whateverdude Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 Libya's Gadhafi says in brief statement Mediterranean, North Africa have become a 'ground of war' - Reuters Bahahahah
/dev/null Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 Gadhafi was already in power before Obama was inaugurated. Ergo this war is also Bush's fault
meazza Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 Gadhafi was already in power before Obama was inaugurated. Ergo this war is also Bush's fault Will Michael Moore make a documentary about Obama now?
whateverdude Posted March 19, 2011 Author Posted March 19, 2011 Will Michael Moore make a documentary about Obama now? Yeah, he can call the film "ground of war"
....lybob Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 Will Michael Moore make a documentary about Obama now? Maybe, he's been critical of Obama since November 2009 Filmmaker Michael Moore is adding his name to a growing list of liberals increasingly disappointed by President Obama's policy choices.Moore is questioning the president's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan. He writes in an open letter on his Web site michaelmoore.com: "Do you really want to be the new 'war president'? With just one speech... you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics.... You will teach them what they've always heard is true — that all politicians are alike. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578225,00.html#ixzz1H5Tb7Dbi Many times for the last year and a half I've said on this Board that there are a lot progressives pissed at Obama for being a establishment Wall Street corporatist and being tremendously weak in his dealings with Republicans- Obama has a chance of having a Democratic primary challenger it's not a big chance now but it seems to grow a little bit everyday.
EasternOHBillsFan Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 The French are now in full scale warrior mode, and now finally the morons can each french fries, drink French wines, and eat French cheese without going batshit. Where's my cognac? Many times for the last year and a half I've said on this Board that there are a lot progressives pissed at Obama for being a establishment Wall Street corporatist and being tremendously weak in his dealings with Republicans- Obama has a chance of having a Democratic primary challenger it's not a big chance now but it seems to grow a little bit everyday. I'm not just pissed at him for that, but for opening up Atlantic drilling offshore, not lifting the Cuban embargo, and free spending into oblivion like the Democrats were accused of before Clinton. He's damn lucky the GOP has no viable candidate and scorns Donald Trump, or he'd lose. War or no war, as a progressive he has made me angry on several occasions.
....lybob Posted March 19, 2011 Posted March 19, 2011 The French are now in full scale warrior mode, and now finally the morons can each french fries, drink French wines, and eat French cheese without going batshit. Where's my cognac? I'm not just pissed at him for that, but for opening up Atlantic drilling offshore, not lifting the Cuban embargo, and free spending into oblivion like the Democrats were accused of before Clinton. He's damn lucky the GOP has no viable candidate and scorns Donald Trump, or he'd lose. War or no war, as a progressive he has made me angry on several occasions. The funny thing is when the right-wing hears that progressives are mad at Obama for not being progressive enough they can't process it, it blow a circuit in their Pentium 64 - they'll say don't you wish you voted for McCain and Palin or do you miss Bush and I say !@#$ no!!!! I just wish I stayed home instead going out in that crappy weather to vote. We need some better candidates, Russ Feingold maybe Gen Westly Clark .
DC Tom Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 Bahahahah Not to worry, this won't be a "real" war. Just bombing the **** out of a country from the air, at minimal cost and risk of American lives, thereby guaranteeing a "victory", no matter what the result or how many Libyans are killed.
UConn James Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) Not to worry, this won't be a "real" war. Just bombing the **** out of a country from the air, at minimal cost and risk of American lives, thereby guaranteeing a "victory", no matter what the result or how many Libyans are killed. Until sometime down the road, this comes around to bite us in the ass when we least expect it, when Ghadaffi/Kaddafy/Cadhaphi/Kedafe/Quadaffi/Gedaphfi or one of his sons, say, orders the bombing of another airliner, or worse. This won't ever be forgotten. Whenever they can get some blowback in, they won't hesitate a second. As you know probably better than anyone here, the idea that we can be involved like this and not get our hands dirty with our drones or jets is the height of arrogance. Our defenses still aren't tight enough to catch everythng, even 10 years on. One might argue they do this anyway behind the curtain. And that was before the $36B in frozen personal assets. Unless Libya never sells another drop of oil, there'll soon be enough money to start some fresh havoc. Edited March 20, 2011 by UConn James
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 The international community led this and Obama is joining in on a United Nations effort to crush a crumbling dictatorship on the same day that the Eqyptian people are VOTING on a new Constitution. Leaving the terrorist in charge while his own people are fighting him at the Same time democracy is sweeping across the region isn't very pragmatic. The idiotic comparison to Iraq is pretty weak
whateverdude Posted March 20, 2011 Author Posted March 20, 2011 Obama only picked this fight because he knows he can't lose and he needs to pad the international diplomacy/coalition building part of his resume going into the election. He could give a **** about human rights, Africa and Asia is full of human rights injustices and he does nothing. This action took no guts on Obamas part, it was a PR move to draw stark differences between his foreign policy of UN centric coalition building and Bushes. EVERYONE HATES Gadhafi even the Arabs think he's nuts and can't be trusted so building a coalition with UN consent was a once in a life time opportunity in which Obama was politically savvy enough to seize upon. It will never happen again!
Gene Frenkle Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 This is topsy turvy. A perfect example of politics as a team sport. Lemmings.
DC Tom Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 This is topsy turvy. A perfect example of politics as a team sport. Lemmings. I want done to Qadaffi Duck the same thing I wanted done to Saddam Insane back in '03: assassinate the bastard. This, of course, is different. We're not actually trying to dethrone Qadaffi, we're just enforcing a no-fly zone. Completely different from Iraq, and absolutely unprecedented. I mean, if there were ever a popular uprising against Saddam in Iraq that he tried to crush with overwhelming military force, I'm sure a no-fly zone would have stopped things in their tracks...
truth on hold Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) As usual it has nothing to do with the stated justification, in this case "protecting Lybian civilians" It's primarily about oil and I'm sure the behind the scenes discussions would confirm that. UK and France have failing economies and can't tolerate the recent spike up. In the US, higher energy prices/inflation puts pressure on the Fed to turn off the money printing press. Obama doesn't waste any time with the bogus extension argument that Khadafi's statement to the rebels about "having no mercy" was somehow directed at civilians. Which of course makes no freaking sense. Edited March 20, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack
Jim in Anchorage Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 I want done to Qadaffi Duck the same thing I wanted done to Saddam Insane back in '03: assassinate the bastard. This, of course, is different. We're not actually trying to dethrone Qadaffi, we're just enforcing a no-fly zone. Completely different from Iraq, and absolutely unprecedented. I mean, if there were ever a popular uprising against Saddam in Iraq that he tried to crush with overwhelming military force, I'm sure a no-fly zone would have stopped things in their tracks... There was a uprising. encouraged by Bush Sr And the no fly zone was established in the South right after the Gulf war. Didn't seem to help.
UConn James Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 There was a uprising. encouraged by Bush Sr And the no fly zone was established in the South right after the Gulf war. Didn't seem to help. I think Tom was going for sarcasm there....
Nanker Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 This is fantastic news. Nelson DeMille will get another five or six books out of this! Return of the Son of the Lion perhaps?
whateverdude Posted March 20, 2011 Author Posted March 20, 2011 A simple question...why are we protecting al Qaeda backed rebels (Al-Jama’a al-Islamiyyah al-Muqatilah bi-Libya) in Libya?
KD in CA Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 Maybe, he's been critical of Obama since November 2009 Many times for the last year and a half I've said on this Board that there are a lot progressives pissed at Obama for being a establishment Wall Street corporatist and being tremendously weak in his dealings with Republicans- Obama has a chance of having a Democratic primary challenger it's not a big chance now but it seems to grow a little bit everyday. Even Obama knows that no one is more spineless and predictable than Hollywood liberals and the wealthy, self-styled "progressives". What are they going to do, not get in line behind the liberal, black guy 2012? Back an establishment candidate like Hillary?
DC Tom Posted March 20, 2011 Posted March 20, 2011 I think Tom was going for sarcasm there.... I don't know how he missed that...
Recommended Posts