• 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!

Osama Bin Laden is dead

j-mac said:
The proof you seek should be no further really in that Obama has kept in place ALL of these programs, including Gitmo.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%

What I have been seeing in the past few days is a lot a liberal hypocrisy (Both Obama and his sheep)

To all Bush haters, the next time you criticize past decisions, first put those decisions in the context of the time. Did they make sense then, with the knowledge that was available then?

If you haven't done that, then you really have no business using 20/20 hindsight to fault the decision. The outcome may not have turned out as expected, but if the decision was made using the best available info, and the alternatives were worse, then it wasn't a bad decision.

The real messiah, here is Bush. Obama is just riding his coat tails and taking the credit.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
The proof you seek should be no further really in that Obama has kept in place ALL of these programs, including Gitmo.

j-mac
Click to expand...

How do you figure? It might seem that way if you don't think about it. He tried hard to close GITMO for example, but lack fo congressional support hindered that and not his acceptance that it was best. Seriously, what is wrong with being honest about these things?
 
Kali said:
Is this sarcasm? I hope so. Anyways as I have said: OBL was a direct threat armed or unarmed. What is so damn hard for people to understand about this? None of his silly little "rights" were violated. Those that think so need to get the hell over it, suck it up and deal. :roll:

Again: Bin Laden was a direct threat to all of us and we did what should have been done. Period.
Click to expand...

We didn't pick up UBL or any others for interrogation? Practically, there was no resistance from his group...

Why was that?
 
Last edited:
Erod said:
He has LOADS of proof, like Eric Holder admitting it, for one.

Sucks for you guys, I know.
Click to expand...

Actually, another claim is not proof. Sorry. Can you provide actual information we got? Verifiable, documented, and equal to the example I gave?
 
Boo Radley said:
He tried hard to close GITMO
Click to expand...

he tried...

LOL!

too bad FIFTY sitting dem senators KNEW BETTER

including john kerry, harry reid, chuck schumer, daniel inouye, diane feinstein...

how's that patriot act these days, do you think holder got a warrant before listening in on that call to kuwaiti?
 
Boo Radley said:
Can you provide actual information we got?
Click to expand...

you'd really have to ask helgerson

while you're at it, ask holder why he issued the report

think much, chairman?

LOL!
 
The Prof said:
only the ig report released by holder in august, 2009
Click to expand...
Funny that the IG report says several times that it can't be determined that it
"couldn't have been accomplished without ... eit's"

Why would the IG say the explicit and exact opposite of it "couldn't have been accomplished without ... eit's" when you say that he said it "couldn't have been accomplished without ... eit's?"
 
ok, so he's been taken care of. he's dead. so when are we getting out of Afghanistan?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Funny that the IG report says several times that it can't be determined that it
"couldn't have been accomplished without ... eit's"

Why would the IG say the explicit and exact opposite of it "couldn't have been accomplished without eit's"
Click to expand...

because a preeminent source is a preeminent source

couldn't have been accomplished without what's-his-name's ways---gitmo, detention, wiretapping...

it all, including eit's, led to the assassination

remember?
 
Last edited:
Why does everything, beneficial, or hindering, turn into a partisan poop slinging contest? When the economy hinders its the other sides fault, when Bin Laden is killed both sides are fighting to take credit. The more you fight over taking/blaming credit, the more you truly embarrass yourselves.
 
ric27 said:
We didn't pick up UBL or any others for interrogation? Practically, there was no resistance from his group...

Why was that?
Click to expand...

WHO CARES? No5t me. If some of you bleeding hearts wish to mourn and cry over a bunch of scummy asspunk terrorist? Knock yourself out but I am glad they are dead.
 
He's not dead until Baahaus does a song
Osama Bin laden is dead"
 
his hand in murdering thousands of innocent people was certainly significant but in the end he was becoming more insignificant. he was a failure. the mass revolutions in the Arab world over the past few months give testament to that.

are we safer now that Bin Laden's dead? possibly, but unfortunately we are never going to be able to eradicate every single crazy extremist out there.

millions of Arab Muslims have risen up and are prepared for their own martyrdom – not for Islam but for freedom and liberty and democracy. to them, al-Qaeda was already politically dead and that is not the path they have chosen to follow.

don't lose sight of that.
 
The Prof said:
because a preeminent source is a preeminent source
couldn't have been accomplished without what's-his-name's ways---gitmo, detention, wiretapping...
it all, including eit's, led to the assassination
remember?
Click to expand...
So the fact that what you're saying is in direct and explicit contradiction to the source you're citing has no impact. kk
 
Boo Radley said:
How do you figure? It might seem that way if you don't think about it. He tried hard to close GITMO for example, but lack fo congressional support hindered that and not his acceptance that it was best. Seriously, what is wrong with being honest about these things?
Click to expand...

Meh...Another 'it's not his fault' moment...Good GAWD Joe, is there anything that you tongue wagging supporters will see him accept responsibility for?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Meh...Another 'it's not his fault' moment...Good GAWD Joe, is there anything that you tongue wagging supporters will see him accept responsibility for?


j-mac
Click to expand...

J, do you prefer to be honest, or play polticial games. There is a difference between a person changing his mind and saying Bush was right and not changing your mind but being unable to effect the change you want. You may argue he's ineffective, maybe even too weak to force it, but there is no evidence that he's accepted Bush's position. Again, it's about honesty.
 
Boo Radley said:
J, do you prefer to be honest, or play polticial games. There is a difference between a person changing his mind and saying Bush was right and not changing your mind but being unable to effect the change you want. You may argue he's ineffective, maybe even too weak to force it, but there is no evidence that he's accepted Bush's position. Again, it's about honesty.
Click to expand...



I gotta question for you.

How can you support an extrajudicial assassination of OBL, but not EIT of KSM?



Curious minds want to know. :prof
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I gotta question for you.

How can you support an extrajudicial assassination of OBL, but not EIT of KSM?



Curious minds want to know. :prof
Click to expand...

Have you read what I said about this? If it was an assassination, I don't support it. If they were trying to capture him and he was killed in the firefight, **** happens. My preference would be that he stand trial. While I won't cry or moun his death, assassination is just as illegal as EIT.
 
Boo Radley said:
J, do you prefer to be honest, or play polticial games. There is a difference between a person changing his mind and saying Bush was right and not changing your mind but being unable to effect the change you want. You may argue he's ineffective, maybe even too weak to force it, but there is no evidence that he's accepted Bush's position. Again, it's about honesty.
Click to expand...


Honesty? Where is that in anything this guy does? We haven't had a moment in the past two years of this administration that wasn't done under the guise of political expediency. Don't be hold us to standards you don't have any intention of holding yourself to. That is directly out of 'Rules for radicals' and we see that.


j-mac
 
Boo Radley said:
Have you read what I said about this? If it was an assassination, I don't support it. If they were trying to capture him and he was killed in the firefight, **** happens. My preference would be that he stand trial. While I won't cry or moun his death, assassination is just as illegal as EIT.
Click to expand...

Is OBL a world leader now?


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom