• 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!

Exclusive: Secret tapes undermine Hillary Clinton on Libyan war[W:292]

US Conservative said:
You are premising this with the statement that Hillary lying to get us into a war that killed Americans was ok because Libya was "already unstable". I welcome that flawed logic-can't imagine twisting myself in knots like that though.
Click to expand...

You must of missed the post where I said I disagreed with getting involved in the Libyan Civil War.
 
US Conservative said:
I caught the post where you cited Libya as already being destabilized, how exactly does that matter in your view?
Click to expand...

Because it was in response to a claim that Libya was not destabilized before the US got involved and Hilary Clinton was the sole factor for Libya's destabilization.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Because it was in response to a claim that Libya was not destabilized before the US got involved and Hilary Clinton was the sole factor for Libya's destabilization.
Click to expand...

It does not matter if it was or wasn't-lying to get Americans into a war where Americans are killed is unacceptable.
 
US Conservative said:
It does not matter if it was or wasn't-lying to get Americans into a war where Americans are killed is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Well, and lest not forget the false narrative of him using the excuse that Hillary Clinton was the sole reason for what took place with Libya. That's just more of that made up BS from leftests that like to play with terminology while taking things out of context. Their usual limitation.

Clearly none has come out and said Libya was cause by Clinton and she is the whole reason around why what happened there.....did.

But you know how they like to make **** up on the fly.....while they apply it to the mix of what is real.
 
Montecresto said:
That's true, except when a republican does it.
Click to expand...


Seems that's not true either.

th

6748-dwight-d-eisenhower-quote-wallpaper-1440x1080.jpg
 
US Conservative said:
It does not matter if it was or wasn't-
Click to expand...
Of course it matters. You are saying the truth does not matter?

lying to get Americans into a war where Americans are killed is unacceptable.
Click to expand...
And I agree. No where did I say I disagree. But then again I find your statements to possibly be incredibly ironic.
 
MMC said:
Seems that's not true either.

th

6748-dwight-d-eisenhower-quote-wallpaper-1440x1080.jpg
Click to expand...

The GOP mindset on war has changed great deal since Eisenhower... Eisenhower warned us of the Military Industrial Complex and its need for conflict and war, while today's GOP, and a great deal of Democrats seem to embrace it and promote its policies and profits.
 
MMC said:
Seems that's not true either.

th

6748-dwight-d-eisenhower-quote-wallpaper-1440x1080.jpg
Click to expand...

Hey MMC, seems my point flew above you. The poster I was responding to suggested that "lying to get Americans into a war where Americans are killed is unacceptable", and I pointed out that that is true, unless a republican president does it. As evedenced by the very fact that he and yourself excuse Bush for having done exactly the same thing, with far greater cost to America then anything in Libya. What would be refreshing is for you and the rest of the partisans on BOTH sides of the isle to call out such behavior every time it happens, not just when it's the other party. But history has shown that the partisan values his party over his country, so that's not likely to change.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
The GOP mindset on war has changed great deal since Eisenhower... Eisenhower warned us of the Military Industrial Complex and its need for conflict and war, while today's GOP, and a great deal of Democrats seem to embrace it and promote its policies and profits.
Click to expand...

No kidding!! The fringe right I would think would refrain from rolling out Eisenhower, his values being so far removed from theirs. He also said that he opposed the use of the nuclear bomb on Japan on two counts, one, that Japan was already preparing to surrender, and two that he hated to see the US be the first country to use that awful weapon. Nope, he doesn't look anything like the GOP today.
 
Montecresto said:
Hey MMC, seems my point flew above you. The poster I was responding to suggested that "lying to get Americans into a war where Americans are killed is unacceptable", and I pointed out that that is true, unless a republican president does it. As evedenced by the very fact that he and yourself excuse Bush for having done exactly the same thing, with far greater cost to America then anything in Libya. What would be refreshing is for you and the rest of the partisans on BOTH sides of the isle to call out such behavior every time it happens, not just when it's the other party. But history has shown that the partisan values his party over his country, so that's not likely to change.
Click to expand...


Well, Monte your theory would work if I had supported Bush Jr....so that is just the usual deflection while you bash the US for not being Angels on Earth. As a Matter of fact with even the US having been in the Right with dealing in any conflict. You always manage to point out what the US did that was wrong.

What would be refreshing is to see you throw that change up.....and not blame the US even for problems started by others outside the US.
 
MMC said:
Well, Monte your theory would work if I had supported Bush Jr....so that is just the usual deflection while you bash the US for not being Angels on Earth. As a Matter of fact with even the US having been in the Right with dealing in any conflict. You always manage to point out what the US did that was wrong.

What would be refreshing is to see you throw that change up.....and not blame the US even for problems started by others outside the US.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting you didn't/don't support Bush's Iraq war?? Which military interventions have I blamed on the US, that were actually the fault of another country?
 
Montecresto said:
Are you suggesting you didn't/don't support Bush's Iraq war?? Which military interventions have I blamed on the US, that were actually the fault of another country?
Click to expand...

Well, most of that ME stuff Monte pretty much all goes back to Churchill when it comes to the West. Like I said.....any conflict, but to be honest. I at least haven't heard you blame the US for starting WWII nor WWI.


Albeit you did condemn us for using the Nukes on Japan.
 
MMC said:
Well, most of that ME stuff Monte pretty much all goes back to Churchill when it comes to the West. Like I said.....any conflict, but to be honest. I at least haven't heard you blame the US for starting WWII nor WWI.


Albeit you did condemn us for using the Nukes on Japan.
Click to expand...

It's true that the US and the UK have been shaking up the Middle East for a century, better. I've never seen anything that would support the notion that the US started either of the world wars. I have been critical of FDR's provocations of the Japanese and the Germans which drew us into the two blemishes on humanity. And yes, of course I condemn the use of a nuclear bomb on civilian (really any) targets. And I'm satisfied that if, pick a non Western country, say had Gaddafi had the means to drop a nuke on Paris and destroy it as we did Hiroshima, you would have condemned it as an act of terrorism, though Gaddafi would have claimed he was attempting to survive, and drive back a French led attack on his country.
 
Montecresto said:
It's true that the US and the UK have been shaking up the Middle East for a century, better. I've never seen anything that would support the notion that the US started either of the world wars. I have been critical of FDR's provocations of the Japanese and the Germans which drew us into the two blemishes on humanity. And yes, of course I condemn the use of a nuclear bomb on civilian (really any) targets. And I'm satisfied that if, pick a non Western country, say had Gaddafi had the means to drop a nuke on Paris and destroy it as we did Hiroshima, you would have condemned it as an act of terrorism, though Gaddafi would have claimed he was attempting to survive, and drive back a French led attack on his country.
Click to expand...


Yet even here you try. :roll: As until Churchill opens it up....the US has no play whatsoever. Its recorded history, documented and with all sorts of documentaries on it.

So no....the US wasn't doing any shaking until brought on board and asked to do so by all sides.
 
MMC said:
Yet even here you try. :roll: As until Churchill opens it up....the US has no play whatsoever. Its recorded history, documented and with all sorts of documentaries on it.

So no....the US wasn't doing any shaking until brought on board and asked to do so by all sides.
Click to expand...

Sorry but NO!

Middle Eastern oil has enchanted global powers and global capital since the early twentieth century. Its allure has been particularly powerful for the United States. The American romance began in earnest in the 1930s, when geologists working for Standard Oil of California discovered commercial quantities of oil on the eastern shores of Saudi Arabia. In the years that followed, enchantment turned into obsession. Shortly after World War II it became clear that oil was more than merely a coveted industrial commodity. The most visible and celebrated event in that history occurred when Franklin D. Roosevelt hosted ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn Saud, the founding monarch of Saudi Arabia, aboard the USS Quincy on Egypt’s Great Bitter Lake in February 1945. The meeting permanently linked Middle Eastern oil with American national security.


America, Oil, and War in the Middle East

By the way, I won't argue with you that the UK was in their before the US. It was opened up by the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, and much restructuring, remapping, but as pointed out, the US has been there in earnest since 1930. And took full control in the 60's and do you recall Carter's inaugural address and his tough talk to anybody that threatened US hegemony in the region??
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
Sorry but NO!

Middle Eastern oil has enchanted global powers and global capital since the early twentieth century. Its allure has been particularly powerful for the United States. The American romance began in earnest in the 1930s, when geologists working for Standard Oil of California discovered commercial quantities of oil on the eastern shores of Saudi Arabia. In the years that followed, enchantment turned into obsession. Shortly after World War II it became clear that oil was more than merely a coveted industrial commodity. The most visible and celebrated event in that history occurred when Franklin D. Roosevelt hosted ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn Saud, the founding monarch of Saudi Arabia, aboard the USS Quincy on Egypt’s Great Bitter Lake in February 1945. The meeting permanently linked Middle Eastern oil with American national security.


America, Oil, and War in the Middle East
Click to expand...



Sorry, but Yes.....and from your own link Monte. Nice try though with your Anti American rhetoric. Did you want to try and go back and blame the US for Who really was sitting on that perch and long before 1930? What happened?


In a rush to secure and expand their own supplies in the region, the British landed an expeditionary force near Basra in what is now Iraq in 1914. By 1918 the British captured Baghdad and ensconced themselves and their allies there, a perch from which they projected power for several decades. 5 American ascendance in the Persian Gulf later in the century created a new pattern of militarism and war.....snip~


Those that have been teaching you abroad. Should make sure they include all of history and not just their notion of it.
 
MMC said:
Well, and lest not forget the false narrative of him using the excuse that Hillary Clinton was the sole reason for what took place with Libya. That's just more of that made up BS from leftests that like to play with terminology while taking things out of context. Their usual limitation.

Clearly none has come out and said Libya was cause by Clinton and she is the whole reason around why what happened there.....did.

But you know how they like to make **** up on the fly.....while they apply it to the mix of what is real.
Click to expand...

Its all spin all the time.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Of course it matters. You are saying the truth does not matter?


And I agree. No where did I say I disagree. But then again I find your statements to possibly be incredibly ironic.
Click to expand...

More of the dance of the liberal. Hillary really lied and really got Americans killed after really accusing others of doing the same.

Its called hypocrisy, and its not going to help her in 2016.

I say again-the left can't ever hold the moral high ground because they are incapable.
 
US Conservative said:
More of the dance of the liberal. Hillary really lied and really got Americans killed after really accusing others of doing the same.

Its called hypocrisy, and its not going to help her in 2016.

I say again-the left can't ever hold the moral high ground because they are incapable.
Click to expand...

Great story bro...
 
US Conservative said:
More of the dance of the liberal. Hillary really lied and really got Americans killed after really accusing others of doing the same.

Its called hypocrisy, and its not going to help her in 2016.

I say again-the left can't ever hold the moral high ground because they are incapable.
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about? :screwy
 
US Conservative said:
And the dance continues.
Click to expand...

No one has danced. You have accused me of many accusations that arent true. Then you said the truth doesnt matter. Then you called the truth "liberal spin".
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1064290666 said:
Republicans liberate nations from oppressive regimes and they are evil. Democrats do it and they are Hillary. Enough said...
Click to expand...

Democrats "liberated" someone from an "oppressed regime"?


France?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom