whateverdude Posted March 21, 2011 Author Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) umm hello, they keep trying to push the "Iran wants a weapon" case ... where have you been? Also Iran didn't get to the level of unrest Lybia did. Protracted Lybia uprising provided excuse neokooks are always looking for. Just like after 9/11 they used it to scapegoat Saddam. Not Dexter, sorry to disappoint. LOL what was the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests? So let me get this right we will do what ever the Jewish puppet masters tell us to do and take out all their enemies for them but wait until they have the nuclear bomb first Edited March 21, 2011 by whateverdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 They're not in violation of the non-proliferation treaty. And internal documents obtained show they abandoned any desire for a weapon almnost a decade ago. LOL what was the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests? Sorry Im not familiar with Iranian war planes firing on rebel targets throughout the country. And the Iranian army in combat against rebel forces in rebel-controlled cities throughout the country. Please advise otherwise, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Some Dems upset with Barry? I guess at least Kucinich is consistent in skirting the issue of impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dexter Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Bull **** If this was true we would be bombing Iran and stop posting as Dexter The Decider's original plan was just that, to completely sell out, to wipe out not those behind 911, but instead those at war with those behind 911, since that is what Israel wanted. Somewhere, during the Sunni-Shia civil war in Iraq, someone explained to the sub human Decider that attacking Iran would be to wage war on Iran... and the Shia dominated "demockeracy" in Iraq... http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.iran/ TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Sunday tried to allay Iranian fears over a planned U.S.-Iraq security pact, saying his government would not allow Iraq to become a launching pad for an attack on its neighbor. art.tehran.afp.gi.jpg Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, left, greets Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Sunday. Click to view previous image 1 of 2 Click to view next image "Iraq today doesn't present any threat as it used to be in the times of the former regime," al-Maliki told Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during a Sunday meeting between two leaders, according to a statement from the prime minister's office. "Today's Iraq is a constitutional state based on the rule of law, and it seeks to develop its relations with the regional countries based on cooperation and mutual respect," al-Maliki said. Earlier, Iran's state-run news agency IRNA quoted the Iraqi leader as saying that "Baghdad would not allow its soil to be used as a base to damage the security of the neighboring countries, including Iran." His remarks come as the United States and Iraq are trying to reach a bilateral agreement on how long the U.S. military will remain in Iraq and what role it will play in Iraq's security. LOL what was the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests? So let me get this right we will do what ever the Jewish puppet masters tell us to do and take out all their enemies for them but wait until they have the nuclear bomb first Every sub human traitor like you who supported every count of treason by W should be very happy about Iran, since W is 100% responsible for the election of Ahmadinejad in 2005 (all about "axis of evil" and what was going on in Iraq at the time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) Some Dems upset with Barry? I guess at least Kucinich is consistent in skirting the issue of impeachment. Obama's trying to move to center for 2012 election, and wants to counter the "soft on defense" label that you know will be coming from the right. May actually be a positive for him that some of the more Liberal politicians are speaking out against. You know for sure almost none of their constituents would cross party lines and vote Republican, and angering Kucinich will win over some righties. Sad fact is almost no wars are started for stated reasons ... Iraq was not about WMDs, WMDs was the excuse to sell it to the public; the war in Lybia (and thats what it is a war, end the "no fly zone" BS) is not about Lybian civilians, for Obama it's about election year politics. Edited March 21, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Obama's trying to move to center for 2012 election, and wants to counter the "soft on defense" label that you know will be coming from the right. May actually be a positive for him that some of the more Liberal politicians are speaking out against. You know for sure almost none of their constituents would cross party lines and vote Republican, and angering Kucinich will win over some righties. At the rate Barry's going, he'll have no one left in his corner. No Repub will vote for him. Independants like me know they got burned last time. And far-Lefties are deserting the ship. Sad fact is almost no wars are started for stated reasons ... Iraq was not about WMDs, WMDs was the excuse to sell it to the public; the war in Lybia (and thats what it is a war, end the "no fly zone" BS) is not about Lybian civilians, for Obama it's about election year politics. I agree with you on Iraq. However I don't know about Barry's true intentions with Libya. But you could be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 . 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... Well played, sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Obama's trying to move to center for 2012 election, and wants to counter the "soft on defense" label that you know will be coming from the right. Please explain what this action in Libya has to do with defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Please explain what this action in Libya has to do with defense? Good question, beats me. Just the same as massing a full scale invasion of Iraq when we had a war to fight with the unabashed, unapologetic supporters of 9/11 in Afghanistan. But come election time it will be billed as "taking decisive action against a brutal dictator and sponsor of terror." And that will be argued makes him a "staunch defender of freedom not afraid to make tough decisions and use force to protect this great country of ours." Just like Bush did with Saddam/Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Good question, beats me. Just the same as massing a full scale invasion of Iraq when we had a war to fight with the unabashed, unapologetic supporters of 9/11 in Afghanistan. But come election time it will be billed as "taking decisive action against a brutal dictator and sponsor of terror." And that will be argued makes him a "staunch defender of freedom not afraid to make tough decisions and use force to protect this great country of ours." Just like Bush did with Saddam/Iraq. Do you have any opinions on world events that don't involve Bush sucking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Do you have any opinions on world events that don't involve Bush sucking? Funny you'd ask that in a thread where my first 3 posts were critical of Obama w/o mentioning Bush or Iraq. Consistent with your playbook only having one play: try to force the "liberal" tag on the confronter, then attack the label. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Please explain what this action in Libya has to do with defense? World order is always in our best interest especially when a democracy is being born right next door Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) Funny you'd ask that in a thread where my first 3 posts were critical of Obama w/o mentioning Bush or Iraq. Consistent with your playbook only having one play: try to force the "liberal" tag on the confronter, then attack the label. "Idiot" tag. I don't give a **** whether you're liberal or conservative. You're an idiot. Edited March 21, 2011 by DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) "Idiot" tag. I don't give a **** whether you're liberal or conservative. You're an idiot. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/127879-want-to-slash-government-waste/page__view__findpost__p__2122368 And you still didn't respond to the comment that it's funny you ask "Do you have any opinions on world events that don't involve Bush sucking?" when in that very same thread my 3 initial posts were critical of Obama w/o mentioning Bush or Iraq. Double Edited March 21, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 World order is always in our best interest especially when a democracy is being born right next door A democracy is being born in Egypt? :lol: :lol: You know when you'll realize that Egypt has not turned into a democracy? When your head is rolling down a flight of stairs, that's when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 World order is always in our best interest especially when a democracy is being born right next door So what does lobbing cruise missles at a tent in the desert have to do with world order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 World order is always in our best interest especially when a democracy is being born right next door I bet they will even have a two party system................................. The Muslem Brotherhood Party vs. The Al Qaeda Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/127879-want-to-slash-government-waste/page__view__findpost__p__2122368 And you still didn't respond to the comment that it's funny you ask "Do you have any opinions on world events that don't involve Bush sucking?" when in that very same thread my 3 initial posts were critical of Obama w/o mentioning Bush or Iraq. Double Actually, in two of those three you had to drag the neocons, "lying about WMDs", and all that other bull **** you spew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Please explain what this action in Libya has to do with defense? Democrats were against "offense is the best defense" before they were for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted March 21, 2011 Author Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) Sorry Im not familiar with Iranian war planes firing on rebel targets throughout the country. And the Iranian army in combat against rebel forces in rebel-controlled cities throughout the country. Please advise otherwise, thanks. No they just shot them in the head in the streets in their beds and wherever they found them for the mere thought of rebellion. Edited March 21, 2011 by whateverdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts