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)
View Poll Results: Is Obama's Libya Similar to Bush's Iraq?
Yes, and the media is treating Obama much better than they treated Bush 59 40.69%
Yes, and the media is treating Obama the same as Bush 9 6.21%
Yes, and the media is treating Obama worse than Bush 2 1.38%
No, the two situations are not similar 72 49.66%
Other 3 2.07%
Voters: 145. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2011, 01:58 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,180 posts, read 19,449,121 times
Reputation: 5297

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay F View Post
For those who say Libya is a different situaton than Iraq. Imagine for one second that Bush took the same exact action against Libya. You would never hear the end of it. The media would bash the hell out of him, especially for not getting the approval of congress. The same liberals who are approving of this action now (or saying nothing) would be furious at Bush.

I do respect the liberals such as Michael Moore who are outspoken against Obama over this. At least they are consistent, that is a good quality...better than the "Obama right or wrong" crowd who are still under a hypnotic spell.
If the U.S supplied a supporting role under Bush to enforce a no-fly zone by bombing certain military targets without sending ground troops in the media would not have bashed him. Hell the media supported the initial invasion of Iraq...

Regardless, the situation is not even REMOTELY close to Iraq. Ground troops vs no ground troops for starters....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2011, 02:08 AM
 
521 posts, read 466,854 times
Reputation: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay F View Post
For those who say Libya is a different situaton than Iraq. Imagine for one second that Bush took the same exact action against Libya. You would never hear the end of it. The media would bash the hell out of him, especially for not getting the approval of congress. The same liberals who are approving of this action now (or saying nothing) would be furious at Bush.

I do respect the liberals such as Michael Moore who are outspoken against Obama over this. At least they are consistent, that is a good quality...better than the "Obama right or wrong" crowd who are still under a hypnotic spell.
Iraq was a legal war.

Libya is an illegal war.

That's the difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 02:45 AM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Scates View Post
Iraq was a legal war.

Libya is an illegal war.

That's the difference.
They both were/are illegal.

The Iraq War in terms of international and domestic law. UN treaties we were party to allowed no military attacks without approval from the Security Council. A treaty ratified by the US Senate which carries the force of law.

On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq

The 2nd in terms of the US Constitution which gives only Congress the right to commence War without the US first being attacked.

Last edited by padcrasher; 03-22-2011 at 02:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:33 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,929,215 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
If the U.S supplied a supporting role under Bush to enforce a no-fly zone by bombing certain military targets without sending ground troops in the media would not have bashed him. Hell the media supported the initial invasion of Iraq...

Regardless, the situation is not even REMOTELY close to Iraq. Ground troops vs no ground troops for starters....
Bush went to Congress - obama didn't. Bus had twice as many in his coalition than obama has. Where is obama getting the money to pay for this?

Quote:
They both were/are illegal.
Only if you believe the UN the calls shots in the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 05:55 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,862,853 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
If the U.S supplied a supporting role under Bush to enforce a no-fly zone by bombing certain military targets without sending ground troops in the media would not have bashed him. Hell the media supported the initial invasion of Iraq...
The USA is leading the attacks,it is responsible for most of the attacks,it is in charge of coordinating the attacks....how is that taking a supporting role exactly?


Quote:
Regardless, the situation is not even REMOTELY close to Iraq. Ground troops vs no ground troops for starters....
There were no ground troops in Iraq at the beginning,it was an air war....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 06:20 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,929,215 times
Reputation: 7118
How does the Left reconcile this?
Quote:

2007;

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,†.
They agreed with him then...or now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,180 posts, read 19,449,121 times
Reputation: 5297
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Bush went to Congress - obama didn't. Bus had twice as many in his coalition than obama has. Where is obama getting the money to pay for this?



Only if you believe the UN the calls shots in the world.
Actually Bush didn't exactly go to Congress, he didn't follow what Congress passed.

You do not need to go to Congress to enforce a no-fly zone. We do not have any troops on the ground, nor do we have any indications or evidence that we will have troops on the ground.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 01:06 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,447,180 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcee squared View Post
By global, I mean countries that have the capability to strike.

Russia and China abstained.
We had more unilateral involvement in Iraq. The 2 situations are almost identical for the most part. Only an ideologue would see it differently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 01:08 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,447,180 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough View Post
Did you notice that the Libya action was taken in furtherance of a UN Security Council resolution specifically authorizing it, while Bush's invasion of Iraq was not?
How many times did Saddam violate the UN Security Council NFZ in Iraq killing NATO forces? That is an act of war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 01:09 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,447,180 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill61 View Post
My pleasure.

Iraq War.................................................. .............................Libyan Military Mission
War, complete with ground troops.................................................Not a war, ground troops will not be sent in.
Planned from Bush's first day in office, waiting for an excuse...............Not on President Obama's radar in any way, until asked by our allies
Lied to the American Public about WMDs to gain approval...................Didn't lie to garner support
Protracted war activities including ground troops...............................Short term mission to clear a path for the allies to enforce the NFZ
UNANIMOUSLY opposed by the Arab League.....................................Endorsed by the Arab League, 20-2
Seen by Iraqis and the Arab world as occupiers - US flags burned..........Seen as liberators by grateful citizens
No participation by any Arab countries............................................Qatar has already committed 4 planes, UAE also committed to
.................................................. ...........................................involvement in the next few days.
.................................................. ...........................................Jordan, Iraq, and Morocco also in talks about participation.



You want more, or will that suffice?
Can you read the future? I thought not, so don't count your chickens before they hatch. Ground troops WILL be sent in. It is inevitable. You can't protect people on the ground from the air without killing them.
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 04:19 PM.

© 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