enforce a law they are not subject to, ever, because while otherwise unrelated, that would prevent any claims of immunity.
-Frem
I do not serve the Blind God.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Liberals are the equivalent of a pair of an old gramma's 1930's bloomers. They are to big, try to cover too much, and are funny colors.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME