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.
Bush added much more than $4 trillion. You are probably just looking at public sector debt; the private sector debt, where the bad lending occured, needs to be included.
That is a bit retarded... blaming Bush for everything unrelated to Bush... well then Obama's true deficit is 100 Trillion dollars... does that make you feel better? I like coming up numbers like punitive damage for all the "hurt emotions" of America that led to decline in productivity from Obama's failures... you like that? Like I said, a bit retarded..
The campaign ad writes itself. I was surprised in particular that Obama used the word 'unpatriotic' since so many lefties have complained about it in the past few years.
You assume Congress would have approved Obama's African wars. I don't think they would have. We've wasted a whole lot of American lives and taxpayer money propping up the Afghanistan heroine trade with our soldiers guarding poppy fields. But, The FED and IMF are profiting so new wars just keep happening.
The difference in Iraq and Libya is that Gaddhafi actually HAD attacked the U.S. by proxy in the airplane bombing, we got results in less than ten years at a miniscule fraction of the cost of deposing Saddam, we didn't kill 5,000 Americans for nothing, and Obama didn't completely forget who he was after a month into the action.
All things considered, from a business standpoint congress should not be allowed to be involved in starting wars. Obama gave us a much better ROI.
The difference in Iraq and Libya is that Gaddhafi actually HAD attacked the U.S. by proxy in the airplane bombing, we got results in less than ten years at a miniscule fraction of the cost of deposing Saddam, we didn't kill 5,000 Americans for nothing, and Obama didn't completely forget who he was after a month into the action.
All things considered, from a business standpoint congress should not be allowed to be involved in starting wars. Obama gave us a much better ROI.
It sounds like you're hedging to allow a Democrat to assist in the deposition of foreign leaders, but have a real problem with a Republican doing so. The cost of the action completely irrelevant. It's the principle of taking out a foreign leader, or not, that matters.
Your principles seem to be more partisan-based than a deeply rooted belief in who should be taken out, and who shouldn't.
The difference in Iraq and Libya is that Gaddhafi actually HAD attacked the U.S. by proxy in the airplane bombing, we got results in less than ten years at a miniscule fraction of the cost of deposing Saddam, we didn't kill 5,000 Americans for nothing, and Obama didn't completely forget who he was after a month into the action.
All things considered, from a business standpoint congress should not be allowed to be involved in starting wars. Obama gave us a much better ROI.
aeroguy nails it, this is a post hoc, cherry picked, phony analysis. Remember Saddam had plotted to kill HW Bush, so to argue that Gaddhafi had attacked us by bombing Pan Am 103 over Scotland, while Saddam never did, is absurd.
Similarly early indications are the the new Libya will be a fundamentalist Islamic state, while Iraq is functioning democracy in the heart of the Mid East with at least the glimmer of potential--at least it was until Obama let it slip away, according to Charles Krauthammer: KRAUTHAMMER: In Iraq, Obama turned victory into failure
If establishment of a new Libya as another fundamentalist Islamic state under Sharia law is 'a much better ROI' I think I'll put my money under my mattress from now on.
It sounds like you're hedging to allow a Democrat to assist in the deposition of foreign leaders, but have a real problem with a Republican doing so. The cost of the action completely irrelevant. It's the principle of taking out a foreign leader, or not, that matters.
Your principles seem to be more partisan-based than a deeply rooted belief in who should be taken out, and who shouldn't.
The threrad is about money, not principles. The right-wing seems to be able to summon principles only on a situational basis.
Libya cost only a timy sliver of what Iraq did, and BTW - If Saddam had actually had WMDs, he had no delivery system that would ever have gotten them here.
With President Cheney and his lap dog Bush, it was not about principles, it was about oil, read: money. It could not have been about morality or principles with them. They have none.
aeroguy nails it, this is a post hoc, cherry picked, phony analysis. Remember Saddam had plotted to kill HW Bush, so to argue that Gaddhafi had attacked us by bombing Pan Am 103 over Scotland, while Saddam never did, is absurd.
Similarly early indications are the the new Libya will be a fundamentalist Islamic state, while Iraq is functioning democracy in the heart of the Mid East with at least the glimmer of potential--at least it was until Obama let it slip away, according to Charles Krauthammer: KRAUTHAMMER: In Iraq, Obama turned victory into failure
If establishment of a new Libya as another fundamentalist Islamic state under Sharia law is 'a much better ROI' I think I'll put my money under my mattress from now on.
What would you expect Kraphammer to say? He likes to get a paycheck every week.
I am glad to see you are firmly behind Separation of Church and State. The government you see in Iran and Libya is what you will get here if the fundamentalist screwballs ever gain the upper hand.
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.
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.
