Obama's Legacy: Initiation of a civil war in Libya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan...2%80%93present)

Obama initiated a war in Libya with no intent to follow through to ensure a stable government could be formed. He did this, under Hillary's advice and consent, nominally to save the country from their leader.

The net result is a country that will be in a condition of a civil war for the forseeable future. This was the first step in the systematic destabilization of the middle east and north Africa.

Was there anything good in the motives, or results, of this activity? Most would say that Hillary recommended this in order to have a foreign policy "feather" in her cap when her presidential run came around.

SNICK

Perhaps the left wing Hillarites could offer up positive examples of Obama's "legacy" for discussion.

SPAM

This was the first step in the systematic destabilization of the middle east and north Africa.
Originally Posted by kehaar

You do not think the invasion of Iraq was a destabilization factor there moreso than this?

Nope, unless you believe in genocide, oh wait that is WTF who does believe in the massive reduction of our population.

Nope, unless you believe in genocide, oh wait that is WTF who does believe in the massive reduction of our population. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Really?

So you believe that the womans right to choose is genocide?

You believe we should have a Medicare system where on average , you get more out than you pay in?

Because I do believe a woman should have that choice up to a pont and I believe that we should either oay more into Medicare or have a responsible discussion on the cost of end of life care.

Carry on with your distortions...


.

You do not think the invasion of Iraq was a destabilization factor there moreso than this? Originally Posted by WTF

Nope. Saddam destabilized that region when he invaded and occupied Kuwait; thus initiating all that afterwards transpired in Iraq.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan...2%80%93present)

Obama initiated a war in Libya with no intent to follow through to ensure a stable government could be formed. He did this, under Hillary's advice and consent, nominally to save the country from their leader.

The net result is a country that will be in a condition of a civil war for the forseeable future. This was the first step in the systematic destabilization of the middle east and north Africa.

Was there anything good in the motives, or results, of this activity? Most would say that Hillary recommended this in order to have a foreign policy "feather" in her cap when her presidential run came around. Originally Posted by kehaar

+1

Nope. Saddam destabilized that region when he invaded and occupied Kuwait; thus initiating all that afterwards transpired in Iraq. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

what about the Iran-Iraq war (gulf war I)? wasn't that destabilizing too?

you did not see the riff-raff that came out of those wars like in the Gulf War III.

what about the Iran-Iraq war (gulf war I)? wasn't that destabilizing too?

you did not see the riff-raff that came out of those wars like in the Gulf War III. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Iraq and Iran beat each other bloodily, but, in the end, both states were still powerful and independent enough to remain solvent as sovereign, independent states. Meanwhile, Saddam's invasion of Kuwait obliterated Kuwait as an independent state; thus, substantially and unacceptably changing the balance of power in the region.

Really?

So you believe that the womans right to choose is genocide?

You believe we should have a Medicare system where on average , you get more out than you pay in?

Because I do believe a woman should have that choice up to a pont and I believe that we should either oay more into Medicare or have a responsible discussion on the cost of end of life care.

Carry on with your distortions...


. Originally Posted by WTF

WTFleabag, you can shove that one up your susseptible 0zombie ass...

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/06/t...erica.html?m=1

http://thealternativehypothesis.org/...and-hispanics/

The cost of Black America
If you are a white American, over the course of your lifetime the federal government will, on average and on your behalf, transfer $384,109 of your wealth and income to a single black individual.

According to the data derived from the 2014 federal budget, the average annual net tax/benefit broke down as follows:
White: -$2,795
Black: +$10,016
Over the course of an average 79-year lifespan, a white individual contributes a net $220,805 to the system, whereas over the course of an average 75-year lifespan, a black individual receives a net $751,200. However, since there are 4.6 times more whites than blacks in the USA, the black share has to be divided among the various contributors to sort out a one-to-one comparison.

So, the net cost to the average White American of the average Black American is $384,109. Married? That's $768,218. Got 2 kids? That's $1,536,436. 4 kids? Now we're talking $2,304,654 lifetime.

Diversity is expensive. Now you understand why you won't have much of an inheritance to leave to your children. Do you really think it's worth it? And then, those natural conservatives to the south, the Hispanics, will surely improve the situation, right? After all, immigration helps the economy! Well, not so much.
Hispanic: +7,298
In fact, because there are more Hispanics in the USA than Blacks, Hispanics are already a bigger cumulative net drain on the economy, $411,950,000,000 to $389,710,000,000. Needless to say, the ongoing demographic change from a predominantly white society to a less productive, less white one can be expected to have even more serious negative effects on the long-term economic prospects of the United States that it already has.

To quote the original author: "The negative fiscal impact of blacks and hispanics is significant. All of this discussion of a “national debt” and “deficit” is primarily of function of blacks and hispanics. Without them, we would be running budget surpluses today, even when keeping the military the same size."

Nope. Saddam destabilized that region when he invaded and occupied Kuwait; thus initiating all that afterwards transpired in Iraq.


+1 Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nope...

http://billmoyers.com/2014/06/27/the...-pack-of-lies/

Nope...

http://billmoyers.com/2014/06/27/the...-pack-of-lies/ Originally Posted by WTF

No where in that article did this guy Joshua Holland refute the fact that Saddam invaded and occupied Kuwait. The fact that Holland tries to claim that Saddam was "justified" in invading Kuwait says much about what an agenda driven and miscreant lib-retard Joshua Holland is.

No where in that article did this guy Joshua Holland refute the fact that Saddam invaded and occupied Kuwait. The fact that Holland tries to claim that Saddam was "justified" in invading Kuwait says much about what an agenda driven and miscreant lib-retard Joshua Holland is. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Between building million dollar shacks SnitchFuck has time to dig up arcane articles from unknown assholes.

You do not think the invasion of Iraq was a destabilization factor there moreso than this? Originally Posted by WTF

The invasion of Iraq stabilized the region. Saddam's rule was inherently unstable, and he would have been forced to external action(Isreal was the likely target) to maintain power. War was coming, and he would have restocked with WMD's as soon as feasible.

Bush dedicated the resources necessary to stabilize Iraq, and did so. There was less violence and Mayhem in Iraq after Bush left than before the invasion. Recognize that the progressives said that the USA enforced sanctions were killing 100's of thousand of Iraqi's per year prior to the invasion(and that was the justification for allowing Saddam to rearm with WMD's).

This is a discussion about Obama, and Libya, though. Obama started a civil war in Libya that had no hope of forming a stable government in the forseeable future. This will result in continuing mayhem and death. The USA has no options that would remedy the situation.

That mayhem and death clearly lay in Obama's lap.