19072 Members
14 Forums
40359 Topics
614270 Posts
Max Online: 2168 @ Yesterday at 08:14 PM
|
|
|
#505557 - 03/20/11 02:08 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Bukkake Boy
Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 611
|
Quote:
With Saddam supporting terrorism and the world boycotting his oil anyway, going to Iraq supported our long-term financial and security interests.
Really? What kind of ROI calculator are you using?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505558 - 03/20/11 02:33 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Really? What kind of ROI calculator are you using?
There was a UN sponsored boycott of Iraqi oil. Media coverage of Saddan's manipulation of the oil for food program publized this. Iraq wasn't even pumping nearly all the oil they easily could have been out of the ground. You remove Saddam, UN boycott ends, Iraq pumps more oil increasing global oil supply, which influences oil prices downward. That benefits our economy greatly because of our "addiction" to oil.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505560 - 03/20/11 02:48 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 11/04/05
Posts: 3509
Loc: Pit of Despair
|
Obama got a hot tip that Libya has the WMDs now.
_________________________
Fap, Fap, Fap
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505561 - 03/20/11 03:14 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 07/15/09
Posts: 12931
Loc: 3 feet high and rising
|
IMO, there is a big difference between air strikes and boots on the ground. Air strikes and bag men on the ground will facilitate change, w/o continued occupation. All we have to do is hope that whoever grabs power is easily bought.
_________________________
Thinking of cracked-out and/or tweaking whores getting their throats and asses brutalized for the next hit makes me hard. --Rear Admiral 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505562 - 03/20/11 04:19 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
IMO, there is a big difference between air strikes and boots on the ground. Air strikes and bag men on the ground will facilitate change, w/o continued occupation. All we have to do is hope that whoever grabs power is easily bought.
Yeah, there obviously is a big difference.
But war isn't straight forward. Obama's said Ghaddafi has to leave 3 cities he already occupies. Two of them are within 30 miles of Tripoli. Ghaddafi's already told Obama to fuck off. So, I'm not sure how you're convinced air strikes is necessarily going to facillitate change. If air strikes is all it takes to necessitate change, why wouldn't they just have done that in Iraq?
And, the Bush administration was convinced they wouldn't have to occupy Iraq for nearly so long. Their initial plan was one year. Things just don't go as planned.
But anyway, so the argument is the difference is Obama's willing to give up on the war if ground troops are required? They would definitely going to be required to get Ghaddafi outta those two cities. But, the idea is that Obama's willing to surrender before they have to enforce those demands?
Has he been telling Europe they shouldn't go in with ground troops? Or, as long as it's not American troops it's okay with him? That "artful" phrasing though, don't know if you can find moral imperative in it I consider necessary for war.
This post is jumbled because I'm trying to figure out what the hell is going on. If I understood it, it'd be a lot shorter.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505564 - 03/20/11 05:25 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Rob Black's Crack Pipe
Registered: 12/20/10
Posts: 72
Loc: Between a brick and a hard pla...
|
Quote:
Quote:
Really? What kind of ROI calculator are you using?
That benefits our economy greatly because of our "addiction" to oil.
What fraction of the interest on the debt incurred for the efforts do you imagine that benefit might be?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505565 - 03/20/11 06:00 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
But, I'm not arguing we should have gone to Iraq here.
Ummm, yes you are and you're full of shit. That escapade damn near killed the true mission, which was wiping out the jihadis in afghanistan.
Quote:
I just want to know why Obama's going to Libya.
If you need to ask why just do everyone a favor and keep your head up your arse and your mouth silent. I'm no fan of barry and I really don't care if Hilary has to shame him into action by proving she has the balls in the administration. All I care about is seeing that sonofabitch dead or in prison, preferably the former.
Congratulations, Nothrust: You've actually made me miss Belaborator.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505567 - 03/20/11 07:01 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
But that's the thing. I was never for Iraq and never believed the WMD story.
What Nothrust's bitching boils down to is the same shite that frootloop Pelosi did: Whatever the other guy does has to be wrong. And that's prima facie absurd, especially when it comes to the use of force. It's either justified (usually, but not always in our interests) or it ain't. Afghanistan: Yes. Libyaa: Yes. Iraq: No, although Saddam swinging wasn't a bad thing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505568 - 03/20/11 07:02 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Full Disclosure here, though:
1) My ex's brother was killed in Iraq
2) Qaddaffi murdered a good friend of mine over Lockerbee, Scotland.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505569 - 03/20/11 08:19 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 12/09/08
Posts: 8433
Loc: Great Pacific Northwest
|
Quote:
Full Disclosure here, though:
1) My ex's brother was killed in Iraq
2) Qaddaffi murdered a good friend of mine over Lockerbee, Scotland.
