Typical. Slam the leader and then offer no advice. Rummy is about the same as some of you numbnut Tea tards...

Exactly!

BTW, Syria's Christian population feels safer under Assad's rule.
. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That is why we should have stayed out of Iraq and Libya....but our multinational's want access over there and we need to put folks in power who will give it to them. If you pull back the curtain , it is always about power and money. Plus Israel wants us to blow up their ass, another tail that wags the American public's body politics.

Left wing dribble.............we did not go into Iraq because American corporate interests wanted access.

Left wing dribble.............we did not go into Iraq because American corporate interests wanted access. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

JD Idiot (twin brother of IB) wants us to take Rummy's advice? Wasn't Rummy the neo-con who along with Cheney and Wolfie convinced a totally clueless Dubya that the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq, was in America's best interest? How stupid was that?

What would Dubya say about this in today's environment? Perhaps he would reiterate his now famous words of yesteryear:

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/b...bushfoolme.htm

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Originally Posted by bigtex

That's "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." One of my favorites.. Sorry :-)

Left wing dribble.............we did not go into Iraq because American corporate interests wanted access. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

We went in because of WMD's?

Wait the WMD's are now in Syria and now you don't want to go! What logic...



Thing that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm

Did! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The only thing you proved was that you don't get sarcasm. Even the plainly obvious kind.

That is why we should have stayed out of Iraq and Libya....but our multinational's want access over there and we need to put folks in power who will give it to them. If you pull back the curtain , it is always about power and money. Plus Israel wants us to blow up their ass, another tail that wags the American public's body politics. Originally Posted by WTF

Whereas it is true that Israel and Syria have been at war with each other for decades, Israel's public stance today is to not get involved (I agree: it's also a true lose-lose situation for the U.S.):

"'It is not for Israel to decide on Syria, we are in a unique position, for varying reasons there is consensus against Israeli involvement. We did not create the Syrian situation,' President Shimon Peres said."

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-detects...093544642.html

I believe Bush had a much more valid case for renewing* the conflict with Iraq than Odumbo has for involving the U.S. in Syria; plus, Bush had a plan for securing Saddam's WMD rather than allowing the WMD to be thrown into the world arms bazaar.

Was Libya a mistake? IDK. That remains to be seen. Libya has a relatively small population, but so did Afghanistan. KadaffyDuck wasn't a friend to the U.S., but it has been fun to watch the lib-retards defend Odumbo's militant actions after they elected the Nobel Peace Prize winner as the "peace candidate" who was supposed to extricate the U.S. from foreign wars. Odumbo was and continues to be politically naïve in international affairs. Odumbo was definitely wrong in Egypt for not backing Mubarak, and Odumbo continues to be wrong by continuing to back the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

A quick look at 20th century American history shows that dimotards time and again stumbled backwards -- unprepared -- into wars: Wilson, FDR, Truman and Johnson. Republican presidents negotiated the peace treaties or armistices for WWI, Korea and Vietnam. BTW, for the record, FDR and Truman did an excellent job administering their wars, but FDR didn't truly understand Stalin. Churchill did, but FDR wouldn't listen.


*Note the word 'renewing': technically, the U.S. and Iraq were still at war from the First Gulf War and only an armistice brought an end to hostilities in the First Gulf War -- an armistice with conditions that Saddam frequently and continuously violated.

The only thing you proved was that you don't get sarcasm. Even the plainly obvious kind. Originally Posted by Doove

You are lyingly wrong, Doofus!

The US should stop acting like the worlds dad. We made the middle east like it is playing political checkers and not chess. We get involved in other counties problems like they are ours. If Assad id killing his people because the are rebelling, then let him. That's not the only country that's happening in. Or is it that it's the only place with that type of stuff going on that's in that oil rich region of the world?

plus, Bush had a plan for securing Saddam's WMD rather than allowing the WMD to be thrown into the world arms bazaar. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Ok, let me be a little more plain, since anything beyond that is too complex for you to figure out.

Did Bush have a plan to secure them, or were they smuggled out of Iraq?

Which is it?

Ok, let me be a little more plain, since anything beyond that is too complex for you to figure out.

Did Bush have a plan to secure them, or were they smuggled out of Iraq?

Which is it? Originally Posted by Doove

Bush implemented his plan, Doofus, and you're the one who said Saddam smuggled the WMD out of Iraq. Now, Doofus, tell the forum what Odumbo's plan was for the WMD in Syria once he toppled Assad's government and don't imagine for one moment that Putin's plan is Odumbo's!

We are always trying to throw stones at at other counties for being ducked up, but we were founded by slave owners and kept slaves for more than a hundred years. The same country that went to war against Hitler, and at the same time hanging black people from trees. How would we have felt if someone had tried to invade us because of the horrible things that were being done to blacks back then. We would have fought back with everything we had and any non organized military rebals fighting in the streets would have been called insurgents. we had blacks in Korea fighting while their families had to sit in the back of the bus and couldn't even use white folks bathrooms or sit and have a meal with them. Look at the Congo, and Myanmar and all the other places with ducked up dictators killing millions. Nothings in it for us that's why we stay out. Well the same goes here.

Whereas it is true that Israel and Syria have been at war with each other for decades, Israel's public stance today is to not get involved (I agree: it's also a true lose-lose situation for the U.S.):

"'It is not for Israel to decide on Syria, we are in a unique position, for varying reasons there is consensus against Israeli involvement. We did not create the Syrian situation,' President Shimon Peres said."

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-detects...093544642.html

! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That link is a bit deceiving. They want us to do their dirty work.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...nd-benny-gantz

Israeli officials ratcheted up their rhetoric, declaring bluntly that Assad had gassed his people and should be punished.
“It takes a barbarian to employ poison gas,” tweeted Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces, who likened Assad to Mussolini, Hitler and Hussein. Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon called the Assad government “monstrous.”
Yuval Steinitz, Israel’s minister for international affairs, strategy and intelligence, said it is “crystal clear” that the Syrian military launched last week’s attack and that it involved chemical weapons.
“The world cannot allow this to continue,” Steinitz said. Syrian leaders, he added, “have no barriers, no moral inhibitions.”

What would Iran have been like if the Shaw stayed in power. What would Iraq had been like if we hadn't helped them with their war with Iran. We are kicking out all the dictators that don't like the terrorists. we don't even know who the rebals we help really are. We're gonna kick him out of Syria then what. Let the Muslim brotherhood take over? Fuck it, just let the Ayatollah take over Syria to like he did when we helped get rid of the Shaw cause he wouldn't let us Fuck them over with the oil. The middle east is all about money. If they were poor with little resources to make millions with, we wouldn't give a Fuck. We would talk shit about it on the news and that's that.

. We would talk shit about it on the news and that's that. Originally Posted by ladylove12

We wouldn't even do that!

With all the oil we have found over here we need to let Russia/Europe deal with that whole region.

We went into Iraq because of the the 9/11 attack...........if 9/11 hadn't happened there wouldn't have been an Iraq war.