Jump to content

Iraq is Burning


Recommended Posts

Their only defense is they're a bunch of self-interested cowards and hypocrites.

This is why I am quick to correct every mindless progressive dolt that Iraq was not Bush's war...it was America's war because plenty of progs voted for it. They actually went out to explain WHY we should go into Iraq. When opinions turned, so did the progs.

 

They always remind me of the turkey mayor (Don Knotts) from the movie "Chicken Little."

 

http://youtu.be/qqzckPB2RZo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 639
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow! This is stupid on steroids. So Obama inherited the Middle East? That's great. And so the Religion of peace was at peace. And without the guiding hand of that Idiot in Chief Bush bringing peace all over the region it just fell apart. Only B-Man could be stupid enough to post such an outlandish and daft propaganda piece

 

I thought it was Bush that released the people of Iraq and the middle east to the freedom of breaking away from tyranny?

 

Obama has allowed the resurgence of Al Qaeda. Who is more tyrannical than Al Qaeda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I am quick to correct every mindless progressive dolt that Iraq was not Bush's war...it was America's war because plenty of progs voted for it. They actually went out to explain WHY we should go into Iraq. When opinions turned, so did the progs.

 

They always remind me of the turkey mayor (Don Knotts) from the movie "Chicken Little."

 

 

Sorry LABillz..................I object.

 

Lets not compare a nice guy like Don Knotts to a Liberal

 

MV5BMjEwNTkzODQ0MF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzQxOTQ3MQ@@._V1_SX214_CR0,0,214,317_AL_.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it was a fail on both parties. Joe LIEberman, a democrat at the time,sponsored the bill authorizing it. System of checks and balances broke down. However on an individual basis, Obama clearly was on record opposing it. Its not a party thing, because both of them are FOS. Have to look at the individual. Right now within republican for example, of likely candidates rand paul opposes intervention, and rubio can't get enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it was a fail on both parties. Joe LIEberman, a democrat at the time,sponsored the bill authorizing it. System of checks and balances broke down. However on an individual basis, Obama clearly was on record opposing it. Its not a party thing, because both of them are FOS. Have to look at the individual. Right now within republican for example, of likely candidates rand paul opposes intervention, and rubio can't get enough.

 

Not that it matters anyway because he had absolutely no influence or political visibility back then, as he was only a step up the ladder from the Cook County Dog Catcher at the time, but how do you know? Did he give a speech about it back then?

 

I would assume he would oppose virtually any US military action that didn't benefit him personally/politically so I'd like to hear his rationale then rather than his position. His stance in 02 would mean nothing anyway. It's what you do when the chips are on the line that counts. Not what you espouse from the comfort of a consequence free environment.

 

His opposition to the surge and misguided withdrawal have killed any authoritative credibility he could hope to have on the issue anyway.

Edited by Rob's House
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Not that it matters anyway because he had absolutely no influence or political visibility back then, as he was only a step up the ladder from the Cook County Dog Catcher at the time, but how do you know? Did he give a speech about it back then?

 

I would assume he would oppose virtually any US military action that didn't benefit him personally/politically so I'd like to hear his rationale then rather than his position. His stance in 02 would mean nothing anyway. It's what you do when the chips are on the line that counts. Not what you espouse from the comfort of a consequence free environment.

 

His opposition to the surge and misguided withdrawal have killed any authoritative credibility he could hope to have on the issue anyway.

lol you sound like Hillary now, that was her rehearsed campaign retort: "All you did was give a speech opposing it, at least I was in the Senate voting for it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that it matters anyway because he had absolutely no influence or political visibility back then, as he was only a step up the ladder from the Cook County Dog Catcher at the time, but how do you know? Did he give a speech about it back then?

 

He did, actually. Staunchly against the war. Not too tough to find.

 

lol you sound like Hillary now, that was her rehearsed campaign retort: "All you did was give a speech opposing it, at least I was in the Senate voting for it."

 

This is what makes you such a !@#$ing moron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

He did, actually. Staunchly against the war. Not too tough to find.

 

 

A cursory yahoo search didn't net the results and it seemed faster just to ask.

 

 

lol you sound like Hillary now, that was her rehearsed campaign retort: "All you did was give a speech opposing it, at least I was in the Senate voting for it."

 

It's really the whole crux of what I was saying. American leftists never want military action unless it's supporting one warlord over another in sub-Saharan Africa, but they all rolled over when conviction came with a political price tag. Obama had no such concerns. Now that it matters he's lost his clear conviction and is starting to look more like a lost kid trying to find a way out of the woods, er, desert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A cursory yahoo search didn't net the results and it seemed faster just to ask.

 

 

 

It's really the whole crux of what I was saying. American leftists never want military action unless it's supporting one warlord over another in sub-Saharan Africa, but they all rolled over when conviction came with a political price tag. Obama had no such concerns. Now that it matters he's lost his clear conviction and is starting to look more like a lost kid trying to find a way out of the woods, er, desert.

So do you think Bush starting this whole mess in Iraq was a good thing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little late now

 

 

 

A rising number of Americans think the war in Iraq was not worth fighting.

A NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Annenberg poll released Tuesday shows that 71 percent of those surveyed think the war in Iraq “wasn’t worth it,” while only 22 percent believe that the war was worth the effort.

 

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/iraq-war-poll-108277.html#ixzz35l0bwRui

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thus proving what we already knew: the majority of Americans are like you in having the foresight of a geriatric mayfly.

 

 

So................

 

 

a few years back, when Iraq had been (somewhat) stabilized post-surge; a majority of Americans had agreed with the decision to remove the Hussein regime................

 

 

and now that many of those gains have been lost under the current Administration, the polling has gone down ? ?

 

 

Wow, good thing I was sitting down when I read that............

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...