Tiberius Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 A Bush criticizing Obama on foreign policy. Wow! Hillary must be dreaming of this dead weight winning the nomination. And even though Conservatives enthusiastically were driven to the polls like cattle to vote for W I have a hard time seeing it happen in the 2016 primaries. Fool me once... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/02/18/jeb-bush-foreign-policy-obama/23599367/ Obama isn't decisive enough...like his brother? Oh wait, he says he isn't like his brother, lol. Ya right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Jeb won't win the nomination. And he's wrong here because anyone paying attention to the last six years knows that Obama's foreign policy has been very consistent: whenever there's trouble, blame Bush, turn up the radio, head for the golf course, hug a tranny, and finish it off with a California fundraiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 Jeb won't win the nomination. And he's wrong here because anyone paying attention to the last six years knows that Obama's foreign policy has been very consistent: whenever there's trouble, blame Bush, turn up the radio, head for the golf course, hug a tranny, and finish it off with a California fundraiser. The liberals did argue from the beginning that Bush's war would just create more terrorists. That seems to have been proven true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 The liberals did argue from the beginning that Bush's war would just create more terrorists. That seems to have been proven true Why of course all these beheadings, and burning people alive, and murdering of Jews and Christians are Bush's fault. That's step 1 of the previously noted Barack Obama 5-Step Foreign Policy. Step 1. Blame Bush. Step 2. Turn up radio. Step 3. Head for golf course. Step 4. Hug a tranny. Step 5. Finish with a California fundraiser. He and his nutsuckers sure love to stick to the scripts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 To be fair, gatorman is our resident expert on brain damage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 A Bush criticizing Obama on foreign policy. Wow! Hillary must be dreaming of this dead weight winning the nomination. And even though Conservatives enthusiastically were driven to the polls like cattle to vote for W I have a hard time seeing it happen in the 2016 primaries. Fool me once... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/02/18/jeb-bush-foreign-policy-obama/23599367/ Obama isn't decisive enough...like his brother? Oh wait, he says he isn't like his brother, lol. Ya right! What does Jeb Bush's foreign policy have to do with his brother's? Oh that's right.......NOTHING!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 What does Jeb Bush's foreign policy have to do with his brother's? Oh that's right.......NOTHING!! Now, now Chef, Gator was right in his thread title......for the first four words....................after that he (naturally) got confused. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 gatorman: Given that intervention in the Middle East isn't your preferred approach, are you taking a stand for appeasement or isolationism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 gatorman: Given that intervention in the Middle East isn't your preferred approach, are you taking a stand for appeasement or isolationism? This is just stupid. Being against the Iraq War means you are an appeaser? What does Jeb Bush's foreign policy have to do with his brother's? Oh that's right.......NOTHING!! What proof do you have it will be different? To be fair, gatorman is our resident expert on brain damage Yes, reading posts from Conservatives all the time gives me a first hand view of brain damaged minds at work. Why of course all these beheadings, and burning people alive, and murdering of Jews and Christians are Bush's fault. That's step 1 of the previously noted Barack Obama 5-Step Foreign Policy. Step 1. Blame Bush. Step 2. Turn up radio. Step 3. Head for golf course. Step 4. Hug a tranny. Step 5. Finish with a California fundraiser. He and his nutsuckers sure love to stick to the scripts. It's as if Bush W never existed! You guys just want him to go away and never be talked about. I understand why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 This is just stupid. Being against the Iraq War means you are an appeaser? That's not what I said. I asked what your position is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 That's not what I said. I asked what your position is today.And then you qualified it to either appeasement or isolationism...as if those are the only two options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 And then you qualified it to either appeasement or isolationism...as if those are the only two options In regards to the current destabilized situation in the Middle East, there are three clear paths you can take with your foreign policy: 1) You can assert yourself on the situation militarily, put down ISIS, and maintain on ongoing military presence in the region in order to maintain stability over the long term. 2) You can divorce yourself from the situation, and allow whatever unfolds in the region to unfold, and play itself out. 3) You can attempt to placate and pacify the various extremist groups, including ISIS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 It's as if Bush W never existed! You guys just want him to go away and never be talked about. I understand why Actually, at this juncture, we're really happy that you and the rest of the progressive nutsuckers won't stop mentioning his name in every single thing you write and say. While your obsession with him is second on the creepy scale only to being on stage next to Joe Biden, the reality is, progressives will ruin a run by Jeb, and suddenly we'd have a helpful use for your BDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 What proof do you have it will be different? Well seeing you brought up the fact that seeing he's a Bush he will have the same policy as his brother it's up to you to prove your point. You would not have brought it up unless you had some sort of proof of your point correct. So I'll wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 In regards to the current destabilized situation in the Middle East, there are three clear paths you can take with your foreign policy: 1) You can assert yourself on the situation militarily, put down ISIS, and maintain on ongoing military presence in the region in order to maintain stability over the long term. 2) You can divorce yourself from the situation, and allow whatever unfolds in the region to unfold, and play itself out. 3) You can attempt to placate and pacify the various extremist groups, including ISIS. Totally disagree. Those are hardly the only options. Fighting a terrorist group isn't really a traditional military operation. You can oppose them but sending the army in is a real dumb way of doing it. Well seeing you brought up the fact that seeing he's a Bush he will have the same policy as his brother it's up to you to prove your point. You would not have brought it up unless you had some sort of proof of your point correct. So I'll wait. I thought the point was pretty clear. Hillary would love to run against him and he would have to explain how and why he is different from his brother, which won't be easy. So I made a political point and you seemed to miss that. Feel free to say this Bush is different if you want, I'd love to hear your emotional...I'm sorry, I mean your reasoning behind that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Totally disagree. Those are hardly the only options. Fighting a terrorist group isn't really a traditional military operation. You can oppose them but sending the army in is a real dumb way of doing it. Opposing them without any actual opposition is dumb? How do you oppose them then? I'd love to hear about your "fourth path". Can you please provide a detailed history of modern, expansive, aggressive, militarist organizations are put down without use of military force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 (edited) The liberals did argue from the beginning that Bush's war would just create more terrorists. That seems to have been proven true It wasn't just Bush's war though. I listened to a montage of clips yesterday of Pelosi, Hillary, Harry Reid and Biden, all the liberal(socialist) icons not only endorsing the war on Iraq, but also saying that there were definitely WMD's. And if Bush and your liberal pals created more terrorists,your current leftist wet dream Barry is arming them. Funny world isn't it? You should feel betrayed. More US creating a problem. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/17/isis-war-cia-arming-rebels-syria http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Edited February 18, 2015 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 In regards to the current destabilized situation in the Middle East, there are three clear paths you can take with your foreign policy: 1) You can assert yourself on the situation militarily, put down ISIS, and maintain on ongoing military presence in the region in order to maintain stability over the long term. 2) You can divorce yourself from the situation, and allow whatever unfolds in the region to unfold, and play itself out. 3) You can attempt to placate and pacify the various extremist groups, including ISIS. You left out 'label them radical extremists, fly a few drones in, wait for Jordan and the UAE to take action, then deploy your State Department's deputy spokesperson to remind us all that we can't kill our way to victory, and that all they really need over there is jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I thought the point was pretty clear. Hillary would love to run against him and he would have to explain how and why he is different from his brother, which won't be easy. So I made a political point and you seemed to miss that. Feel free to say this Bush is different if you want, I'd love to hear your emotional...I'm sorry, I mean your reasoning behind that Why won't it be easy to point out why he's different from his brother? Many brothers are different. My brother is only 2 years older than me and we are extremely different. My views on many things political are a 180 from my brother and father (keeping the Bush clan scenario). But yeah we know you have a hard time understanding that people can actually think for themselves. Now explain how they are the same. You brought it up, back up your claim. Come on boy, you can do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Can you please provide a detailed history of modern, expansive, aggressive, militarist organizations are put down without use of military force? Yeah. That'll happen. You left out 'label them radical extremists, fly a few drones in, wait for Jordan and the UAE to take action, then deploy your State Department's deputy spokesperson to remind us all that we can't kill our way to victory, and that all they really need over there is jobs. Not to mention, yesterday, she justified her comments by saying George W. and Colin Powell took the same approach. Who knew that Barack Obama has the exact same FP as W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts