jfuh

Using your tax dollars? Care to speculate how much of your tax dollars were spent on it?

__________________
The facts and science of the theory of anthropogenic Global warming
If you haven't already - please vote for me

Reverend_Hellh0und

there is a thread already on how much his pandering trip has cost us. feel free to use the "search" feature.

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Hatuey

Where? Link?

__________________
Is Intolerant Because He Won't Let The Intolerant Run Other People's Lives.

Reverend_Hellh0und

is your search feature malfunctioning?

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Hatuey

Doesn't show up I used : Obama, taxes, flights, trips - nothing shows.

__________________
Is Intolerant Because He Won't Let The Intolerant Run Other People's Lives.

SmilesAndFrowns

Hmm...Is Obama already the president or something or did i miss something...or what country is he running for president in? Im confused...? The World?

I find it very odd, indeed, odd. Hmm....

jfuh

You must have missed the part about debating where when you claim something, it is your job to support it.
So if you're going to say that he's spending millions of my tax dollars on this trip or a whole lot of, it's your job to provide me with a credible source to. The burden of proof rests with you. I'm not even asking you to prove some wild goose chase that may be difficult to support, I was simply asking you how much it had cost us and on what do you base this on.
That some "blogger" said so doesn't make it so.

__________________
The facts and science of the theory of anthropogenic Global warming
If you haven't already - please vote for me

jfuh

It is actually an interesting point you bring up. Yes Obama is running for the leader of the free world - so the way I see it having such a great reception from one of our strongest allies is a very good thing.
So what's odd about it?

What would've McCain's reception have been?

__________________
The facts and science of the theory of anthropogenic Global warming
If you haven't already - please vote for me

MSgt

This is very true. Continental Europe doesn't have to object outright to anything. In fact, they simply send the bare minimum and behave as national guard abroad behind American troops. This has always been the case. America doesn't need a cheerleading squad. We don't need a bunch of Europeans giving us applause from afar as they figure how little they can get away with. We need our allies to step up and stop behaving as if the bare minimum is good enough. Ever since Afghanistan, you and everyone else have heard American and European leaders request more from NATO. Seven years later, the probable next President of the United States continues this request.

Iraq was about rejection. Afghanistan is about reluctant duty. America has always given Europe far more respect when they were in need. Even as late as the 1990's Europeans were the recipient of an overwhleming American force to deal with yet another European mess. The bare minimum is nothing we ever consider when aiding our allies.


Turns out wrong. And your numbered excuses are mere excuses designed to stay ignorant and continu your stubborn protests despite clear understanding of the situation. Iraq is in very good shape these days and it took them to destroy each other in tribal feuding and Al-Queda to show the entire Middle East how little it cares about Muslims to figure it out. Culture is fate.

But what you are really saying is that Europeans are generally too stupid to see beyond political BS. Let me take your above mentioned excuses for apathy and shatter thme with a larger picture realization. Iraq was always about something greater for this region and was clearly stated to the UN prior to kick off. If Europeans chose to pretend that WMD was the only factor and chose this an excuse to run...then so be it. The fact remains that as long as the Middle East continues to spiral under dictators, brutal regimes, and fundamental religious prescription, Europe will be the recipient of the radical immigration issues it is already spinning from...not America. Al-Queda hurt American soil even more so than our enemies in WWII did. How many 9/11s do you thimnk is in our future after we demonstrated in Afghanistan and Iraq? Now how many terrorist attacks will Europe endure because of its reluctance to address these issues?

But.....according to you...the real threat was just an old man in a cave and his Tali-Ban hosts. You Europeans absolutely fail to understand a very simple thing. We can create a Homeland Security, guard our borders, create missile defense programs, block visas, and all the other things that people think will eventually create an iron bubble around us. In the long run, this will not work. A city killing nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon will now fit in a backpack. Many weapons don't require transport across borders. Enemies (radical immigrants) can beam directions and instructions anywhere in the world. We aren't going to prevent disease from spreading over our borders. Once it has started there, we aren't going to prevent environmental destruction from spreading here. Millions of people all over the world are moving out of their home contries-either because the grass is greener somewhere else, or more likely because live is unbearable at home. You want to create a real stability in this world and save your own identities and security? It starts by addressing our Cold war mistakes and all the dictators, monsters, and religious regimes abroad that create the individual problems, which evolve into organizations, which eventually seek an enemy.

Once these type immigrants (Cold War creations) make it to Europe and even America, the migrant-both legal and illegal-often transfer to the first world the instabilities and chaos endemic in the third world; and so they put strains on a nation's security and social systems that its systems may not be able to handle. There are humanitarian issues, religious tolerance issues, political issues. Extreme Islamist immigrants bring in mosques and leaders who encourage radicalism and violence. And what of our cultures? We encourage their right to practice their religious prescriptions. The fix is simple. If the conditions are made more tolerable back in their home countries, people will stay home. We have a clear and perfect example of this with India. Many of the best, brightest, and most highly educated emigrated from India. But as capacity was built up and good jobs became increasingly available, the best and the brightest decided to stay home. But in today's Islamic immigrant world, the best and the brightest aren't the ones coming. Multi-million-inhabited third world cities rarely have a viable physical infrastructure, or political and social structure, and they breed every kind of social, health, and environmental evil. Whatever they choose to leave behind, they will rarely choose to off load their life long indoctrinations in fundamental religion. This they bring with them almost every time and they seek the mosques that will accomodate them. And it's far easier to get to Europe than it is to get across an ocean to America. In fact, the majority of the onse that do come to America are the more educated or wealthy ones.

Anyone who fails to understand what these changes mean, and what they bring to countries and societies, will be lost in today's world. Continental Europe is lost. Anyone who tries to apply mid-twentieth-century templates (Cold War) to these problems will find himself lost, confused, and powerless to handle them. This is continental Europe and their need to keep things as they are with all the dictators sitting high on thrones keeping "stability."

Europe will wake up as it always does eventually. But by then, it will be fighting for its security in its own lands again and not abroad where America has been trying to keep it.

I can chastize them all I want, because in the end, it will be my country's sweat, treasure, and blood that gets to deal with European narrow vision when the fanatical element of the Middle East erupts all over Europe. Once again, Europe's refusal to acknowledge a threat will smack it in the face. And just who do you think they will need to send more than their bare minimum?

Perhaps we should have "supported" Europe's Bosnia and Kosovo crisis and applauded while sending only a couple jets and a BN of troops. Still failing to see why Americans reserve the right to chastize European opinion of things? Was Bosnia or Kosovo a matter of national security for America or were we simply needed by our allies? This sense of duty towards ally has never been reciprocated by France or Germany towards us. And it wasn't until Iraq when most America finally figured it out.

I agree it would be strange. In fact, it would be very un DeGaulic if they hadn't. The fact is that they wanted no part of this out of fear and they used the WMD excuse to turn their backs on far more than America. And after the work to topple Saddam Hussein was complete by America, France started making moves to get involved politically just to be a part of the what was to eventually come and not be left out. And did they send any troops to help defend the streets of the consulate building? Or was this yet another venture where the bare minimum would do while American troops sweated the event? And did they send apologies towards the newly created Iraqi government or to the overwhelming population that voted for the first time in history on the laws that would govern them for deeming them insignificant in the endeavor to rid them of their abuser, but worthy enough to see a French consulate building after someone else did the dirty work? This is not new. France has always jumped into the issues even when they hadn't a horse in the race. De Gaul politics still streers the ship.

You seem to gloss over that America eventually showed up for both of your European civil wars and fought. And one of those was after we were largely fighting the Japanese by ourselves in a much larger theater where you sent nobody. Unlike the French, we didn't watch from a far, criticize every move, and then sneak in a consulate building behind European lines.

Haha. They have been following it ever since the end of WWII. The difference today is that there isn't a big bad red wolf on the other side of a concrete wall in Germany and an American military struggling to contain communism all over the world. Today, your nations get to sit back and criticize and pretend to "support" events that will eventually overwhelm Europe before it ever does little more than thump us.

The US people believe they are headed in the wrong direction whenever DirectTV goes out. The fact is that what occurred with Iraq had to happen and it should have happened sooner. If it had, we wouldn't have such a hard time today with this region and what has to be done. The Middle East reflects Europe at the turn of the twentieth century. They will have to destroy enough of themselves before they are able to acknowledge that they have to start working together.


Like throughout the Cold War? Recognize the world you live in. The next and current threat is knocking on your doors and you don't even see it. You are too busy placating or bitching to Islamic fundamentalism in your own neighborhoods to realize that immigration from these wrecked and socially disfunctional nations are increasingly seeking to be near your homes. And as they are already proving to do, bringing the third world with them.

__________________

MSgt
Semper Fidelis
USMC

Bergslagstroll

But one of the most important leason of the Iraq war is the importance of good peace keeping troops then rebuilding a country. That USA can defeat any country but creating security in that country is a lot harder challenge. Their Europeans have done a good job of keeping the peace in large areas of Afganisthan for many years.