Romney war mongering

[Jetmeck]

Attacking Russia and wanting to go into Syria and Iran possibly.........

I thought I had taken a time machine to the 80's............

No wonder they want to increase an already bloated defense budget................they are clueless even with foreign/war issues.

Do you doubt he wants more war and not less ?

There is a lot of money to be made by war profiteers by the american public pay for the war.

Have we not learned from our mistakes under Bush on going to war under false pretenses when war should be a last resort ?
What am I missing this was recent history and americans are sick of war ?

Republicans refuse to see even recent history on war and economic policies................you guys should never, ever get a sniff of any power in this country whatsoever and those of you voting for these idiots need to back off and think.......................

[pricejj]

Attacking Russia and wanting to go into Syria and Iran possibly.........



Obama has expanded wars or sanctions in: Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Eritrea.

You have always promoted war with the Obama administration. Yet now you pretend to be a lover of peace?

[Rigs11]

Hence the difference between dems and righties.perfect example.thanks price

[Jetmeck]

Obama has expanded wars or sanctions in: Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Eritrea.

You have always promoted war with the Obama administration. Yet now you pretend to be a lover of peace?

First off I have never ever promoted any war.

What is it with republicans making stuff up and changing the facts ?

He ended the Iraq war and has set a timetable to get out of Afghan.

Lybia ; all aircraft support, no troops which is how a smart person would have handled any Iraqi problems if needed.

Rest of your post is lies ............

[ant1999e]

Do you have a job??? Really, don't you have anything better to do with your time besides make dumb ass threads?

[Jetmeck]

Do you have a job??? Really, don't you have anything better to do with your time besides make dumb ass threads?

lucky for you and other republicans I am here solely to be the
BAIN of your existence.

[ant1999e]

lucky for you and other republicans I am here solely to be the
BAIN of your existence.

At the expense of discrediting yourself and looking like a fool? It's your internet life homie, do watcha like???.

[Jetmeck]

At the expense of discrediting yourself and looking like a fool? It's your internet life homie, do watcha like???.

fool ? really..............disprove what I have pointed out or go back

into your fact free republican bubble..............

[elsid13]

more and more I think should we re establish the draft and not allow any member of Congress or President to serve unless they have seen time in National Security position.

[ant1999e]

fool ? really..............disprove what I have pointed out or go back

into your fact free republican bubble..............

This shyt isn't thread worthy. You're either an attention whore or your agenda is to dominate this message board with bullshyt anti-Romney threads. I'll say again, this shyt goes not deserve its own thread. If you had half a brain you would delete it.
Hey, I heard Romney stepped on some dog shyt in his backyard. Why don't you make a thread about it? :loser:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

...or your agenda is to dominate this message board with bullshyt anti-Romney threads.

:stupid:

Riiiiiiight - because Romney is such a flawless candidate his opponents have to invent bullsh*t about him...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

This shyt isn't thread worthy.

A presidential candidate is talking about military actions he would consider if elected, and this isn't thread-worthy?

You've been kneeling and bobbing for Willard so long you're delirious. Ha!

[ant1999e]

:stupid:

Riiiiiiight - because Romney is such a flawless candidate his opponents have to invent bullsh*t about him...

Lets see, he was a bully in school, he killed his dog, he's a Mormon. A lot of Bullshyt.
Let me guess, this war monger bs is gonna be next weeks left wing talking points.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Lets see, he was a bully in school, he killed his dog, he's a Mormon. A lot of Bullshyt.
Let me guess, this war monger bs is gonna be next weeks left wing talking points.

If only Willard and his sycophants were so fortunate. :D

[ant1999e]

That reminds me, why are we still in Afghanistan?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

That reminds me, why are we still in Afghanistan?

Haven't you heard?

It's all part of a nefarious socialist agenda. :wave:

[Jetmeck]

That reminds me, why are we still in Afghanistan?

your too funny...........he has set a time line and the republicans go crazy about getting out.............which way do you fools want it ?

Sick of hearing you clowns bitch cause he is not cleaning up the **** storm Bush left fast enough to suit you !!!!

If my party trashed the house I sure as hell wouldn't be complaining
when someone else was cleaning up my mess.

[Jetmeck]

Republicans cannot be embarassed enough to shut the f up.................

[UberBroncoMan]

http://pwjournal.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/giant-douche-and-turd-sandwich.jpg

[peacepipe]

enlarge (http://crooksandliars.com/files/vfs/2012/08/usa%20today.jpg)
http://cdn.crooksandliars.com/files/vfs/2012/08/usa%20today.jpg (http://crooksandliars.com/files/vfs/2012/08/usa%20today.jpg)

this says it all.

[ant1999e]

Refresh my memory of what country fired cruise missiles into Libya in 2011?
What country sent a super computer virus to Iran?
What country is waging covert wars in Yemen and Somalia?
What peace loving president authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan?
Who became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen?

During the Bush administration, there was an American drone attack in Pakistan every 43 days; during the first two years of the Obama administration, there was a drone strike there every four days. And two years into his presidency, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning president was engaged in conflicts in six Muslim countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya. The man who went to Washington as an “antiwar” president was more Teddy Roosevelt than Jimmy Carter.http://www.nytimes.com

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these actions, just pointing out your hypocrisy. P.S. The topic of this thread is "war mongering".

[nyuk nyuk]

Accusations with no evidence that said accusations are an accurate presentation of Romney's stances?

The 80s? What exactly was wrong in the 80s? Reagan took on Soviet proxies in Latin America? Oh shame! WTF?

[nyuk nyuk]

Refresh my memory of what country fired cruise missiles into Libya in 2011?
What country sent a super computer virus to Iran?
What country is waging covert wars in Yemen and Somalia?
What peace loving president authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan?
Who became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen?

http://www.nytimes.com

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these actions, just pointing out your hypocrisy. P.S. The topic of this thread is "war mongering".

It's an old Democratic Party scare line: Call the GOP "war mongers" regardless of facts on the ground.

Suffice it to say, had the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade been bombed by a Republican administration, we'd still be hearing about it and how it jeopardizes political stability and all that.

This crap is tailor-made for mass consumption by the pigeons, and pigeons are all too willing to feed.

[ant1999e]

;)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's an old Democratic Party scare line: Call the GOP "war mongers" regardless of facts on the ground.
.

Riiiiiiight - because the "facts" supporting your hero Smirky McFlightsuit's invasion and occupation of Iraq were so unassailable. ::)

[Jetmeck]

Refresh my memory of what country fired cruise missiles into Libya in 2011?
What country sent a super computer virus to Iran?
What country is waging covert wars in Yemen and Somalia?
What peace loving president authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan?
Who became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen?

http://www.nytimes.com

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these actions, just pointing out your hypocrisy. P.S. The topic of this thread is "war mongering".


There is no hypocrisy to point out............a smart prez goes to war as a last resort and does things that needs to be done without putting troops in harms way for years on end.

Obama is ending your party's wars and will keep us out of another.

The things you listed is the smart way to get things done........you people are clueless to insinuate that what you mentioned and two major ground wars are the same thing..............

[Jetmeck]

who ****ed the country ?
who obstructed fixing it ?
who wants more tax breaks for the rich ?
who wants to end every program the poor and old depend on ?
who started two wars and didn;t get BIN LADEN ?

exactly ...until you clowns admit to the facts ............
you have no integrity and are a piss poor excuse of a man.

[ant1999e]

who ****ed the country ?
who obstructed fixing it ?
who wants more tax breaks for the rich ?
who wants to end every program the poor and old depend on ?
who started two wars and didn;t get BIN LADEN ?

exactly ...until you clowns admit to the facts ............
you have no integrity and are a piss poor excuse of a man.

Again, the thread topic is war mongering... as far as the rest of your whining rant:

[Arkie]

your too funny...........he has set a time line and the republicans go crazy about getting out.............which way do you fools want it ?

Sick of hearing you clowns b**** cause he is not cleaning up the **** storm Bush left fast enough to suit you !!!!

If my party trashed the house I sure as hell wouldn't be complaining
when someone else was cleaning up my mess.

Obama isn't cleaning it up. He's trashing it worse. Military spending has gone up. Why is war not a major issue in this election? It's because the military industrial complex still exists, and business has been booming. You have to answer to them if you want to be President.

THE US WAR IN AFGHANISTAN:

It's the longest US war at 11 years and counting
There are currently 88,000 US troops in Afghanistan
Over 2,100 US soldiers have been killed, with half of them occurring in the three years since Obama took office
38 deaths in August
2 deaths today, so this month hasn't started off any better


http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Obama-Warmonger.jpg

[Jetmeck]

Obama isn't cleaning it up. He's trashing it worse. Military spending has gone up. Why is war not a major issue in this election? It's because the military industrial complex still exists, and business has been booming. You have to answer to them if you want to be President.

THE US WAR IN AFGHANISTAN:

It's the longest US war at 11 years and counting
There are currently 88,000 US troops in Afghanistan
Over 2,100 US soldiers have been killed, with half of them occurring in the three years since Obama took office
38 deaths in August
2 deaths today, so this month hasn't started off any better


http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Obama-Warmonger.jpg


What part of he got us out of Iraq and has a date to get out of the other republican started war do you not understand ?

You guys are clowns........


your too funny...........he has set a time line and the republicans go crazy about getting out.............which way do you fools want it ?

Sick of hearing you clowns b**** cause he is not cleaning up the **** storm Bush left fast enough to suit you !!!!

If my party trashed the house I sure as hell wouldn't be complaining
when someone else was cleaning up my mess.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What part of he got us out of Iraq and has a date to get out of the other republican started war do you not understand ?

You guys are clowns........


your too funny...........he has set a time line and the republicans go crazy about getting out.............which way do you fools want it ?

Sick of hearing you clowns b**** cause he is not cleaning up the **** storm Bush left fast enough to suit you !!!!

If my party trashed the house I sure as hell wouldn't be complaining
when someone else was cleaning up my mess.

Funny - I still recall how anyone who criticized Bush's Iraq and/or Afghanistan policies was a "traitor" who "hated America" and "wanted the terrorists to win" according to these right-wing handjobs.

According to these forked-tongued vermin, anyone who even questioned King George's edicts was guilty of demoralizing the troops and giving comfort to the enemy.

Nothing - not even war - is more than a political poker chip to these amoral slime bags.

[nyuk nyuk]

http://i50.tinypic.com/2wddkr5.jpg

[ant1999e]

What part of he got us out of Iraq and has a date to get out of the other republican started war do you not understand ?

You guys are clowns........


your too funny...........he has set a time line and the republicans go crazy about getting out.............which way do you fools want it ?

Sick of hearing you clowns b**** cause he is not cleaning up the **** storm Bush left fast enough to suit you !!!!

If my party trashed the house I sure as hell wouldn't be complaining
when someone else was cleaning up my mess.

So when Romney speaks about foreign affairs he's war mongering but when Obama gets involved in all of these conflicts he isn't? And why do you keep changing the subject? The other conflicts I mentioned have nothing to do with Bush. But as usual the liberal idiot comes out and you want to blame someone else.

And if my maid cleaned up like he's supposedly cleaning up I'd fire the biotch.

[Arkie]

What part of he got us out of Iraq and has a date to get out of the other republican started war do you not understand ?


I understand that partisans waste so much energy hating the other party that they see only half the truth. They turn a blind eye towards their own party by taking undeserved credit, or giving the other side undeserved blame.

The facts are we went to war with Iraq under Bush, and we got out under Bush. We went to war with Afghanistan under Bush, and we're getting out under Obama if it goes as planned. It's possible it could happen under another President, and then the Republicans will try and take credit. See how that works?

[GreasyQtip]

Do you have a job??? Really, don't you have anything better to do with your time besides make dumb ass threads?

This is awesome! The fact that a poster can't see the hypocrisy in this post is hilarious.

You went on to make 10 other posts in here.

Every single post even the ones just intended to be an insult have no logic. You have a job and time to post, but he must have no job? Im starting to see why the right doesn't value higher education, must be mighty confusing with all the logic and critical thinking.

[ant1999e]

This is awesome! The fact that a poster can't see the hypocrisy in this post is hilarious.

You went on to make 10 other posts in here.

Every single post even the ones just intended to be an insult have no logic. You have a job and time to post, but he must have no job? Im starting to see why the right doesn't value higher education, must be mighty confusing with all the logic and critical thinking.

You have as much logic as a greasy q tip. If you understood the meaning of hypocrisy you never would have made this ignorant post. My job comment goes to the fact that this thread is a complete failure. And maybe he doesn't have a job. The U-6 underemployment and unemployment figure for July was 15%. Please, point out my hypocrisy and lack of logic...

ant1999e Refresh my memory of what country fired cruise missiles into Libya in 2011?
What country sent a super computer virus to Iran?
What country is waging covert wars in Yemen and Somalia?
What peace loving president authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan?
Who became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen?

Quote:
During the Bush administration, there was an American drone attack in Pakistan every 43 days; during the first two years of the Obama administration, there was a drone strike there every four days. And two years into his presidency, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning president was engaged in conflicts in six Muslim countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya. The man who went to Washington as an “antiwar” president was more Teddy Roosevelt than Jimmy Carter.
http://www.nytimes.com

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these actions, just pointing out your hypocrisy. P.S. The topic of this thread is "war mongering".

[nyuk nyuk]

So when Romney speaks about foreign affairs he's war mongering but when Obama gets involved in all of these conflicts he isn't? And why do you keep changing the subject? The other conflicts I mentioned have nothing to do with Bush. But as usual the liberal idiot comes out and you want to blame someone else.

And if my maid cleaned up like he's supposedly cleaning up I'd fire the biotch.

Correct, sir. The Democrats escalating Vietnam into a full-blown war is never mentioned, nor are the notorious torture techniques their pals in south Vietnam were using ie tiger cages. Let's not mention the notorious Gulf of Tonkin incident, either. We endlessly hear liberals rattle their skulls about "no WMD" while they ignore the fact that the Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened and thus the escalation of Vietnam into a war was false as well. Double standards, much? Can you say "no torpedoes"?

McNamara on the mistaken non-attack at Tonkin. (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/787482/gulf_of_tonkin_mcnamara_admits_it_didnt_happen/)

Liberals thoroughly enjoy redefining words in such narrow contexts that only their political enemies are guilty of the charge. Count "warmonger" among those words.

[Requiem]

Was Robert McNamara a liberal?

[nyuk nyuk]

I understand that partisans waste so much energy hating the other party that they see only half the truth. They turn a blind eye towards their own party by taking undeserved credit, or giving the other side undeserved blame.

The facts are we went to war with Iraq under Bush, and we got out under Bush. We went to war with Afghanistan under Bush, and we're getting out under Obama if it goes as planned. It's possible it could happen under another President, and then the Republicans will try and take credit. See how that works?

No, you're crazy! Liberals hate?! Only The Other is capable of that! Those who haven't seen The Light like we have and who don't bask in its warmth! LOL!

Yes --- this forum is full of such hostile partisan hacks. They may feel good in the process of behaving this way in some twisted self-righteous manner, but they do no service by turning a blind eye to one party's behavior. Party-line regurgitation is a sign of inferior intellect and lack of independent thinking. Nobody is right THAT often.

And uh, yeah, Bush put into action the plan to track and kill Bin Laden. The actual kill was under Obama, so Obama tried to take all the credit and went to the site of the towers in NYC to spike the football. Good on GW for not going along.

[nyuk nyuk]

Was Robert McNamara a liberal?

Evasive maneuvers, Mister Riker!

[Requiem]

Yes --- this forum is full of such hostile partisan hacks. They may feel good in the process of behaving this way in some twisted self-righteous manner, but they do no service by turning a blind eye to one party's behavior. Party-line regurgitation is a sign of inferior intellect and lack of independent thinking. Nobody is right THAT often.

Yet, I have seen nothing from you in the ~ 250 posts you've made here that would indicate that you weren't a partisan hack. You've tried to bring in stories like, "My family fled the Communists, and I was once a liberal, but saw the light!" to try and give yourself a little platform to stand on. You are the epitome of a partisan hack, so don't try and elevate yourself differently from what you exactly are.

[Requiem]

Evasive maneuvers, Mister Riker!

Answer the question: Robert McNamara was Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War and one of the most prominent figures in American history in regards to shaping foreign policy. Was he a liberal?

[Requiem]

And FWIW, the topic here isn't the Vietnam War. It is problems people have with Romney's alleged willingness to get us into further conflicts abroad. It's quite possible for a liberal on this forum to be critical of Romney's foreign policy aspirations and detest what was done during the Vietnam War era. The fact that they didn't bring it up doesn't state otherwise. There is no reason to reach 50 years back in the books when we are discussing an issue about a candidate today.

[ant1999e]

Yet, I have seen nothing from you in the ~ 250 posts you've made here that would indicate that you weren't a partisan hack. You've tried to bring in stories like, "My family fled the Communists, and I was once a liberal, but saw the light!" to try and give yourself a little platform to stand on. You are the epitome of a partisan hack, so don't try and elevate yourself differently from what you exactly are.

We're all partisan hacks. It's sad but true. There a few who can be open minded here but they don't last because they can't stand the ignorance. I really wish we were capable of mature discussion at least once in a while. We all want happiness. We just have different ways/beliefs at achieving it. The sad thing is both political sides are corrupt. They don't care about our happiness. They only care about taking more of our money for themselves. And they have the art of divide and conquer down to a science.

[ant1999e]

And FWIW, the topic here isn't the Vietnam War. It is problems people have with Romney's alleged willingness to get us into further conflicts abroad. It's quite possible for a liberal on this forum to be critical of Romney's foreign policy aspirations and detest what was done during the Vietnam War era. The fact that they didn't bring it up doesn't state otherwise. There is no reason to reach 50 years back in the books when we are discussing an issue about a candidate today.

But you cannot have a problem with alleged willingness and not have a problem with factual willingness:


Refresh my memory of what country fired cruise missiles into Libya in 2011?
What country sent a super computer virus to Iran?
What country is waging covert wars in Yemen and Somalia?
What peace loving president authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan?
Who became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen?

http://www.nytimes.com

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these actions, just pointing out your hypocrisy. P.S. The topic of this thread is "war mongering".

[Requiem]

We're all partisan hacks. It's sad but true. There a few who can be open minded here but they don't last because they can't stand the ignorance. I really wish we were capable of mature discussion at least once in a while. We all want happiness. We just have different ways/beliefs at achieving it. The sad thing is both political sides are corrupt. They don't care about our happiness. They only care about taking more of our money for themselves. And they have the art of divide and conquer down to a science.

Not everyone is a hack, and I feel that labels inherently limit one's ability to critically think on issues. My philosophy on politics or takes on them have nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. I just take the issue for the issue. The only reason I'm registered with a party is so I can partake in primary elections in my state. I think it's ****ed up that I have to registered with a party to be able to do that.

[Requiem]

But you cannot have a problem with alleged willingness and not have a problem with factual willingness:

I am not a big supporter of Obama's foreign policy. In fact, my Political Science dissertation in school was entitled Afghanistan and the Arab Spring: The Obama Administration's Graveyard. I was highly critical of it then, I am highly critical of it now. Just because people haven't spoke out about it in this thread doesn't mean they are for it.

I think Jetmeck started the thread callled, "Romney War Mongering" -- specifically discussing what Romney may do in re: foreign affairs if President. Then it got all skewed elsewhere. May your discussion be relevant? Certainly.

[ant1999e]

Not everyone is a hack, and I feel that labels inherently limit one's ability to critically think on issues. My philosophy on politics or takes on them have nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. I just take the issue for the issue. The only reason I'm registered with a party is so I can partake in primary elections in my state. I think it's ****ed up that I have to registered with a party to be able to do that.

I completely agree. I guarantee that I'm not the crazy conservative I seem on here. I was actually much more liberal during high school/early adulthood. Most of the time when it seems I am defending a side/view, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. Hypocrisy I believe is one of the cancers that is killing our country. If as a people we held both sides to the same standards, I believe things wouldn't be as corrupt as they are now. And I registered as an Independent because I think both sides are corrupt. But that kept me from voting Paul in the primary. Yes he's a bit crazy but I feel he's honest.

[Requiem]

I actually have a soft spot for Paul after spending half a year doing a district analysis on him. I do think he genuinely has good intentions, which is something to like him for even if he has some views that are pretty looney tune. Everyone's a hypocrite. Politics is just messy. Brings out the worst in people.

[TonyR]

If you want a return to Chenenyism with respect to foreign policy then Romney/Ryan is your ticket. Sheldon Adelson wants a war with Iran and he'll probably get it.

[nyuk nyuk]

If you want a return to Chenenyism with respect to foreign policy then Romney/Ryan is your ticket. Sheldon Adelson wants a war with Iran and he'll probably get it.

As opposed to Kennedyism or Clintonism? Speaking of brain-dead partisan posts.

[nyuk nyuk]

There is no hypocrisy to point out............a smart prez goes to war as a last resort and does things that needs to be done without putting troops in harms way for years on end.

Obama is ending your party's wars and will keep us out of another.

The things you listed is the smart way to get things done........you people are clueless to insinuate that what you mentioned and two major ground wars are the same thing..............

So then the 58,000+ American deaths in Vietnam over a non-torpedoing incident in the Gulf of Tonkin which led to the Tonkin Resolution and set off the war invalidated the legitimacy of the Democratic Party... Right?!

:approve:

This all reeks of the Democrats trying to recover from their Vietnam debacle by external finger pointing. 58,000 Americans dead, you guys have a VERY steep hill to climb.

[Arkie]

If you want a return to Chenenyism with respect to foreign policy then Romney/Ryan is your ticket. Sheldon Adelson wants a war with Iran and he'll probably get it.

It's because Iran wants war. Look how close they put their country to our military bases!

You can see the runways if you zoom in really close.
http://forusa.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/450px-width/wysiwyg_imageupload/6702/iran-surrounded.png (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202186767305035287983.0004995f23a58e00370d 5&msa=0)

[TonyR]

As opposed to Kennedyism or Clintonism? Speaking of brain-dead partisan posts.

I'm not sure how either Kennedy or Clinton are all that relevant. I do know how a return to Dick Cheney's foreign policy is relevant. It's apparent that you do not.

[mhgaffney]

We're all partisan hacks. It's sad but true. There a few who can be open minded here but they don't last because they can't stand the ignorance. I really wish we were capable of mature discussion at least once in a while. We all want happiness. We just have different ways/beliefs at achieving it. The sad thing is both political sides are corrupt. They don't care about our happiness. They only care about taking more of our money for themselves. And they have the art of divide and conquer down to a science.

Wrong. I am neither a Democrap or a Repuke.

I have been critical of both parties -- and indeed -- critical of our two party winner take all system. It stinks.

What we have is a uni - party -- with two wings, neo liberal and conservative.

Both are controlled by Wall Street. Obama's endorsement of Bush's baile out is all the proof you need.

Wall Street used the 2008 bail out money to buy the Congress, the judges, the White House -- and whatever media they did not already own.

The US middle class is almost finished. The American people are fast being reduced to debt slaves.

Even now the power elite is preparing the next great shock -- possibly a major devaluation of the dollar. They may use another war to distract attention. Expect another false flag attack at any time --

The republic is dead. The Constitution -- as Bush said - is "just a damn piece of paper."

Jefferson and Madison are rolling over in their graves.

Will the people wake up and take back the country -- in time? Doubtful.
MHG

[Meck77]

I am not a big supporter of Obama's foreign policy.

America's foreign policy has been dictated by Israel. We have been at war because of our alliance with them. It's not about who's president. It's who we are in bed with.

[ant1999e]

Wrong. I am neither a Democrap or a Repuke.

I have been critical of both parties -- and indeed -- critical of our two party winner take all system. It stinks.

What we have is a uni - party -- with two wings, neo liberal and conservative.

Both are controlled by Wall Street. Obama's endorsement of Bush's baile out is all the proof you need.

Wall Street used the 2008 bail out money to buy the Congress, the judges, the White House -- and whatever media they did not already own.

The US middle class is almost finished. The American people are fast being reduced to debt slaves.

Even now the power elite is preparing the next great shock -- possibly a major devaluation of the dollar. They may use another war to distract attention. Expect another false flag attack at any time --

The republic is dead. The Constitution -- as Bush said - is "just a damn piece of paper."

Jefferson and Madison are rolling over in their graves.

Will the people wake up and take back the country -- in time? Doubtful.
MHG
You Gaff are definitely "different".

[W*GS]

The republic is dead.

Bull****.

You're little more than an America-hating neo-Nazi puke.

[Jetmeck]

I understand that partisans waste so much energy hating the other party that they see only half the truth. They turn a blind eye towards their own party by taking undeserved credit, or giving the other side undeserved blame.

The facts are we went to war with Iraq under Bush, and we got out under Bush. We went to war with Afghanistan under Bush, and we're getting out under Obama if it goes as planned. It's possible it could happen under another President, and then the Republicans will try and take credit. See how that works?

Iraq war ended under Obama..............period.

[Jetmeck]

So then the 58,000+ American deaths in Vietnam over a non-torpedoing incident in the Gulf of Tonkin which led to the Tonkin Resolution and set off the war invalidated the legitimacy of the Democratic Party... Right?!

:approve:

This all reeks of the Democrats trying to recover from their Vietnam debacle by external finger pointing. 58,000 Americans dead, you guys have a VERY steep hill to climb.



Vietnam is exactly why going into Iraq under false pretenses is the the problem. Did republicans read their history books ?


and we talking about current events asshole..................
We learned from our mistakes, did they ?

[nyuk nyuk]

I'm not sure how either Kennedy or Clinton are all that relevant. I do know how a return to Dick Cheney's foreign policy is relevant. It's apparent that you do not.

Apparently your reading skills are poor, or perhaps you're just dishonest and wear a pair of blinders that seem to be issued to everyone that registers as a Democrat. Slamming a political party as "war mongers" while keeping silent over one that started a war overseas on account of a false pretext which led to nearly 60,000 American deaths? The point is made. The Democratic Party is apparently still trying to make a comeback from that massive blunder.

"Dick Cheney's" policy. I didn't realize he had puppet strings on his fingers. I won't even ask for a source.

[nyuk nyuk]

Vietnam is exactly why going into Iraq under false pretenses is the the problem. Did republicans read their history books ?


and we talking about current events a-hole..................
We learned from our mistakes, did they ?

Considering Democrats never so much as acknowledge the bogus Tonkin incident, in what position are they to point fingers at others about "learning" from it?

What???!

No - instead they're too busy pretending they're benign flower children and peace lovers while they scold the evil war mongering Republicans for their endless military industrial complex wars for oil. They compounded the Vietnam fiasco by blocking Reagan from sending aid to Latin America to stop Soviet expansion.

Genius!

No, be honest about it - and that means being honest about Vietnam and other things. Don't attempt to use them for political gain while pretending that they didn't do FAR WORSE when they controlled the ship.

Again, as I have pointed out here and other threads -- Such is nothing more than false moral outrage for political aims.

