• 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!

Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?


  • Total voters
    102
How about an iota of honesty, Navy....what you are expressing so loudly is only your opinion.
The world is ever so slowing, despite its kicking screaming, being dragged into more peaceful times..

It has nothing to do with my opinon.........The facts speak for themselves....Obama is the biggest spender in the history of this country. He has never seen a dollar (as long as its the taxpayer's and not his) that he won't spend.
 
It has nothing to do with my opinon.........The facts speak for themselves....Obama is the biggest spender in the history of this country. He has never seen a dollar (as long as its the taxpayer's and not his) that he won't spend.

The budget actually hasn't increased since he took office.
And it is the Congress, not the president, who spends.

Other than that, you're correct.
 
The budget actually hasn't increased since he took office.
And it is the Congress, not the president, who spends.

Other than that, you're correct.

Is that why more national debt has been added under BHO than any other POTUS? Is that why it's nearly certain that on the day he leaves office, 20 January 2017, BHO will have added more to the national debt than all other Presidents combined?:roll:
 
There is no evidence that Iraqi oil was a war aim or strategic objective in the second Iraq war. You've raised your "evidence" before. It has nothing to do with the war.:cool:
Do you know they were going to call the invasion Operation Iraq Liberation?

I don't know if oil had any influence on their decision to invade Iraq, but I am quite sure it was an idiotic thing to do. Even if all of the Intelligence were true, that wouldn't be enough reason to invade.
 
It has nothing to do with my opinon.........The facts speak for themselves....Obama is the biggest spender in the history of this country. He has never seen a dollar (as long as its the taxpayer's and not his) that he won't spend.
Somehow you seem to think the only thing that causes debt is spending, but the loss of revenue also creates debt. And good portion of that loss is due to job loss that began 2008.
 
Do you know they were going to call the invasion Operation Iraq Liberation?

I don't know if oil had any influence on their decision to invade Iraq, but I am quite sure it was an idiotic thing to do. Even if all of the Intelligence were true, that wouldn't be enough reason to invade.

Most of the intelligence was wrong. If oil were an objective, then the easy, cheap way to get it was to make a deal with Saddam, not invade Iraq. The invasion was driven by a vision of a Middle East Pax Americana enabled by US power based in Iraq. That was to create the conditions for comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace. The GWB crowd wanted to do big things.:cool:
 
Is that why more national debt has been added under BHO than any other POTUS? Is that why it's nearly certain that on the day he leaves office, 20 January 2017, BHO will have added more to the national debt than all other Presidents combined?:roll:
No, that's not why at all.

What I cited were simply facts. It is the congress that controls the purse strings. The federal budget hasn't gone up since Obama took office. You can make what you will of those facts.

Federal spending has actually dropped since 2009, and so has the deficit.

All of which doesn't mean that spending is under control, or that the deficit is not a problem, or anything of the kind. The federal government has been growing out of control for some time now.
 
No, that's not why at all.

What I cited were simply facts. It is the congress that controls the purse strings. The federal budget hasn't gone up since Obama took office. You can make what you will of those facts.

Federal spending has actually dropped since 2009, and so has the deficit.

All of which doesn't mean that spending is under control, or that the deficit is not a problem, or anything of the kind. The federal government has been growing out of control for some time now.

BHO's commitment to entitlement spending is the driver of debt according to your own link. :cool:
 
BHO's commitment to entitlement spending is the driver of debt according to your own link. :cool:

His commitment to entitlements?
or the entitlements themselves Let's see...

Federal entitlements are driving this spending growth, having increased from less than half of total federal outlays just 20 years ago to nearly 62 percent in 2012. Three major programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—dominate in size and growth, soaking up about 44 percent of the budget.

Two of those are, indeed, entitlements, as the baby boomers who have paid into them for years are now starting to retire, and are entitled to the money they've put in. Medicaid is another problem, as it is a part of the trillion dollar means tested welfare that Congress passed.

Still, doesn't mention Obama, and the three programs pre date his presidency by quite a few years.

All three programs are growing faster than inflation, and—when joined with $1.7 trillion in new Obamacare spending—will drain about 18.5 percent of the nation’s total economic output by mid-century. Because that is about the historical annual average of total federal tax revenue, it means all other government programs—national defense, veterans health care, transportation, federal law enforcement, and others—would effectively have to be financed on borrowed money.

Now, finally, we read about a program actually supported and passed by the Obama Administration.

and if we look at what is actually driving the increased spending lumped together under "entitlements", we see that it is really health care spending. Of the four, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and "Obamacare", only the first two are actually entitlements. Three of the four are health care spending.

Health care spending is taking a huge toll on the private sector as well.

In fact, health care spending over all is more than all of federal spending on everything else, quite a lot more in fact.

Which means that we seriously need real medical care reform, one that will cut costs.
 
His commitment to entitlements?
or the entitlements themselves Let's see...



Two of those are, indeed, entitlements, as the baby boomers who have paid into them for years are now starting to retire, and are entitled to the money they've put in. Medicaid is another problem, as it is a part of the trillion dollar means tested welfare that Congress passed.

Still, doesn't mention Obama, and the three programs pre date his presidency by quite a few years.



Now, finally, we read about a program actually supported and passed by the Obama Administration.

and if we look at what is actually driving the increased spending lumped together under "entitlements", we see that it is really health care spending. Of the four, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and "Obamacare", only the first two are actually entitlements. Three of the four are health care spending.

Health care spending is taking a huge toll on the private sector as well.

In fact, health care spending over all is more than all of federal spending on everything else, quite a lot more in fact.

Which means that we seriously need real medical care reform, one that will cut costs.

BHO has resisted all proposals to address entitlement spending. The deficits are his. By the time he leaves office he will bear responsibility for more of the national debt than all other Presidents combined.:cool:
 
On the anniversary of the Iraq war the question begs to be asked.

NavyPride -

You must the last American in existence who believes the war in Iraq was not about oil.
 
NavyPride -

You must the last American in existence who believes the war in Iraq was not about oil.

It was never about oil and there is no evidence whatsoever that it was. The US held absolute power in Iraq for years, and took no oil.:cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom