What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Kepler said:
On the one hand, I agree with this criticism and think any president should get an explicit vote from Congress before any hostile action unless danger is imminent, as it clearly isn't in this case. Obama did not and he should immediately.

On the other hand, anybody who makes this argument after supporting the previous administration should be laughed off the stage.
Click to expand...

Uhh, the "previous administration" (it's always about Bush, isn't it?) DID get congressional approval, in advance, for both wars. What's your problem? Each day, in everyway, Churchill's observation about his successor becomes more relevant: "An empty car pulled up, and Clement Atlee got out."
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Handyman said:
Well you are arguing semantics really, he said he had "no idea" so I gave him an idea. But yes, you are right he didnt ask a question so my post was worded wrong technically.

Is this going to be your thing now, you are just going to look for random posts by me, find a point to go after and go all Old Pio on the bit? If so I am totally down with it and I will even throw in random crazy words or stuff just for you to attack :D ;) :p
Click to expand...

Quick, the baby needs changing.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Bob Gray said:
Hold on there pilgrim. I just didn't know what point you were making as your comments weren't easily related to the previous post you seemed to be responding to. No need to get a bee in your bonnet.
Click to expand...

My bad, I misread the tone of your post. I do that sometimes. Mea Culpa :)
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Just some random observations:

Gaddafi is on that list (Kim Jong Il, Castro, etc) of guys who need killing, whenever, wherever and however it can be arranged.

If, as BHO claims, Gaddafi represents a security threat to the USA, how can anyone logically argue that Hussein did not? He had invaded his neighbors, twice, Gaddafi has not. He had about ten times the army Gaddafi does, and a much larger collection of advanced weapons systems. Hussein used WMD twice while Gaddafi has not. Hussein killed a minimum of 400K of his countrymen, Gaddafi is a piker by comparison.

BHO evidently feels he can sell this pig to his lefty allies and appeal to the millions of americans who tend to rally around a president when he uses force. Ironically, it's the ultra hard left, Kuchinich and Michael Moore to name two, who are at least being consistent in their dementia. BHO is obviously convinced these imbeciles will vote for him next time out no matter what. And he's almost certainly right.

Who, even among those whose legs tingle at the thought of BHO, will buy the notion that we didn't and aren't leading this adventure? Hillary correctly refers to America's "unique cababilities." Boy howdy.

Do we even have a clue, a hint of what's motivating the "rebels?" Or are we just hoping that almost anything that follows Gaddafi will be an improvement (I'm sort of inclined to this point of view)?

And what's this b.s. about not targeting Gadaffi? We should be targeting him. And I suspect we are. What better, cheaper, quicker more effective way to end this nonsense than to take him and his family out? Remember how good most of us felt seeing Hussein all creepy looking after being dragged by his nutz out of that spider hole? No more video of him in his little Tyrolean hat shooting a rifle off a balcony. And the videos of the shattered corpses of his psychopathic sons also did a lot of good, for the Iraqi people and the world. So if we can take another shot at Gaddafi, let's get on with it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
Just some random observations:

Gaddafi is on that list (Kim Jong Il, Castro, etc) of guys who need killing, whenever, wherever and however it can be arranged.

If, as BHO claims, Gaddafi represents a security threat to the USA, how can anyone logically argue that Hussein did not? He had invaded his neighbors, twice, Gaddafi has not. He had about ten times the army Gaddafi does, and a much larger collection of advanced weapons systems. Hussein used WMD twice while Gaddafi has not. Hussein killed a minimum of 400K of his countrymen, Gaddafi is a piker by comparison.
Click to expand...

Youre heading down the wrong road. We are not taking action in Libya because we need to kill Gaddafi (although that would be nice).

Libya is not about being the international police for bringing someone to justice for attrocities committed decades ago (or was it for the oil or was it because of Kuwait or...). We're taking action for humanitarian reasons...we're hoping to stop genocide. And again, Iraq would not be a big thorn in the US' credibility, military capability and deficit if we would have just bombed Baghdad. In other words, Iraq was the wrong war fought without international support and using an occupation that has been tragic for the US. Libya is none of that.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

SteveP said:
Really? His words, responding in writing to a series of questions regarding executive power from Charlie Savage (then of The Boston Globe), seem to indicate that this action falls well within the scope of what he was talking about in 2008:
Click to expand...

Hmmm... I'll have to stand corrected, then.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
Do we even have a clue, a hint of what's motivating the "rebels?" Or are we just hoping that almost anything that follows Gaddafi will be an improvement (I'm sort of inclined to this point of view)?
Click to expand...

At the risk of coming off as conspiracy theorist, I think you're on to something here. Whether we deserve it or not, since WWII, we seem to have developed a reputation as a country that will use force to oust dictators we don't like in the hopes of supplanting them with democracy (or dictators that we do like).

If you have to pick just one promise that Obama has failed to live up to the most, it would have to be his promise that his administration would not be "politicks as usual". He seems to do a lot of things the way his predecessors would have done things.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

The situations aren't directly analogous, but there are some interesting parallels between American lefties now and during WW II. Then, Hitler and Stalin were allies and "this is a European war that's none of our business." And both American isolationists and commies and their pals made this argument. But when Hitler unleashed Operation Barbarossa, American commies and their pals did a 180, arguing how important it was to stop fascist aqgression. One historian described American commies and their pals "doing a somersault in mid air."

Now we have people who've been arguing for about the last 8 years how bad Bush was, how our intervention in the affairs of another nation is never justified,that we had made "a rush to war," that these were "wars of choice," how we're always in it for the oil or because Haliburton made it happen, that we can't and shouldn't be "policeman to the world," ad nauseum. But now that "the one" is engaging in a policy that is only different from Bush's (if it's different at all) in its scope or duration, we see American lefties doing that sommersault in mid air, again. And rushing from all directions to rationalize it.

A neutral observer might conclude our lefty pals are being hypocrites. Code Pink, 'phone home.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
The situations aren't directly analogous, but there are some interesting parallels between American lefties now and during WW II. Then, Hitler and Stalin were allies and "this is a European war that's none of our business." And both American isolationists and commies and their pals made this argument. But when Hitler unleashed Operation Barbarossa, American commies and their pals did a 180, arguing how important it was to stop fascist aqgression. One historian described American commies and their pals "doing a somersault in mid air."

Now we have people who've been arguing for about the last 8 years how bad Bush was, how our intervention in the affairs of another nation is never justified,that we had made "a rush to war," that these were "wars of choice," how we're always in it for the oil or because Haliburton made it happen, that we can't and shouldn't be "policeman to the world," ad nauseum. But now that "the one" is engaging in a policy that is only different from Bush's (if it's different at all) in its scope or duration, we see American lefties doing that sommersault in mid air, again.

A neutral observer might conclude our lefty pals are being hypocrites. Code Pink, 'phone home.
Click to expand...
Why do people even try to engage you in discussion? Then again, we're all a bit masochistic.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Foxton said:
Why do people even try to engage you in discussion? Then again, we're all a bit masochistic.
Click to expand...

Because you're frequently unavailable due to those parole board committments? Because you can't give them what they need? Because I occasionally (and some would say mistakenly) offer a little perspective?
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Kepler said:
A country isn't "brave" or "cowardly." That's great rhetoric to rally masses to a cause, but a country is a type of corporation -- a machine designed to focus and direct the will of the people who control it. You may as well call a screwdriver or a cantilever "brave."
Click to expand...

Don't disagree completely. However, what term would you use to describe a European country that leads the way to military action, then bails before the job is done, and leaves the US the job of cleaning it up? When I say country, I mean the established government of that country. Probably should have explicitly stated that since after rereading my original post it isn't clear. Apologies.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

dxmnkd316 said:
However, what term would you use to describe a European country that leads the way to military action, then bails before the job is done, and leaves the US the job of cleaning it up?
Click to expand...

I'd call it opportunistic and I'd be really careful about allying with them. But mostly I'd be suspicious whether there wasn't a lot more going on under the hood than such a white hat / black hat narrative suggests. Example: "the first Bush administration encouraged the Kurds to revolt against Saddam, then cowardly backed away and let them get slaughtered." I've always thought the truth was probably a lot more complicated than that.

This doesn't mean a government can't act in a way that if it was a person you'd feel obliged to punch them in the face. All my peers with Czech blood owe the Brits a broken nose for Munich. But we also have to be aware that what we think is going on is always being refracted through ideological and editorial lenses that like to boil the story down to the outrage of the week. 90% of outrages are probably just deliberate fact selection and arrangement for partisan or economic gain.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
Because you're frequently unavailable due to those parole board committments? Because you can't give them what they need? Because I occasionally (and some would say mistakenly) offer a little perspective?
Click to expand...

I'm sure you've observed that Foxton doesn't do well with perspectives other than his own.
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Happy Anniversary to the new health care law. Has the stock market tanked yet?
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
There isn't the teensiest bit of irony that this left wing, anti-war president now finds it necessary to bomb the crap out of Gadaffi.
Click to expand...

That question was already answered (or rendered moot depending upon your perspective) when our troop presence was increased in Afghanistan. ;)
 
Re: Obama XX: Maybe We'll Even Talk About Obama

Old Pio said:
The situations aren't directly analogous, but there are some interesting parallels between American lefties now and during WW II.
Click to expand...

What a steaming pile of...

Yeah, well, there are some interesting parallels between American righties now and the fascist far right during WW II. Hyper-nationalism. Militarism. Agrarian-Populism. Homophobia. Fear of immigrants. Proponents of a "traditional" role for women.

But of course, the situations aren't "directly analogous"... :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top