[Jetmeck]

Apparently your reading skills are poor, or perhaps you're just dishonest and wear a pair of blinders that seem to be issued to everyone that registers as a Democrat. Slamming a political party as "war mongers" while keeping silent over one that started a war overseas on account of a false pretext which led to nearly 60,000 American deaths? The point is made. The Democratic Party is apparently still trying to make a comeback from that massive blunder.

"Dick Cheney's" policy. I didn't realize he had puppet strings on his fingers. I won't even ask for a source.

Look, let me make it abundantly clear for you mentally challenged unapologetic republican ass lickers............

Bush and Cheney got us into two wars. Obama has gotten us out of Iraq and we are on our way to getting out of Afghanistan.

RePUBLICANS RANT ON iRAN, Romney talking chit about Russia and want to spend even more on defense.

What do you think they want more defense spending for ?

They want to get into more wars which makes millions for companies like Haliburton for example.............wars are big business.


They want to REPEAT mistakes from recent history.

[Jetmeck]

Considering Democrats never so much as acknowledge the bogus Tonkin incident, in what position are they to point fingers at others about "learning" from it?

What???!

No - instead they're too busy pretending they're benign flower children and peace lovers while they scold the evil war mongering Republicans for their endless military industrial complex wars for oil. They compounded the Vietnam fiasco by blocking Reagan from sending aid to Latin America to stop Soviet expansion.

Genius!

No, be honest about it - and that means being honest about Vietnam and other things. Don't attempt to use them for political gain while pretending that they didn't do FAR WORSE when they controlled the ship.

Again, as I have pointed out here and other threads -- Such is nothing more than false moral outrage for political aims.



your full of chit...................Vietnam is a lesson learned by smart people............republicans learned nothing from that.

[Requiem]

Nyuk nyuk, stop dodging the question fattie: Was Robert McNamara a liberal?

[nyuk nyuk]

your full of chit...................Vietnam is a lesson learned by smart people............republicans learned nothing from that.

Great, so you can then show me where Democrats "learned" from it and aren't invoking a double standard in attacking Republicans? Oh that's right - they went along with it fully until it became a hot potato and then they abandoned ship and climbed onto the high chair.

Considering widespread knowledge of the screwed up Tonkin incident is quite new, I'd like to know where you have concluded that Republicans should have "learned" from this all this time ago?

[Requiem]

Stop dodging the question, ho!

[Jetmeck]

Great, so you can then show me where Democrats "learned" from it and aren't invoking a double standard in attacking Republicans? Oh that's right - they went along with it fully until it became a hot potato and then they abandoned ship and climbed onto the high chair.

Considering widespread knowledge of the screwed up Tonkin incident is quite new, I'd like to know where you have concluded that Republicans should have "learned" from this all this time ago?

look idiot dems are cleaning up both wars your party started.

Vietnam was a war of choice unlike WW1 AND 2.

SMART PEOPLE GET YOU OUT OF WARS and keep you out.

You people beyond clueless defending the biggest ****up of a prez ever and then you tools want to go down the exact same roads with wars and economic policy.....................

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Considering Democrats never so much as acknowledge the bogus Tonkin incident, in what position are they to point fingers at others about "learning" from it?
.

Either you're too young to remember the Vietnam years, or you're smoking some serious revisionist crack.

Either way, you're making a complete and utter fool of yourself here (which, I realize, is nothing new for you.)

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/543647_524404970918352_1832462937_n.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

America's foreign policy has been dictated by Israel. We have been at war because of our alliance with them. It's not about who's president. It's who we are in bed with.

If Gaffney makes a statement like the one above, he's blasted as an "anti-Semite," but you get a pass every time.

Wonder why that is?

[Arkie]

Iraq war ended under Obama..............period.

That's a simple way of looking at it. If Romney is elected, the Afghan war will end under Romney period. Republican partisans will pull the same trick and take credit for getting us out.

[nyuk nyuk]

Look, let me make it abundantly clear for you mentally challenged unapologetic republican ass lickers............

Bush and Cheney got us into two wars. Obama has gotten us out of Iraq and we are on our way to getting out of Afghanistan.

RePUBLICANS RANT ON iRAN, Romney talking chit about Russia and want to spend even more on defense.

What do you think they want more defense spending for ?

They want to get into more wars which makes millions for companies like Haliburton for example.............wars are big business.


They want to REPEAT mistakes from recent history.

This is very basic. First, you're accusing others of partisan political asslicking while being in the middle of engaging in it yourself. This is casting such a wide net that you've caught yourself in it. Smart move. I take it you enjoy the taste of salad?

Secondly, that you downplay something that cost nearly 60,000 American lives while you froth at the mouth like a rabid pit bull over a war in Iraq with less than 4,500 dead is screamingly laughable. You have provided no indication that Democrats "learned" from it, but rather history tells us that they helped the USSR gain a foothold in Latin America by blocking aid to Latin resistance groups. Later, they joined in attacking Yugoslavia for shaky reasons at best (citing a "genocide" of 500,000 that never happened while at the same time ignoring a REAL ONE in Rwanda), and put a cruise missile into the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. I'd love to know what was "learned" here? CYA?

Thirdly, and I see this commonly from liberals: The squealing like a pig in a slaughterhouse about big bad Haliburton but not uttering a peep that Bill Clinton rewarded them with no bid contracts. What should we all "learn" from this other than that Democrats are raging flipping liars? I would suggest that on the subject of Haliburton that liberals cease taking to listening to leftists. They are being had as useful idiots.


