Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-09-2011, 10:55 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,851,320 times
Reputation: 3315

Advertisements

Obama Acknowledges "Stalemate" in Libya; "Significant" Number of Troops out of Afghanistan in July - FoxNews.com

"
Obama Acknowledges "Stalemate" in Libya; "Significant" Number of Troops out of Afghanistan in July

Read more: Obama Acknowledges "Stalemate" in Libya; "Significant" Number of Troops out of Afghanistan in July - FoxNews.com"

Shouldn't he have wrapped up Afghanistan before attacking another country?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:05 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,984,492 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
I'm very familiar with the terms, I just don't buy the loaded BS coming out of the White House, if we are there to protect the Libyan civilians from being slaughtered then why are we killing them with bombs at the same time? The US isn't just part of NATO, we ARE NATO when it comes to troops, equipment and leadership so no matter what the idiot in chief says we are at WAR with Libya with no timetable, no exit plan and no end in sight.
Not quite .... maybe this will help:

NATO - Member countries

Quote:
NATO is an Alliance that consists of 28 independent member countries.
And also the following:

2011 military intervention in Libya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
On 19 March 2011 a multi-state coalition began a military intervention in Libya to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which was taken in response to events during the 2011 Libyan civil war.[11] On 19 March, military operations began, with US and British forces firing over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles,[12] the French Air Force and British Royal Air Force[13] undertaking sorties across Libya and a naval blockade by the Royal Navy.[14] Air strikes against Libyan Army tanks and vehicles by French jets have since been confirmed.[15][16]

Since the beginning of the intervention, the initial coalition of Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Norway, Qatar, Spain, UK and US[18][19][20][21][22][23] has expanded to 17 states, with newer states mostly enforcing the no-fly zone and naval blockade or providing military logistical assistance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:16 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,851,320 times
Reputation: 3315
The US has more troops, more equipment and more military leaders in Libya than any other NATO member. You can't spin this no matter how hard you try, Obama started a war against a country that didn't pose us a threat and liberal retards are giving him a free pass for no other reason than... well... than they're liberal retards. GWB could have mailed a letter to Libya and it would have been seen as an attack on another country by many *******s but Obama lobs a couple hundred missiles into a sovereign country and it's no big deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:18 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,984,492 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
Anyone who was unemployed during the Bush presidency should be back to work by now, anyone sitting around doing nothing for 2 years deserves to be unemployed since they're clearly not looking for work in the first place.
So what you are saying, is those people who lost their jobs during Bush, found new jobs since Obama came into office?

Lose your job during Bush ... find a new job during Obama.

Guess we can THANK OBAMA AGAIN for another job well done !!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:22 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,984,492 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
The US has more troops, more equipment and more military leaders in Libya than any other NATO member. You can't spin this no matter how hard you try, Obama started a war against a country that didn't pose us a threat and liberal retards are giving him a free pass for no other reason than... well... than they're liberal retards. GWB could have mailed a letter to Libya and it would have been seen as an attack on another country by many *******s but Obama lobs a couple hundred missiles into a sovereign country and it's no big deal.
You TRULY do not understand NATO.

Sorry, but I can't help you any more than I already have done above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:25 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,851,320 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RD5050 View Post
So what you are saying, is those people who lost their jobs during Bush, found new jobs since Obama came into office?

Lose your job during Bush ... find a new job during Obama.

Guess we can THANK OBAMA AGAIN for another job well done !!!
What I'm saying is you're trying to blame GWB for people who have been unemployed since Obama came into office, at what point do we give up on someone who clearly doesn't want to work? If people were finding new jobs during Obama we wouldn't have such high unemployment numbers right now... wake up, you support an idiot who has done nothing to help the people of this country get jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:27 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,851,320 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RD5050 View Post
You TRULY do not understand NATO.

Sorry, but I can't help you any more than I already have done above.
I understand NATO a lot more than you do apparently. I don't need help figuring out that Obama has gotten the United States into ANOTHER unfunded, unplanned and unorganized war against a country that posed us no threat. Thanks Obama, you're doing a great job following the George W Bush play book, I'm sure he's proud of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:38 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,984,492 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
What I'm saying is you're trying to blame GWB for people who have been unemployed since Obama came into office, at what point do we give up on someone who clearly doesn't want to work? If people were finding new jobs during Obama we wouldn't have such high unemployment numbers right now... wake up, you support an idiot who has done nothing to help the people of this country get jobs.
What I see is the unemployment rate rising a full 3% during the last 9 months of Bush.

And then continuing to rise another 2% through Oct 2009, until Obama turned it around, and it has since fallen back to 9%.

I'd call that a big accomplishment for Obama to stop the Bush Unemployment Disaster in its tracks, and move unemployment back in the right direction!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:41 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,984,492 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
I understand NATO a lot more than you do apparently. I don't need help figuring out that Obama has gotten the United States into ANOTHER unfunded, unplanned and unorganized war against a country that posed us no threat. Thanks Obama, you're doing a great job following the George W Bush play book, I'm sure he's proud of you.
I stand by my previous response.

Nothing more can be said regarding NATO other than what I already provided above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2011, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,851,320 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RD5050 View Post
What I see is the unemployment rate rising a full 3% during the last 9 months of Bush.

And then continuing to rise another 2% through Oct 2009, until Obama turned it around, and it has since fallen back to 9%.

I'd call that a big accomplishment for Obama to stop the Bush Unemployment Disaster in its tracks, and move unemployment back in the right direction!
So in your opinion the rise in unemployment through Oct. 2009 was due to Bush policies?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:57 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top