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.
Obama has it right....Talk!
If Talks fail and a Country threatens the peace and Existance of another Country then any sign of aggression should be met with a comparable or greater action, even if that action is outright War. The UK tried to appease Hitler but when he ignored our seriousness we went to war.
So YES......... Declaring a war should always be an option.
Right. Ever heard the expression, "Talk is cheap"?
Talking to people who want to kill us is useless. They have their reasons, and no amount of talk is going to convince them. It is just plain silly to think that you can "talk" to terrorists, and evil regimes.
Oh no, say the libs. You can't put any blame on Obama for anything until he gets ready to take some blame. He still talks about his inheritance from Bush so they will continue to blame Bush for everything. He has been gone from DC for 5 months and still everything is his fault.
I will give you some information about Ghandi that libs don't like to see, either. Ghandi was in the second most populous, soon to be nation, in the world and was working against what was then the dying empire of the world. The British were in plenty of trouble other places so his refusal to eat etc worked well. The world backed Ghandi because of what Britain had been so they had to back down.
Keep trying because some day the libs will have to admit that some of the problems belong to Obama.
so to speak what those said clinton did remember in 2000
Lib's just don't get it. If Obama had any "Stuff" in his pants, he would tell the Iran Mulla's that if they start killing their protesters he will reduce their military sites to ashes as well as their nuke production sites.
Not only will that put them on notice, it will let the Iranian people know that we are on their side. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
That doesn't put them on notice. That's war! I's so easy to talk tough when you're hiding behind a monitor and keyboard. But this is real life for our soldiers. It's not this warmongering cyberworld that you've created. Don't take military action lightly. (ie Iraq)
I know your type. One minute you want to bomb Iran. Then you want to give them all hugs. I'll stick with professional opinions on this one. People who know about foreign policy.
Who is trying to have their cake and eat it too? Sorry, but you are.
Right. Ever heard the expression, "Talk is cheap"?
Talking to people who want to kill us is useless. They have their reasons, and no amount of talk is going to convince them. It is just plain silly to think that you can "talk" to terrorists, and evil regimes.
they been crying out to the US for yrs then they wised up..they have thier reasons for resentment against the US after all the US has terrorised that region and meddled for some time
well lets see we have been invaded by 21 million illegal mexican people and army did nothing.
we were invaded by 1/2 million cubans 1989 , we did nothing so i guess defending our country, i dont think so - attacking the enemies of other countries now by all means yes i guess on board. interesting same government that raped the south turned loose illegal immigration on its citizens.
War is the last resort and not "hey they may have WMD's, so lets attack and start a pointless war to find out of they really have WMD's"
Well, I assume you are referring to Iraq. Let's be clear: The world believed (and there was plenty of evidence — most significant: Sadam had used them) that Iraq was engaged in an ongoing program to further develop their WMD's. This was not a "guess" or "presumption", as you wish to infer. Even Clinton knew, and was concerned about Sadam's program.
Why is it necessary for us to keep revisiting this? You leftists are either incredibly stupid, or the obvious is true: You simply wish to keep perpetuating a lie, because you think it helps your cause (not). It really just makes you look dumb and ignorant of reality.
they been crying out to the US for yrs then they wised up..they have thier reasons for resentment against the US after all the US has terrorised that region and meddled for some time
Meddled? Obama's words, huh? We in America, because we are free, have an obligation. That is to come to the aid of those suffering under evil dictatorships throughout the world. Liberty, and freedom, do not have to be "forced" on a people. It is the natural yearning of the human spirit.
Who lights a candle and hides it under something where it's light does not shine?
Freedom is light. We have a duty to spread it throughout the world. How can we sit by when there is suffering, and say, "We cannot meddle in others affairs"?
Ridiculous. The people of the world suffering under evil look to us for help. Will we ignore them? What does that say about us as a nation?
Obama has it right....Talk!
If Talks fail and a Country threatens the peace and Existance of another Country then any sign of aggression should be met with a comparable or greater action, even if that action is outright War. The UK tried to appease Hitler but when he ignored our seriousness we went to war.
So YES......... Declaring a war should always be an option.
But if you read any history that was the problem with Britain and France in WWII;they allowed Hitler to ignore the terms of the peace in WWI.By the time they acted it meant swift defeat of all of mainland europe and the UK being bascially a small island.Read Chruchills boks on the war and he knew that they were sunk if they didn't get the US into teh war and it was only a matter of time until invasion or not the UK loss.So sayinhg talk based on what the UL did pre WWII makes nos ense at all. especaill even looking at the result for two world powers that wre vicors after the war and thier losses. Bsacailly the UK was out of man power to increase their troop levels just after the invasion of france.I don;t think anyone wants to follow Chamberains leadership as a example.
Obama has it right....Talk!
If Talks fail and a Country threatens the peace and Existance of another Country then any sign of aggression should be met with a comparable or greater action, even if that action is outright War. The UK tried to appease Hitler but when he ignored our seriousness we went to war.
So YES......... Declaring a war should always be an option.
Sure, Obama, have another tea party..! Talking hasn't worked in a 100 years, but BO is the man, they will all love him and do as he says..
Get real, they want to KILL you.! Don't you get it..? There is no talking..!
The ONLY thing that will apease them is for all infidels to be dead..
They don't want to talk..! How blind can you be..? You must be a democrat,, not much sense...
I hear too many people slamming Obama for wanting aggression to be the last resort. Aggression has not stopped the terrorist threat so Obama should be given a Chance to try something new. How many Iraqs do you want before people wake up and realise that NO terrorist has been defeated by war. The IRA were defeated with Talks not bloodshed.
Oh, really?
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.