• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Seeks UN Resolution Authorizing Strikes on Libya

Whovian said:
U.S. Seeks UN Resolution Authorizing Strikes on Libya - FoxNews.com



If we go into Libya, I wonder if the 'no blood for oil' people will come out and protest, hanging Obama in effigy, burning his photo, calling him Hitler, etc., like they did for Bush? I think not.

Also, if the Obama administration goes into Libya without UN authorization, what will the general reaction be here in the states?
Click to expand...
Obama, that ****ing warmonger.....where the hell is his congressional declaration of war? Hmmm?????? Where the **** is it?
 
Big Tom said:
???? What the hell are you talking about? Everyone here knows what he was saying. wow...open a window and get some air.
Click to expand...
He said he wasn't talking about what everyone here knows he was talking about.
 
Whovian said:
I was comparing the reactions of the masses between what happened when Bush went into Iraq, and what might happen if Obama goes into Libya... not the conflicts themselves.
Click to expand...

Simon W. Moon said:
So the usefulness and meaningfulness of your comparison of Iraq and Libya comes from the fact that the situations are so different?

I will now compare the reactions of the masses between what happened when the coal miners were rescued in South America and what might happen if the Japanese reactor has a total meltdown.

If Japanese reactor has a total meltdown, I wonder if the people who cheered the rescue of the miners will come out and and celebrate with hugs and kisses and champagne like they did when the miners were rescued? I think not.
Click to expand...

You kinda suck at this, don't you :rofl:

My comparison: reactions of the same group of people after a President gets them involved in an armed conflict.

Your comparison: reactions of different groups after a negative outcome occurrence and a happy positive outcome occurrence.
 
Last edited:
It's 10:30 PM, WHERE THE **** IS THE DECLARATION OF WAR???? If Obama goes to battle without one, I'm going to insist on impeachment.
 
StillBallin75 said:
better hope Congress gets off their asses then.
Click to expand...

Are you stalking me? You always seem to be there lately. Anyway, Congress better or I'll impeach them too.
 
American said:
It's 10:30 PM, WHERE THE **** IS THE DECLARATION OF WAR???? If Obama goes to battle without one, I'm going to insist on impeachment.
Click to expand...

My dude, we never officially DoWed Iraq or Afghanistan, thus do you think we should impeach Bush as well?

Edit: Also, please look here as well
 
Last edited:
American said:
Obama, that ****ing warmonger.....where the hell is his congressional declaration of war? Hmmm?????? Where the **** is it?
Click to expand...

American said:
It's 10:30 PM, WHERE THE **** IS THE DECLARATION OF WAR???? If Obama goes to battle without one, I'm going to insist on impeachment.
Click to expand...

Oh am I the only one on this board just eating this up!?!?? OMG this is better than sex! A liberal mad at Obama! Impeach him, hell I'm on board with that too! Not for this Libyan thing, but for lots of domestic gaffes! :lamo

Probably the only time me and you will ever agree on anything! LOL

Bomb, bomb bomb, bomb bomb Gadaff, Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Gadaff....
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
Oh am I the only one on this board just eating this up!?!?? OMG this is better than sex! A liberal mad at Obama! Impeach him, hell I'm on board with that too! Not for this Libyan thing, but for lots of domestic gaffes! :lamo

Probably the only time me and you will ever agree on anything! LOL

Bomb, bomb bomb, bomb bomb Gadaff, Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Gadaff....
Click to expand...

Did you not realize that American is just ****ing with us? :lamo
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Yeah, and after they **** things up 9 ways from Sunday, you'll be wishing the U.S. had taken the lead role.
Click to expand...

No, no I won't. It can no longer be the responsibility of the U.S. To be the world's enforcer. We can no longer afford to do it, and the sooner we pull back, the better we'll be able to get our own house in order.
 
Last edited:
Dezaad said:
No, no I won't. It can no longer be the responsibility of the U.S. To be the world's enforcer. We can no longer afford to be do it, and the sooner we pull back, the better we'll be able to get our own house in order.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes you will. But, hey, don't take my word for it. You'll see.
 
U.S. Seeks UN Resolution Authorizing Strikes on Libya
Click to expand...


Frankly, I am surprised that the 'Golfer n chief' could fit in the request.


pfft, too little, too late.


j-mac
 
apdst said:
Yes, yes you will. But, hey, don't take my word for it. You'll see.
Click to expand...

No, I won't. It will make no difference to me if they screw it up, with respect to how I feel about what we should do. I have already accepted that, without our leadership, the world's downtrodden may not do as well.

I think paying down our debt is more important than expensive adventures.
 
Whovian said:
If we go into Libya, I wonder if the 'no blood for oil' people will come out and protest, hanging Obama in effigy, burning his photo, calling him Hitler, etc., like they did for Bush? I think not.

Also, if the Obama administration goes into Libya without UN authorization, what will the general reaction be here in the states?
Click to expand...

Blood for oil has been the policy in Libya for a long time now. It has only recently been a "problem" because Libyans want freedom and the fighting is causing disruptions to the oil market.

62294-col-gaddafi-of-libya-seen-here-with-british-prime-minister-t.jpg


gheddafi_obama01g.jpg


gaddafi-putin.jpg
 
Temporal said:
Blood for oil has been the policy in Libya for a long time now. It has only recently been a "problem" because Libyans want freedom and the fighting is causing disruptions to the oil market.
Click to expand...


Actually one of the reasons we have been more chummy with Libya is because they abandoned their secret nuclear program and made it entirely open and transparent. A state where nuclear weapons, technology, and know-how flood the world is NOT a scenario anyone wants to see.

Libyan Nuclear Weapons
 
Jetboogieman said:
To compare Libya and Iraq is such a fallacy it defies imagination.
Click to expand...

This is where the Libs like Jetboogieman lose all credibility.

Trying to compare them does defy the imagination. If it does, what took the Obaminator so long to get off the pot?

Saddam:

1. Started a war, lost it and agreed to disarm.
2. Attempted to assasinate a US President.
3. Was shooting at our planes in the NFZ with regularity. A hostile act from someone who should have been cooperating.
3. Had WMD and used them.
4. Was not transparent in any manner with the UN Inspecteurs de la Sortie. Read Blix's testimony before the war started. He spells it out.
5. Kicked out Inspecteurs.
6. Was killing 100 of his own people on average per day for years, and Post Gulf War 1, cleansed a town for its uprising.
7. There were 17 UN Resolutions in 12-years, and still Saddam kept waving with his middle finger.
8. Every ally, and all the Democrat Leadership warned about Saddam's WMD... before Bush 43 was elected.


Gaddafi Duck:
1. Has killed his own people in an attempt to retain control.


You're right, there really is no comparison.

Liblady: If you recall, the press didn't like Bush giving multiple reasons to go into Iraq... WMD was one, and serious. Read Blix's report before we went in. It's chilling if you understand what WMD and weponized WMD can do.

.
 
ADG said:
No, you're right. George W. didn't deregulate anything (that I'm readily aware of) concerning the financial sector. But then he didn't need to, as the damage had been done with Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. The financial meltdown was truly a bipartisan effort.
Click to expand...

Who's that? Don't believe we have ever had a Bush, Sr. in the White House, though we do have an Obama, Jr...

Just saying... for accuracy sake...
 
For all those liberals who whined that there was no security council authorization for Iraq (though in reality, there was), there is now clear and unambiguos UNSC authorization for action in the air regarding Libya... I wonder what argument they will concoct now?

I support a no-fly zone... it was needed at least two weeks ago... it may now be too late...

One poster posited that the rebels don't want this, where do you get that from? I have seen far more evidence that the opposite is true, but Kane may blame that on the programming we get from the media... lol
 
Well know UN have decided on a no fly zone. Then it comes to Iraq USA can be extremly thankfull that the sanction and weapon incpection worked very well. Else wmd would have been in the hand of terrorists and insurgents and used to kill Americand. Because the Iraq war was a total catastrophe. Becuase USA didn't know their the wmd that they said existed was located. They didn't either have the manpower to secure weapon site. So many weapon site was plundred and the weapon later used by terrorist and insurgents. So if Bush had been correct that Iraq had a lot of wmd those wmd had ended up in the wrong hands. So thank UN for that Iraq war didn't become more of a catastrophe it became.
 
Dezaad said:
No, I won't. It will make no difference to me if they screw it up, with respect to how I feel about what we should do. I have already accepted that, without our leadership, the world's downtrodden may not do as well.

I think paying down our debt is more important than expensive adventures.
Click to expand...
Are you really this naive? Who do you think is going to supply 95% of the resources for this little operation. :doh

.
 
TOJ said:
Are you really this naive? Who do you think is going to supply 95% of the resources for this little operation. :doh

.
Click to expand...

According to what I am reading, Britain, France, and some Arab countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom