Quit picking on Obama……

gopher

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
JLM said:
Actually pretty much the opposite, I've been hearing a lot of talk for over a week but haven't seen any action yet. They know bloody well the bastards are using chemicals.
Click to expand...



If Assad's military formations are launching rockets filled with gas canisters they should show up on USA satellite photos. So far, not one such photo has been presented to Congress or the UN. Therefore, there is no basis for attacking Assad unless once again it is being done for the financial benefit of war profiteers.

By the way, I've been monitoring other websites and it is good to see right wingers suddenly voice such intense objection to foreign intervention. Gee, it makes me wonder - why the great interest in being peace makers all of a sudden?
 
B

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
Tecumsehsbones said:
Umm. . . when you say that a statute has been violated, the statute is relevant, and it is a matter of law.

The law is a tool to be used in partisan political fashion. What the law means will only be known when the Supreme Court rules on the issue if, as and when the issue becomes ripe and is before the Court.


You forgot to dwama-queen about how the U.S. is dead to you.
Click to expand...

You're a lawyer. I asked you for a citation to the point of law you were making. Do you have a citation?

gopher said:
Naturally that included Occupy Wall Street.

Or mebbe I should say, failed to include OWS.






A while ago several wannabes on this forum approved of the Patriot Act before they disapproved of it.


;)
Click to expand...

What about Obama? He disapproved of the Patriot Act at one time, but he now supports it. :)

JLM said:
Actually pretty much the opposite, I've been hearing a lot of talk for over a week but haven't seen any action yet. They know bloody well the bastards are using chemicals.
Click to expand...

Obama can't use military force effectively. He will be defeated and America will be discredited. Obama isn't much of a commander in chief.
 
EagleSmack

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
BaalsTears said:
Obama can't use military force effectively. He will be defeated and America will be discredited. Obama isn't much of a commander in chief.
Click to expand...

If he strikes at Syria... how will he be defeated? Is Syria going to sink all the US warships?

You got to love what people consider victory today. Because we didn't annihilate an enemy they somehow count it as a victory.
 
B

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
EagleSmack said:
If he strikes at Syria... how will he be defeated? Is Syria going to sink all the US warships?

You got to love what people consider victory today. Because we didn't annihilate an enemy they somehow count it as a victory.
Click to expand...

America's political objectives determine the meaning of victory in any context involving hostilities. There is no law requiring American military action against any belligerent using chemical weapons.

As a result any American military action in Syria will be designed to establish a new norm in international relations regarding use of chemical weapons. But American military action in Syria will not be sufficiently robust to kill the Assad family and its minions. In the absence of the death of all of the Assads it will not be possible to impose this new norm on Syria or anyone else. Failure to establish this new norm with a limited military strike on Syria means that American political objectives will not be accomplished.

The failure to accomplish one's political objectives with the use of military force has a name. It's called defeat.
 
EagleSmack

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
If the goal is to just punish or retaliate against Syria for using chemical weapons and the strikes are successful... put another in the win column!

Killing the Assad Family, etc. is not the goal... that is your imagined goal. That is what you would consider the only way to victory. However, that is your imagined objective and has no bearing on reality.
 
B

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
EagleSmack said:
If the goal is to just punish or retaliate against Syria for using chemical weapons and the strikes are successful... put another in the win column!
Click to expand...

Obama will screw the pooch. His use of force in Syria will be no more effective than his escalation of the Afghanistan War. Everyone in the Middle East views the USA as a Weak Horse.
 
gopher

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
BaalsTears; said:
What about Obama? He disapproved of the Patriot Act at one time, but he now supports it. :)



Obama can't use military force effectively. He will be defeated and America will be discredited. Obama isn't much of a commander in chief.
Click to expand...



Obama was not in the Senate when the Patriot [sic] Act was enacted in 2001. Durbin (D) & Fitzgerald (R) were the Illinois senators. Obama was a state senator and had no voice in the approval of that law. As for his role as commander in chief, at least he ended the war on Iraq but his record is p1ss poor on Afghanistan. Bush's was far worse but that's another subject.

One thing's for sure - it's good to see all those right wingers who were so gung-ho about wars on Iraq and Afghanistan now suddenly become a bunch of bleeding heart antiwar liberals.
 
hunboldt

hunboldt

Time Out
May 5, 2013
2,427
0
36
at my keyboard
Walter said:
Since you are a lefty, Thinskin (aka hunboldt), you prefer the NYT as a source.

Facebook Post Said to Be by Assad’s Son Dares Americans to Attack - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...


Walt, - only an idiot would be concerned over what assads 11 year old thinks. You aren't an idiot, so give it up, ol' chap..
 
Walter

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,887
126
63
hunboldt said:
Walt, - only an idiot would be concerned over what assads 11 year old thinks. You aren't an idiot, so give it up, ol' chap..
Click to expand...
Just pointing out, Thinskin, that BHO has no respect anywhere except for his drones.
 
B

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
gopher said:
Obama was not in the Senate when the Patriot [sic] Act was enacted in 2001. Durbin (D) & Fitzgerald (R) were the Illinois senators. Obama was a state senator and had no voice in the approval of that law. As for his role as commander in chief, at least he ended the war on Iraq but his record is p1ss poor on Afghanistan. Bush's was far worse but that's another subject.

One thing's for sure - it's good to see all those right wingers who were so gung-ho about wars on Iraq and Afghanistan now suddenly become a bunch of bleeding heart antiwar liberals.
Click to expand...

Gopher,

A partial truth is the same thing as an outright lie because both are materially misleading. You have given us a partial truth, but failed to disclose the whole truth.

As a US Senator Barack Obama voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act. Check this out:

Obama Speech - Floor Statment - PATRIOT Act Reauthorization - Complete Text

As president Barack Obama signed another Patriot Act reauthorization. Check this out:

Obama approves extension of expiring Patriot Act provisions - CNN.com

I do not defend George Bush. May he burn in hell. Now having said that let's turn to President Obama. He didn't withdraw from Iraq. He adopted the Bush Status of Forces Agreement timeline. That's all. Obama tried to negotiate a continued presence for US troops in Iraq, and the Iraqis gave Obama the heave ho.

Obama foolishly escalated the war in Afghanistan, and has now been defeated by a bunch of primitives.

Obama foolishly involved himself in Libya against a dictator who was not a threat to the US. Now Libya is run by a bunch of warlords and Al Qaeda devotees. If Obama hadn't become involved in Libya the Benghazi Four would still be alive today.

Obama has been running weapons to Syrian rebels some of whom are al Nusra which is the Al Qaeda franchisee in Syria.

If Obama attacks Syria he will be an ad hoc unilateralist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom