Gaddafi killed?

[Bigerik]

Considering al-Qaeda at its absolute biggest numbered 300 men, are guys must be lousy shots...

[Charles]

Well, it couldn't have happened to a nicer caaksucker.

But I'm still curious as to why the great powers decided that now was the time after app 30 years.

Chas

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by Charles

Well, it couldn't have happened to a nicer caaksucker.

But I'm still curious as to why the great powers decided that now was the time after app 30 years.

Chas

I'm happy he's dead, but he has been relatively quiet of late. The West is naive if they think Libya is going to be a nice peaceful democratic country. I do think several European powers would like to divvy up the spoils. Damn, we're running out of dictatorial types wearing those Captain Crunch outfits.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bhunter

I'm happy he's dead, but he has been relatively quiet of late. The West is naive if they think Libya is going to be a nice peaceful democratic country. I do think several European powers would like to divvy up the spoils. Damn, we're running out of dictatorial types wearing those Captain Crunch outfits.

One thing about it, he looked pretty kewl beating that nickel plated machete on his lectern.

And Michael Jackson would have DIED for Kadaffy's threads!!!

As far as that goes, I would have DIED for his harem of bodyguards!!!

Chas

[Fast_Eddie]

Originally Posted by Charles

Well, it couldn't have happened to a nicer caaksucker.

But I'm still curious as to why the great powers decided that now was the time after app 30 years.

Chas

It's a world wide conspiracy. First the people in Tunisia. Then the people in Egypt. Now Lybia. All working together, giving their lives just to make Obama look good. Shoot, even Bin Laden offed himself for Obama. It's that Muslim/Christian black magic Voodoo he learned in Kenya. Only a natural born Kenyan can perform it.

You have no clue the scope of the world wide conspiracy.

Wait, if he's from Kenya, why do the whack jobs think he's Muslim? Aren't they mostly Christians over there?

[Krazygrrl]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

It's a world wide conspiracy. First the people in Tunisia. Then the people in Egypt. Now Lybia. All working together, giving their lives just to make Obama look good. Shoot, even Bin Laden offed himself for Obama. It's that Muslim/Christian black magic Voodoo he learned in Kenya. Only a natural born Kenyan can perform it.

You have no clue the scope of the world wide conspiracy.

Wait, if he's from Kenya, why do the whack jobs think he's Muslim? Aren't they mostly Christians over there?

You are so far off on a tangent that even Captain Kirk couldn't come to your rescue.

The question is one of a "clear and present danger". Obama grossly overstepped his bounds, especially in Libya. Libya, certainly, did not represent a "clear and present danger". In 1986 or 1988 it did maybe, but not in 2011.

How about Uganda's Lords Liberation Army, Obama has sent again sent the U.S. Military on a venture to secure the Ugandan border areas. Yet he refuses, shown through actions of the DOJ, to secure the American southern border. I am sure these Ugandans have the vast resources and the incredible technology to obliterate the USA at one stroke; Only Obama knows, through brilliance, that they are poised to strike this monumental blow at any time. Ohhh those Ugandan supermen. Only Obama can possibly stop them!! Only Obama, yes indeed!!

This too, is another illegal act in my view. It is high-time to stop all these military adventures. It is time to dramatically reduce the US military footprint throughout the world. I am simply sick and tired of the sucking noise Obama has made in the national coffers. $161 Billion, was the greatest spending deficit under G.W. Bush. That was hideously bad. It is already $1.4 Trillion, nearly 10x as much, this year alone under Obama according to the GAO. Is the GAO a Republican tool to discredit Obama?

Look over there... NO, silly, over there... YES. there... it's Lincoln's ghost and that crazed Republican might be coming for you... LOL

[Fast_Eddie]

Originally Posted by Krazygrrl

The question is one of a "clear and present danger". Obama grossly overstepped his bounds, especially in Libya. Libya, certainly, did not represent a "clear and present danger". In 1986 or 1988 it did maybe, but not in 2011.

I then assume you would be in favor of bringing George W Bush up on War Crimes as neither Iraq or Afghanistan (when we invaded) meet your test. And you would say the so-called "Bush Doctrine" (What do you mean? Like, his view of the world?) is illegal on it's face. Yes? Or is the "clear and present danger" thing just when a Democrat is President.

What clear and present danger did Viet Nam pose? Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, not Germany. Was WWII an illegal war as well? The first Gulf War- no clear and present danger. Grenada, 1983. No clear and present danger. Bombing of Iranian oil platforms in 1987. No clear and present danger.

Hell, W is the one who TOLD us that Iraq DID pose a threat to the US. Obama never said Lybia was a threat. W lied with no regret. It was only later, when no threat was uncovered that the story changed to "liberation". Difference being, of course, that Lybia was actually liberated- and they ASKED for help.

What right wing radio talker is feeding you this "clear and present danger" nonsense? You didn't make it up on your own. Whatever argument you heard, you're clearly not expressing it in any way that makes sense. Just post a link to whatever nut-job web site you're getting it from so I can tell you what's wrong the the actual argument, not your fractured and ill-reasoned interpretation of it.

[Krazygrrl]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

I then assume you would be in favor of bringing George W Bush up on War Crimes as neither Iraq or Afghanistan (when we invaded) meet your test. And you would say the so-called "Bush Doctrine" (What do you mean? Like, his view of the world?) is illegal on it's face. Yes? Or is the "clear and present danger" thing just when a Democrat is President.

What clear and present danger did Viet Nam pose? Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, not Germany. Was WWII an illegal war as well? The first Gulf War- no clear and present danger. Grenada, 1983. No clear and present danger. Bombing of Iranian oil platforms in 1987. No clear and present danger.

Hell, W is the one who TOLD us that Iraq DID pose a threat to the US. Obama never said Lybia was a threat. W lied with no regret. It was only later, when no threat was uncovered that the story changed to "liberation". Difference being, of course, that Lybia was actually liberated- and they ASKED for help.

What right wing radio talker is feeding you this "clear and present danger" nonsense? You didn't make it up on your own. Whatever argument you heard, you're clearly not expressing it in any way that makes sense. Just post a link to whatever nut-job web site you're getting it from so I can tell you what's wrong the the actual argument, not your fractured and ill-reasoned interpretation of it.

Eddie, I was not in favor of Iraq. Afghanistan, is where Al Qaeda is and was based. That should have been destroyed.... Again, I am not speaking of George Bush, but Barrack Obama. Just because Bush did something, which I may or may not agree with, does not imply that Obama can do so with impunity. You are saying, by constantly comparing him to George Bush and whatever perceived transgressions, that he (Obama) rightfully can do what he likes. Well, that logic generally goes out the door quite early in life. Remember, we are speaking about Obama, the guy from Hawaii currently in the White House, not George Bush who lives in a Dallas suburb.

As far as political doctrine such as "clear and present danger", I would suggest that you take an objective look at history and period policy. You can call me a right-wing "nut-job" and everything else you want, but it will not diminish the validity of my presented argument. Just because some might think I am crazy, doesn't make me wrong. Think of the glorious 2010 midterm election... wasn't it an exhilarating being a Democrat? I wish I too would have the blind faith so many have put in Barrack Hussein Obama. I do want to see him walk on water.

[Fast_Eddie]

You are a right wing nut job, and thank you for the permission to say so.

You're avoiding my question. You said "This too, is another illegal act in my view." I'm asking if it is more, less, or the same amount of illegal than every military action the United States has taken in the last 30 years under Democratic or Republican Presidents. Simple question. Yes or no.

Or, do you have one set of rules for Obama and another for anyone else? Can't have it both ways. And it's amazing how you can't find a single Teapublican these days who wanted to invade Iraq. Sure thought there were some back in the day.

[Krazygrrl]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

You are a right wing nut job, and thank you for the permission to say so.

You're avoiding my question. You said "This too, is another illegal act in my view." I'm asking if it is more, less, or the same amount of illegal than every military action the United States has taken in the last 30 years under Democratic or Republican Presidents. Simple question. Yes or no.

Or, do you have one set of rules for Obama and another for anyone else? Can't have it both ways. And it's amazing how you can't find a single Teapublican these days who wanted to invade Iraq. Sure thought there were some back in the day.

Isn't it odd that all those Demcrats that voted for the Iraq war in 2003, including Pelosi, Rangel, Ried, and others, now deny that they did?... How sad! They got the same information that George Bush received, but only Bush lied.. how convenient!