^5

[nyuk nyuk]

If Gaffney makes a statement like the one above, he's blasted as an "anti-Semite," but you get a pass every time.

Wonder why that is?

You mean like how Requiem keeps posting pictures making fun of Asian accents and broken English and nobody utters a word?

I feel you, dawg.

[nyuk nyuk]

Nyuk nyuk, stop dodging the question fattie: Was Robert McNamara a liberal?

Explain to us why and how any blame for that incident or any other aspect of Kennedy/Johnson policy falls on his lap and not on the laps of his superiors that actually set policy... I would think any attempt is going to be at the best a whopper of a conspiracy theory akin to the moon landing hoax.

Or you can take your deflective shields-up crap back to your favorite Star Trek reruns.

:)

[Meck77]

If Gaffney makes a statement like the one above, he's blasted as an "anti-Semite," but you get a pass every time.

Wonder why that is?

I couldn't tell you. What I can tell you is that both Bush, Cheney, Obama, and Romney were all basically in diapers or not even born in 1947.

Why or how could anyone debate that Israel is in a holy war? I'm not arguing whether or not Israel has the right to defend themselves. The fact is they've always been at war. America has aligned itself with Israel therefore America is at war.

What is debatable is debatable is whether the alliance is worth it. Who is president is irrelevant.

What is your opinion on this LA?

[ant1999e]

I couldn't tell you. What I can tell you is that both Bush, Cheney, Obama, and Romney were all basically in diapers or not even born in 1947.

Why or how could anyone debate that Israel is in a holy war? I'm not arguing whether or not Israel has the right to defend themselves. The fact is they've always been at war. America has aligned itself with Israel therefore America is at war.

What is debatable is debatable is whether the alliance is worth it. Who is president is irrelevant.

What is your opinion on this LA?

Don't hold your breath. LABF's only opinion is it's Bush' fault.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I couldn't tell you.

I can.

It's because you have an 'R' after your name.

Why or how could anyone debate that Israel is in a holy war? I'm not arguing whether or not Israel has the right to defend themselves. The fact is they've always been at war. America has aligned itself with Israel therefore America is at war.

What is debatable is debatable is whether the alliance is worth it. Who is president is irrelevant.

What is your opinion on this LA?

I already told you a while ago that I was in basic agreement with you on this issue (as rare as an appearance by Halley's Comet, I know...)

[Jetmeck]

Don't hold your breath. LABF's only opinion is it's Bush' fault.

how much percent would you say it is Bush's fault ?

[Meck77]

I can.

It's because you have an 'R' after your name.



I already told you a while ago that I was in basic agreement with you on this issue (as rare as an appearance by Halley's Comet, I know...)

That's what I thought.

Meh not sure what all the fuss is all about then. We've been at war, we will continue to be at war, our economy and $ will continue to suffer because of this alliance that is dragging us down.

I think more and more Americans are finally coming to this realization. Perhaps real change will come in a couple elections down the road.

For now...Expect more war and more of the same.

[Jetmeck]

except we are out of one war and about to end the other one so your whole primis is wrong

[ant1999e]

how much percent would you say it is Bush's fault ?

Well. 3+ years into the term, I say it's about 50/50. Bush got us into the mess but it hasn't gotten any better if not worse.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Well. 3+ years into the term, I say it's about 50/50. Bush got us into the mess but it hasn't gotten any better if not worse.

L0L!

You ditto heads can't decide which way you want it:

Either Obama is continuing Bush's policies, or he's transforming America into a socialist dystopia.

Make up your minds! :wave:

[Jetmeck]

Well. 3+ years into the term, I say it's about 50/50. Bush got us into the mess but it hasn't gotten any better if not worse.

Good for you at least admitting some fault is a step in the right direction.

Now how about all the obstruction from republicans ?

How do you know his policies made things worse if almost none his policies were put into place because of obstruction ?

You can't....you are assuming.

I remind you it took eight long years to get to this mess and as OBAMA was handed control the economy was in free fall and getting worse for months and months after he took control.

If all his policies were enacted things could very well be better but I won't try to tell they would be better because we simply do not know becaue of republican obstruction.

I wish he had a magic wand to fix things fast and I wish republicans would call their house member and bend their ear for playing party over country.

[ant1999e]

Good for you at least admitting some fault is a step in the right direction.

Now how about all the obstruction from republicans ?

How do you know his policies made things worse if almost none his policies were put into place because of obstruction ?

You can't....you are assuming.

I remind you it took eight long years to get to this mess and as OBAMA was handed control the economy was in free fall and getting worse for months and months after he took control.

If all his policies were enacted things could very well be better but I won't try to tell they would be better because we simply do not know becaue of republican obstruction.

I wish he had a magic wand to fix things fast and I wish republicans would call their house member and bend their ear for playing party over country.

How do you know??? They could have destroyed the country. You're ass uming.

Both sides play party over country. Do you read anything anyone else posts?
Look, you have nothing but excuses.

Obama and the Dems controlled everything for the first half of his term but got nothing done. Unemployment was at an all time high and he thought ObamaCare was the priority. He passed a $900 billion stimulus package. Too bad the shovel ready jobs weren't as shovel ready as he thought.

[TonyR]

Apparently your reading skills are poor, or perhaps you're just dishonest and wear a pair of blinders that seem to be issued to everyone that registers as a Democrat. Slamming a political party as "war mongers" while keeping silent over one that started a war overseas on account of a false pretext which led to nearly 60,000 American deaths? The point is made. The Democratic Party is apparently still trying to make a comeback from that massive blunder.

"Dick Cheney's" policy. I didn't realize he had puppet strings on his fingers. I won't even ask for a source.

Sigh. The last I checked Kennedy and Clinton aren't among the choices in the upcoming election.

And if you're not aware of Cheney's influence on policy during GWB's 8 years I don't know what to tell you.

Oh, that and I'm not a registered Democrat.

[ant1999e]

http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obamas-stimulus-documented-failure

It is true that Obama entered office in the midst of a deep recession. But, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, that recession ended in June 2009, almost three years ago.

Since then, America has been in a "growth" cycle, but a pathetic one. Real gross domestic product growth peaked at 3.9 percent in the first quarter of 2010, and Obama is now in real danger of being the first U.S. president since World War II not to see at least one quarter of economic growth at 4 percent or higher in a first term.

After all, three years ago Obama's top economic adviser told the country that if Congress approved Obama's plan unemployment would never top 8 percent and would drop below 6 percent this year. It did top 8 percent. It is nowhere near 6 percent today.

"But even if you buy the White House's argument that the $800 billion package created 3 million jobs, that works out to $266,000 per job.


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/youth.nr0.htm
From April to July 2012, the number of employed youth 16 to 24 years old rose 2.1 million to 19.5 million, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
Regional and state unemployment rates were generally little changed or slightly higher in July. Forty-four states recorded unemployment rate increases, two states and the District of Columbia posted rate decreases, and four states had no change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.

[TonyR]

^ Yes, ant, it's been a "jobless recovery". To the extent there's much he can do Obama hasn't done a "good job". But have you heard Romney or Ryan give a single policy proposal that is going to "fix" things? If so, what what was it? I agree things need to be "better" but I've heard very little about what's going to make that happen.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

When all those jobs were being hemorrhaged overseas on Dumbya's watch, right-wingnuts like ant1999e either defended Bush or simply remained silent.

Now these same hypocrites are pretending to care about jobs.

[orinjkrush]

more and more I think should we re establish the draft and not allow any member of Congress or President to serve unless they have seen time in National Security position.

totally agree. this is one of the gems of the Roman empire. you had to prove yourself in the military before you got to higher governmental levels.

of course that would mean most if not all major candidates would have to go back and sign up. Hilarious!

[orinjkrush]

http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obamas-stimulus-documented-failure

It is true that Obama entered office in the midst of a deep recession. But, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, that recession ended in June 2009, almost three years ago.

Since then, America has been in a "growth" cycle, but a pathetic one. Real gross domestic product growth peaked at 3.9 percent in the first quarter of 2010, and Obama is now in real danger of being the first U.S. president since World War II not to see at least one quarter of economic growth at 4 percent or higher in a first term.

After all, three years ago Obama's top economic adviser told the country that if Congress approved Obama's plan unemployment would never top 8 percent and would drop below 6 percent this year. It did top 8 percent. It is nowhere near 6 percent today.

"But even if you buy the White House's argument that the $800 billion package created 3 million jobs, that works out to $266,000 per job.


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/youth.nr0.htm
From April to July 2012, the number of employed youth 16 to 24 years old rose 2.1 million to 19.5 million, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
Regional and state unemployment rates were generally little changed or slightly higher in July. Forty-four states recorded unemployment rate increases, two states and the District of Columbia posted rate decreases, and four states had no change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.

it may be that the Fed's approach to stimulate the economy is TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS ON STEROIDS. Give the banks free money and see how it trickles down. Had we, on the other hand, given each person in America $10,000 (300 million times 10,000 equals $3T) we would have had a bottom up recovery which would have worked. we have to stop aiding wall street and start focusing on main street. :strong:

[houghtam]

totally agree. this is one of the gems of the Roman empire. you had to prove yourself in the military before you got to higher governmental levels.

of course that would mean most if not all major candidates would have to go back and sign up. Hilarious!

I think you mean Republic. This was not particularly true of Rome after Gaius Marius instituted the removal of property requirements as a pre-requisite of military service. Thereafter the practice of needing to live a martial life to advance in government went by the wayside.

[orinjkrush]

I think you mean Republic. This was not particularly true of Rome after Gaius Marius instituted the removal of property requirements as a pre-requisite of military service. Thereafter the practice of needing to live a martial life to advance in government went by the wayside.

excellent! correction noted. I believe military service was also a component of Plato's concept of the Republic and was still true under the early "Emperors".

[peacepipe]

http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obamas-stimulus-documented-failure

It is true that Obama entered office in the midst of a deep recession. But, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, that recession ended in June 2009, almost three years ago.

Since then, America has been in a "growth" cycle, but a pathetic one. Real gross domestic product growth peaked at 3.9 percent in the first quarter of 2010, and Obama is now in real danger of being the first U.S. president since World War II not to see at least one quarter of economic growth at 4 percent or higher in a first term.

After all, three years ago Obama's top economic adviser told the country that if Congress approved Obama's plan unemployment would never top 8 percent and would drop below 6 percent this year. It did top 8 percent. It is nowhere near 6 percent today.

"But even if you buy the White House's argument that the $800 billion package created 3 million jobs, that works out to $266,000 per job.


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/youth.nr0.htm
From April to July 2012, the number of employed youth 16 to 24 years old rose 2.1 million to 19.5 million, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
Regional and state unemployment rates were generally little changed or slightly higher in July. Forty-four states recorded unemployment rate increases, two states and the District of Columbia posted rate decreases, and four states had no change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.

The arguement you make by saying this only proves you're a idiot. You have no concept of how bids for jobs work.