Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
US Attacks Libya
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Too bad the GOP told the public that they couldn't withdraw from Iraq. Obama pulled out our combat troops and the world did not end. It is a big change and one that the GOP pointedly disagreed with. |
Anonymous
Stupid and wrong. |
Anonymous
GREAT post--love it! :0) |
Anonymous
I don't follow. I agree with the PP that Bush was acting in good faith, and that 99% of the intelligence supported that Iraq had WMD. So where was he not wrong? Obviously Saddam was a bad guy, a murderous dictator, but that wasn't the reason for the invasion. It was the supposed failure to comply with UN resolutions. |
Anonymous
Too bad the GOP told the public that they couldn't withdraw from Iraq. Obama pulled out our combat troops and the world did not end. It is a big change and one that the GOP pointedly disagreed with. Obama pulled combat troops out based on the timetable Bush set with the Iraqi government. It was all based on Bush's plan, so it was no change at all. |
Anonymous
Obama pulled combat troops out based on the timetable Bush set with the Iraqi government. It was all based on Bush's plan, so it was no change at all. Oh dear Lord, you would make a great Stalinist. You are already busy rewriting the textbooks just a few years after it all happened. 1. Do you not remember years of THIS: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1136485,00.html 2. Do you then not remember two years later THIS: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07122/782586-84.stm 3. Do you not remember then the 18 benchmarks load of crap that was supposed to take the place of a timeline? http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/benchmark.html 4. And then as late as July 2008 he still opposed a timeline but that maybe he would accept an "aspirational goal??!!": http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/washington/16prexy.html 5. And then by October 2008 we are two months away from the expiration of the legal mandate that allows our troops to operate in Iraq, and the Iraqi government is now demanding a withdrawal timeline http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/13/AR2008101302846_pf.html 6. And that the timeline is in line with Barack Obama's timeline which he has already put on the record? 7. And that the Bush people even then were still trying to formulate their cockamamie "aspirational goal" but Iraq is not having it? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/13/AR2008101302846_pf.html 8. And that you cannot find one single quote from GW Bush advocating a withdrawal deadline before the signing date of 11/17/2011 9. And that on the date of signing the Iraqi spokesman is referring to the possibility of an earlier withdrawal, referencing specifically Obama's timeline http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/17/AR2008111700522.html?nav=rss_world/mideast/iraq The fact is that the two parties that publicly supported a withdrawal timeline were Obama and the Iraqi government. Bush had no option but to go with the Iraqi demands, and the demands were in line with the Obama proposal. You can keep revising history, though. What next? Will you be airbrushing photos of the war? You can start by erasing the "Mission Accomplished" banner over Bush's head. Oh wait, the White House tried to do that once already. |
Anonymous
And that 99% percent of evidence was gotten with a google search They had no weapons of mass destruction. FYI the African nations have condemned the attack on Libya. And nobody know who Gaddafi will be replaced by, or if he even will be replaced |
Anonymous
| Still over 50000 troops occupying Iraq. |
Anonymous
| The last count I saw the US launch 122 missile and the British launch 2 |
Anonymous
| Fox just hired Kadafi as a commentator. Something about fair and balanced, they have to give a voice to all the anti-obama view points. |
Anonymous
I bet he is better than Glenn Beck |
Anonymous
| Nothin but nothin is sweeter than this. Watching liberals fall all over themselves and argue with each other about whether we should bomb a country that didn't attack us now that they are doing it. BUSH WAS RIGHT !!! he supports this action I'm sure. |
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
There is a similar split among Republicans. Richard Lugar, one of the few sane Republicans left in the Senate has questioned US actions in Libya. You may be correct that Bush supports this action. If so, that would simply cement the fact that the attack is wrong-headed. I still don't understand the conservatives here who take so much joy in killing people. Men, women, and children -- many of whom have nothing to do with Qaddafi -- are being killed. Yet, for you this is a source of entertainment. Do you really consider yourself to be human? |
Anonymous
Ow, people thinking for themselves. How embarrassing that they are not sheep. |
Anonymous
| Concerning Bush supporting this action: Although I thought he was a strong contender for worst Pres ever, I think he has been commendable as an ex-Pres. Quiet mostly, supportive when asked (unless I have missed something). My only complaint is that he did not repeat, as ex Pres, the defense of US Muslims that he made as Pres. |