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.
Why don't you ask Pakistan and OBL about his set. Perhaps you liked Bush's set better. By the time everything is paid for the war in Iraq, the pricetag could be as high as $6,000,000,000,000 or $6 trillion if you prefer.
Quote:
Uhhh, you do know the militants who attacked the embassy were funded and supported by Obama in their civil war with Gaddafi right? Were you living underground the past 5 years?
No, see, I actually think for myself. The policy the adminsitration had was to push for a stalemate as the best possible outcome. Perhaps you would have preferred Mitt's suggestion adn had us arm them. Feel free to blindly whine though.
Lies and personal attacks - how mature! You're standing around whining about how "Obama" let the Russians invade, and now you're claiming that you don't want war with Russia!? Get real!
So, what's your patriotic, non-"liberal" solution? Because we've tried sanctions, and there's only one other step after that, and it's called military action.
Got any answers? Of course not - but it is all still somehow "Obama's fault" because he didn't magically protect the Ukraine from invasion without actually using military force... right...
He could have given them weapons instead of helmets and garbage they couldn't use.
Why don't you ask Pakistan and OBL about his set. Perhaps you liked Bush's set better. By the time everything is paid for the war in Iraq, the pricetag could be as high as $6,000,000,000,000 or $6 trillion if you prefer.
No, see, I actually think for myself. The policy the adminsitration had was to push for a stalemate as the best possible outcome. Perhaps you would have preferred Mitt's suggestion adn had us arm them. Feel free to blindly whine though.
Why don't you ask Pakistan and OBL about his set. Perhaps you liked Bush's set better. By the time everything is paid for the war in Iraq, the pricetag could be as high as $6,000,000,000,000 or $6 trillion if you prefer.
No, see, I actually think for myself. The policy the adminsitration had was to push for a stalemate as the best possible outcome. Perhaps you would have preferred Mitt's suggestion adn had us arm them. Feel free to blindly whine though.
Mitt Romney's suggestion? Who cares about Romney, he isn't president, he can't arm nobody. Romney is back on the East Coast kicking back Coors, and watching TV in his mansion.
Who actually did arm the Syrian rebels? Oh that's right, it was OBAMA.
BS. I'm a fiery Anti-Obama domestics policies. But when it comes to foreign policy the guy has proven right. It is not the duty of Americans to spend resources we do not have and American lives we do need here at home. We have to stop thinking that we need to get ourselves in every conflict around the World. We are not the UN, let the world burn down, and we should again regain our manufacturing capabilities through it.
Let Europeans fight their own wars. Ukraine is not our problem, Syria s not our problem, Asia is not our problem. Let the world be for Christ sake. I do not understand certain people that proclaim loud and clear the government intrusion in their life, and rightly so, but then turn around and state that America should be involved in every conflict in the world. If you are so prone to be World Hero not body is stopping you to go to those places and fight your so much needed war.
But we should stop being the F World Police. The New Generation is tired of this Game, American People do not gain anything from it. What do we have to gain from going into Ukraine, and Syria, Iraq? When I say We, I make an allusion to normal folks, middle class people in the country not Defense Contractor Corporations. I tell you, NOTHING. Really Nothing.
Most of the failures actually ARE continuations of Bush's policies, or more precisely, the policies of those who actually control the government and both parties.
But, sure - feel free to live in Tea Party land, where the following facts don't apply:
1) The GOP cut the funding to protect our embassy's, Benghazi included:
Sure, let's ignore that fact and pretend it's all the fault of "liberals."
2) NSA's spying has gone on for years, and the Patriot Act was passed on Bush's watch. Again, more little facts that nobody wants to hear.
3) Starting a war with Russia is not a good idea, but sure - let's start up WW 3 over the Ukraine. Great idea!
4) The Middle East: I'm sorry, but when was the last time, exactly, the US has had a policy here that worked? Are we forgetting a few little wars started under Bush that helped set the current events in motion? Heck, are we forgetting decades of failures - from both parties - that have helped all this unfold?
Obama is no saint, that much is obvious, but it is simply laughable to wave the OP's list around as some sort of "proof" of how bad his foreign policy is when most of the junk mentioned either had nothing to do with him (Benghazi), or are simply the OP's personal rants - "let's start a war with Russia!" Finally, anyone who actually cared about this nation - instead of partisan rants - might want to know why failed foreign policies continue, regardless of which part is in office... but, no - let's not ask any real questions and instead shriek "liberal!!!" and pretend we're having intelligent discussions on this forum.
This post is so full of intellectually dishonest claims that it doesn't even dignify a logical response. Therefore, I will offer this: You voted for HOPE N CHANGE. "Change" was presumably meant to be a "change" from Bush's policies. And yet here you are giving Barack Obama a free pass for extending and even exacerbating the problems that came forth under Bush?
This is why you and your types will never be taken seriously. Fundamental disingenuousness is a hallmark of your brand of ideology.
This post is so full of intellectually dishonest claims that it doesn't even dignify a logical response. Therefore, I will offer this: You voted for HOPE N CHANGE. "Change" was presumably meant to be a "change" from Bush's policies. And yet here you are giving Barack Obama a free pass for extending and even exacerbating the problems that came forth under Bush?
This is why you and your types will never be taken seriously. Fundamental disingenuousness is a hallmark of your brand of ideology.
Slam! Da Duh Duh! Da Duh Duh! Let the boys be boys! Slam!
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.
