Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 49

Thread: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

  1. #31
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:49 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,450
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Jet:

    One more thing:

    Patriotic Americans weren't on the side of Sheehan, Code Pink, calling our troops Nazi's, war criminals, Air raiding villages and terrorizing civilians, revelling in the death toll daily, claiming the "war is lost", singing in chorus "the surge is failing", or taking out full page ads calling our great general BETRAYUS.

    No, that was the traitors.

    .

    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 09-02-10 at 04:13 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  2. #32
    Guru
    Mustachio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,582

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Jet:

    One more thing:

    Patriotic Americans weren't on the side of Sheehan, Code Pink, calling our troops Nazi's, war criminals, Air raiding villages and terrorizing civilians, revelling in the death toll daily, claiming the "war is lost", singing in chorus "the surge is failing", or taking out full page ads calling our great general BETRAYUS.

    No, that was the traitors.
    You keep saying "terrorizing civilians." That wasn't the quote. The quote was "We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there." That doesn't sound "treasonous" to me but then again, I'm not the one frothing at the mouth.

    You consider anybody who doesn't support the mission a traitor. I consider anybody who doesn't even stop to think about the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis inhuman. If your argument centers around what Democrats did and what Democrats said, you haven't actually said anything. And you've wasted a whole lot of time saying nothing.
    A working class hero is something to be

  3. #33
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,746

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Aside from the speech largely sounding self-congratulating for he and his base, it was a mediocre speech that failed to give strategic credit to his predecessors and failed to deliver a message with how a War on Terrorism will continue to be unleashed.
    Ah, yes.......

    1) We invaded Iraq after cherrypicking intel that said Saddam was developing nukes.

    2) We were told that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons.

    3) We were told that Saddam was developing missiles that could hit the US.

    4) We were told we would be greeted with flowers, and be seen as liberators.

    5) We were told the war would last less than a month.

    6) We sent too few troops to do the job, and it wasn't until years later that a troops surge was sent.

    7) We abanoned the war against those who attacked us on 911.

    8) We were told to go shopping.

    9) We were told to watch what we say.

    10) We were told that Saddam was working with al-Queda.

    Yes, Obama should have given the credit for everything to the man who deserves ALL the credit for this disaster - George Bush.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  4. #34
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:49 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,450
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    You keep saying "terrorizing civilians." That wasn't the quote. The quote was "We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there." That doesn't sound "treasonous" to me but then again, I'm not the one frothing at the mouth.

    You consider anybody who doesn't support the mission a traitor. I consider anybody who doesn't even stop to think about the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis inhuman. If your argument centers around what Democrats did and what Democrats said, you haven't actually said anything. And you've wasted a whole lot of time saying nothing.
    You're right, it is air raiding villages and killing civilians, not terrorizing.

    "Enough troops"... and then Obi is against the Surge.

    If you think it is frothing at the mouth bringing up what the left did... OK... because what they did shouldn't be forgotten.
    Some here are coy, and play as if their side were a patriotic lot. No... they were vile political opportunists that sent troops to war and then turned on them.

    I like to keep it in their faces so the vile amongst us will ponder what they had done.

    It may be frothing, but beside inserting terrorizing instead of killing... is there something I misapplied to the traitors on the left?
    Nope, there isn't.

    As for inhuman... a million died (500,000 children) during sanctions and Maddie Albright of the Clinton Clan claimed it was worth the price. What price... what did they achieve? Zero.


    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 09-02-10 at 05:36 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  5. #35
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Zimmer,

    Please name one thing that Colin Powell said in his UN presentation about WMD that turned out to be true.


  6. #36
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Yeah let's pull the cover off and expose the crap underneath.

    Support the troops but not the mission?
    ROTFLOL... means you do not support the troops. You harm their mission, and thereby harm the troops. You embolden the enemy. That is not supporting the troops. Nothing remotely close. And it's not as if you folks were silent about this... you folks were rabid.

    But "you can support the troops, without supporting the war"... that's Liberal "Logic" for ya.

    In fact, you folks were hostile, and your leadership irresponsible at best, treasonous at worst. Your party is the favorite of al Jazeera... why?

    Dems leaders claiming to the world:
    "The surge isn't working". (This mantra was party wide)
    "The war is lost".
    "Nazi's".
    "Air raiding villages and terrorizing civilians".

    This about our own troops while they are fighting on the battle field!!!

    "Bush lied, people died"...

    Some support.

    Now, go crawl back under your rocks; treasonous lot.

    .
    What the hell are you talking about? It's not that hard to support the troops without supporting the war. Everytime a soldier died, I grieved a little inside, just like every other American. I wanted, and prayed for all the troops to come home safely, and quickly. I had family over there. Ever think that wanting the troops to come home, is a better way of supporting them than wanting them to stay in a war zone?
    And how the hell is not supporting the war, emboldening the enemies? That kind of logic is why no one here takes you seriously.
    Also the treason stuff, is too funny. Since when was disagreeing with the government treasonous?

    I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually. -James Baldwin
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  7. #37
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,450

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    I don't think there has been any American president that has delivered a bigger slap in the face to American servicemen, than our current president.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #38
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't think there has been any American president that has delivered a bigger slap in the face to American servicemen, than our current president.
    Why?

    10 characters
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  9. #39
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't think there has been any American president that has delivered a bigger slap in the face to American servicemen, than our current president.
    There are many American servicemen who are dead today or severely injured because of Obama's predecessor. That is fact.


  10. #40
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,463

    Re: Obama's Speech August 31, 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    OV:That's all we need to quote. Saddam had and used WMD, and from here I'll let Hans Blix blow your ass out of the water on your error fueled claim.....

    [edit for length]

    Blix reveals uncertainties, asks questions that should have been answered a decade earlier. It was 12-years and 16 UN Resolutions. How many does a despot get after losing a war and agreeing to disarm? 3 decades and 30 resolutions? Perhaps not enough for the Libs... I don't know... I'm asking.

    Blix specifically mentioned: VX, weaponized VX, ANTHRAX, all unaccounted for according to Hans. Of course... Saddam would never, ever use WMD... nor would he pass it off to a terrorist, especially in the euphoria after 911. No... he'd never do that...

    ...Disney music... it's a small world after all, it's a small world after all, it's a small world after all... it's a small, small world...

    .
    Yes, it is a small world for small minds.....

    "...Iraqis Truthful about VX - Later evidence and inspection findings show that the Iraqi scientists had been truthful: they had never succeeded in stabilizing VX, and had never filled any warheads with the nerve toxin. The lab results are later shown to be severely flawed. Ritter will write, “In the end, I was wrong to have pushed so hard to have the lab results made public.” [New Yorker, 6/7/2004; TruthDig, 3/17/2008]
    Madeleine Albright

    The above link is a very good account of what transpired during the Clinton administration leading up to 9/11. Ever since the first Gulf War the only thing the US was interested in was regime change in Iraq. The extreme sanctions on Iraq were meant to force Iraqis to do the regime change themselves but that was unlikely without outside support. Even the UN inspections were manipulated toward this goal of regime change and by 1998 Saddam realized this when he discovered CIA were posing as UN weapons inspectors.

    So the harsher the sanctions became, the more resentment throughout the Arab world against the US became and terrorist attacks throughout the 1990s on US interests and embassies abroad increased substantially. The Clinton Administration simply called it "collateral damage" and any attempt by Arab nations to co-operate in capturing these terrorists were ignored and they became politically isolated. There were many chances before 9/11 to capture OBL but for some reason it was all ignored or prevented as the price of doing business in the ME.

    Soon world opinion started to denounce the Iraq sanctions especially after Madelyn Albriet's statement that the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children were worth it to keep the sanctions in tact. There is evidence she may have even personally prevented the UN inspectors from delivering a final report that Iraq was clean of WMDs which would have lifted the sanctions in 1998.

    Then due to pressure from a Neocon group called Project for the New American Century, Clinton illegally bombed a pharmaceutical company inside Iraq (Desert Fox) so he could falsely claim it was making WMDs. This was the justification the US used for not lifting sanctions. At this same time, the NeoCons were plotting to do regime change themselves but they knew they couldn't do it without someone to replace Saddam and thats where Chalabi and his IRC came in.

    After Bush took office he ended the protocol for UN inspections in favor of aerial surveillance and heavy bombing operations by US and British air forces over the No Fly Zones which encompassed over 2/3 of Iraq. The NeoCons contrived entire justification for the war on Iraq, and I have no reason to believe they didn't know before hand about 9/11 and simply let it happen so they could it use it as the justification to invade Iraq. Which is exactly what they did.
    Last edited by Moot; 09-03-10 at 05:19 AM.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •