Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

War Mongers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: War Mongers

    Originally posted by Ralphyboy View Post
    The difference there is Bush lied to the american public about the WMD's, Obama has been pretty much up front about his war tactics, while Bush cowered behind his daddys tailcoat and claimed victory for a war that Obama inhereited and is still going on. At least put the facts where they need to be in this discussion about the wars.I'm no Obama lover either but have fathfully served my country in time of war and think its all a bunch of chit were fighting for oil in the mideast period and have been for some time. What I'd like to know is how come we haven't been helped out on the oil by the chitheads we went in to save in the 1st gulf war. Where the hell are they with that oil help now after we saved their butts from Saddam?
    Ralphyboy, Bush and the WMDs is one of the most blatant lies ever told by a sitting President. Isn't even more of a question exactly why the American people re-elected him after the WMD lies were exposed and much blood spilled? Sometimes I wonder if We The People are getting exactly what we deserve.

    Obama, however, has certainly not been honest about his war plans, either. Keep in mind he ran on the promise to get us out of Iraq. We're still there, still have no clear exit strategy or plan. On top of that, we are back hot and heavy into Afghanistan... also with no exit strategy and no end in sight. With regard to Libya, Obama cites humanitarian reasons, which I personally think is all baloney. At least Bush played to Congress. Obama deployed the US military against Libya without any dialog whatsoever with Congress. How long did it take him to address the American people regarding his actions? I can't remember any case where a President didn't address the nation on the same day he initiated the action. I suspect he wouldn't have addressed the nation at all had he not gotten a lot of flak for his failure to do so.

    All these politicians are arrogant megalomaniacs with no regard for the Constitution or the will of the people. When the President is sworn in, he swears to honor and defend the Constitution. Between the war actions, the Patriot Act, the massive abuse of monetary policy, and unconstitutional provisions of healthcare reform, this President as well as the previous one should both have been impeached for violating their solemn oath to protect the Constitution.
    Last edited by Andy_M; 04-03-2011, 12:18 AM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: War Mongers

      So what is the games plan on Libya you tease the rebels that you were going to help them and stop Gadaffi but have stopped yourselves from arming them so what was the point in getting involved in the first place.

      Tony

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: War Mongers

        Originally posted by AFM View Post
        So what is the games plan on Libya you tease the rebels that you were going to help them and stop Gadaffi but have stopped yourselves from arming them so what was the point in getting involved in the first place.

        Tony
        Sadly I don't think there ever was a plan. Obama went in on the orders of the UN at the request of the Arab League. We went in too late and without including our Congress in the discussion. Now we are trying to figure out just who the government opposition is and whether we really want to help them.

        I'm afraid Obama's lack of experience in these matters is showing through. Obama's claim to fame was as a community organizer. That is how he's handled the economy, the health care, this conflict and so many other issues. Now he needs to be a leader and I am not sure he has it in him.

        Mark
        "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

        I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: War Mongers

          Originally posted by AFM View Post
          So what is the games plan on Libya you tease the rebels that you were going to help them and stop Gadaffi but have stopped yourselves from arming them so what was the point in getting involved in the first place.

          Tony
          To stop Gadaffi from using his military weapons of war to kill his own people. Like tanks and fighter jets. It worked too...mission accomplished.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: War Mongers

            The "rebels" are Al-Queda. Same terrorists we are fighting in Afghanistan.
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: War Mongers

              US foreign policy has been characterized by the apparent lack of a plan for far too long now.

              When Bush 41 engaged in the first Gulf war, he stopped short of deposing Saddam. While he caught a lot of flack for this from those that are obsessed with military muscle-flexing, it was without a doubt the correct move. Stopping when he did enabled the US to simply make an exit. Contrast that with the absurd Bush 43/Cheney/Rummy "strategy", which has led to much more loss of life, tons more expense, no way out.... and no benefit to anyone.

              I don't blame Obama's lack of experience, although he has proven to be lacking in that area. Even so, no one could be that blind. He must have an ulterior motive in Libya, although I don't know what it is. He didn't go to Congress because he knew full well that there is no way he would have gotten Congressional support for his actions in Libya. Bush 43 fabricated his argument. Obama didn't bother with an argument. Both constitute serious abuses.

              Government is spiralling out of control in the United States. We are engaged, simultaneously, in three wars - none of which has clear objectives. No one in Government can define in real terms the objectives of these or what will have to happen for us to be able to claim we're done. The country has gone from being the world's largest creditor to the largest debtor nation in history. China has, this year, surpassed US industrial production - and would have done so years ago had monetary exchange rates not been manipulated. The US economy continues to be in much worse shape than it has ever been in before, and the only thing that Government is doing about it is printing money - the action of last resort of failing monetary systems. Corporate tax rates are the highest in the world, and the overall tax rate on individuals (federal, state, real estate, sales, and other taxes) amount to nearly 50% for those in the middle class. Yet still, the gov't "budget" results in spending, when you consider "off budget expenses", TWICE what they take in. The Repubs and the Demos argue over numbers like $61B in cuts... but no one tells you that this number is less than 4% of the annual deficit. It's fly specks in the pepper. Meanwhile, taxpayer dollars are funnelled, by the trillions (through direct means as well as low Fed interest rates), to prop up banking--who are all very happy these days. Monetary manipulations strip our savings of value, and take real assets from people (foreclosures). The so-called health care reform bill was largely written by the insurance companies, and despite the lies we were told, will increase costs. At the same time, liberty in the US has been reduced to being merely a word. Don't think so? Try to take your cash, gold or silver out of the United States.

              I'm wondering what we can do to end this madness before it ends us.
              Last edited by Andy_M; 04-03-2011, 11:51 AM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: War Mongers

                Originally posted by NHMaster3015 View Post
                At least the bomb factory workers will keep busy for awhile
                I think we have outsourced that production.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: War Mongers

                  The US defense budget is about $670B.

                  The next largest defense spender is China, at about $110B.

                  So, we spend more than six times as much on defense as the next largest spender. The Soviets are not there anymore; Russia is number 4 or 5 on the list.

                  Seems to me that if we reduced spending to 2x the level spent by China, that should still be plenty to ensure National security. Maybe not enough to police the world. But it would be $450B of savings per year.

                  $450B per year. And we would still double the defense budget of the next largest spender. This doesn't include other large budgets, by the way, like homeland security.

                  No one in DC is pointing out to the American people that we are spending 6x as much on our defense as the next largest spender. Congressman's Ryan's Republican budget hits social security and medicare hard. Probably good. But NOT defense.

                  I think we all have to be willing to accept some pain. Government needs to be reduced. But why shouldn't this include defense? Why exactly is it necessary to spend SIX TIMES as much as the next largest pender to ensure our security? Doesn't this seem outrageously out of whack? Especially since the Soviets have been out of business for nearly twenty years?

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X