Sorry for both your losses. I can understand that when it gets personal, it suddenly makes less entertaining. I've been making little atomic zombies jokes all week at work, mostly to good reactions, until a coworker was telling everyone about her pregnant daughter in law was hoping to catch a private flight from Tokyo by the weekend. I've been pretty quiet about it since.
I think I agree with you that north was just saying that what the other guy is doing is wrong. The thing is, we've been listening to that since the beginning of the Iraq war. I think a little backlash is politically justified. And as much as I'd love to jump on that bandwagon, I'm going to pass because, like you, I'd love to see this fucker dance on the end of a rope. If Barry follows the girls in to make that happen, oh well. I'm pretty OK with that. The ends justify the means.
_________________________
Having killed someone doesn't make you a killer- @KINGROCHE
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505570 - 03/20/11 09:27 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
What fraction of the interest on the debt incurred for the efforts do you imagine that benefit might be?
I've got rough, completely unqalified to give, ideas that I won't bore you with. But, to give you an idea of oil's importance to the US economy, there was some study that floated through investment news sites that said if oil goes up to (it was somewhere around) $130/barrel), the US can't grow, it will necessarily be in recession while oil stays above that price. It's at $100/barrel now.
And, the US GDP is like $2T/year. So, whatever percentage we'd lose due to something as permanent as oil prices being too high and the GDP shrinking vs. growing like we normally do... A banking crisis we just went though is harder on an economy than most recessions because it freezes up money flows, affecting every sector of our economy. An oil recession would affect every sector to. But, scarce oil wouldn't be as temporary as a banking crisis, it'd last longer and so be more severe...
I just started typing out a bunch of shit, but it's pointless. I've read through this stuff before, but haven't memorized and am completely unqualified. Hopefully just you can just get some kind of round idea of what I'm thinking is the importance of oil...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505571 - 03/20/11 09:44 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Ummm, yes you are and you're full of shit. That escapade damn near killed the true mission, which was wiping out the jihadis in afghanistan.
Fucking up Afghanistan is a damn good argument against Iraq. But, that argument uses the benefit of hindsight. 20 years from now and with additional hindsight, if we have another ally in the middle east we can count on to go bomb Syria (it was in mid '00's? during Bush administration) or Iraq (in '80? during Reagan administration) when they start building a nuclear bomb. And, this ally isn't Israel who Arabs consider the little devil. If freedom does spread like Bush propagandized for. With another 20 years of hindsight, is it necessarily going to look like such obviously a dumb thing to have done?
Last time I started rambling about all this shit on this board was with Fatman. I made it clear I really don't know whether or not we should have gone to Iraq, just have mixed emotions about it. But, I'm not sure how much hindsight is useful in determining whether or not he made the right decision at the time.
Quote:
What Nothrust's bitching boils down to is the same shite that frootloop Pelosi did: Whatever the other guy does has to be wrong.
No, whether or not I agree with him, I find it interesting to try to understand people. And, I'm not getting this Obama guy. Jerkules made the best point. It's like Obama's head works in half-measures somehow. Where if we can do it easily then its okay. After all, would nearly as many people be bitching about Iraq if we had won 10 times more easily?
My head just doesn't work like that. If I'm going to do something as important as go to war...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505573 - 03/21/11 05:37 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
Gadhafi has the blood of many Americans on his hands and the Obama administration is using an approach similar to that utilized by 41, not 43. Cool Barry will handle this better than the Crawford, TX village idiot did in Iraq.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505574 - 03/21/11 06:02 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 08/09/06
Posts: 9113
Loc: red dirt state of mind
|
Obama is an incompetent boob. The only thing that has gotten better in his time in office has been his golf game.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505576 - 03/21/11 07:27 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 03/22/07
Posts: 5186
Loc: Joshua Tree National Park
|
I'm thinking it is a preemptive strike on Quaddafi because Obama knows Q didn't pick Pitt to go to the Final Four in his bracket pool.
_________________________
I would eat Allie Sin's asshole until I got an emotion out of her.-Jerkules
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505578 - 03/21/11 09:12 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 07/15/09
Posts: 12931
Loc: 3 feet high and rising
|
Eventually all of this regime change in the Middle East is going to bite us in the ass. Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, fine, we don't rely on them much. When Saudi Arabia, birthplace of most of the 9/11 guys, starts laying waste to protestors, using arms and chemicals that bare the Made in USA label, we gonna have big problems. They are already helping one of those fiefdoms they border, once there is mass uprising on their soil, we will be fucked. Russia and China will be pushing to go in, because any turmoil there will increase the value of their energy deals in Iran. If we use Security Council veto power, then the terrorists will have new motivation.
_________________________
Thinking of cracked-out and/or tweaking whores getting their throats and asses brutalized for the next hit makes me hard. --Rear Admiral
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505579 - 03/21/11 11:34 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
I agree with Barry the Pirate. We should all hope for a good result.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505580 - 03/21/11 12:06 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 07/15/09
Posts: 12931
Loc: 3 feet high and rising
|
Shit is getting rough in the Middle East. Yemen's military is starting to fracture You start to lose the backing of your military, you might as well start negotiating an exit.
_________________________
Thinking of cracked-out and/or tweaking whores getting their throats and asses brutalized for the next hit makes me hard. --Rear Admiral
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505581 - 03/21/11 12:44 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 01/30/08
Posts: 7602
Loc: a site known for its tolerance...
|
The U.S. should just stay out of everywhere. They do nothing, people bitch, They do something, people bitch. Let these motherfuckers sort out their own mess.
_________________________
"I'll never forget the moment during the lovely Alyssa Allure's scene in 'American Bukkake' where the fellow got out of his wheel chair to ejaculate on her face. It was grotesque but had a certain frisson." -Sock
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505585 - 03/21/11 08:27 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
Focus on the point made by J.B.. and others that Gadhafi has the Lockerbie blood of many Americans on his hands. Didn't the great German writer Thomas Mann teach us that everything must be paid for? Gadhafi deserves  or  .
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505587 - 03/21/11 11:42 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Human Garbage
Registered: 09/18/08
Posts: 1574
Loc: DIEGO!
|
Quote:
And, the US GDP is like $2T/year.
Um, US GDP is actually about $14T per year. It's our annual fiscal deficit that approaches $2T per year (more, if the $233B deficit that Obama ran up for February 2011 is the run rate for the year).
In other words, almost 14.3% of the entire economy is comprised of the hot checks the Federal Government kites each year. Returning the United States to its real level of economic activity (where the Federal government isn't splashing around fake dollars) will probably entail an immediate 20-30% drop in everyone's standard of living.
They -- our politicians -- have well and truly fucked all of us. Sure, one can argue that George Bush contributed to our problems, but his accumulated increase in the Federal debt over eight years was $2.5T, while Obama ran up more than that in his first two years. (And I suspect he might be able to top that just in one year, if reelected.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505588 - 03/22/11 02:47 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Gadhafi has the blood of many Americans on his hands and the Obama administration is using an approach similar to that utilized by 41, not 43. Cool Barry will handle this better than the Crawford, TX village idiot did in Iraq.
Yeah, I was watching CNN last night. Apparently all Obama's hullabaloo that confused everybody about how tough he was being was based on how he's going to sanction Libya after the military force. But, he hasn't even gotten international support for it yet. It's not like Ghaddafi's going to care if we tell them we're not buying their oil. All he'll do is sell it to China. China might get a better deal, but Ghaddafi will still live like a king.
Now that Obama's defined the mission, I don't even have a problem with it. At least there's no obvious problems my amateur eyes can see.
But fuck did he mess up the public message. After the Arab League asked us to intervene, Obama had them going nuts about what the hell he was doing: Click
I don't know that the public message being so fucked up necessarily fucked up the effort itself. I just hope the private negotiations weren't fucked up that bad. Because for being a dictator, Ghaddafi was doing everything else we wanted. After the Iraq invasion, he completed opened up his country to inspections for WMD. Unlike Saddam who was doing everything we didn't want, e.g., defying UN sanctions, invading neighboring countries till we castrated him..
Ghaddafi was the role model for the other dictators that we wanted. If it was possible to save him as an ally we should have. Just how Obama handled the public message, if he fucked up the private negotiations that badly..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505589 - 03/22/11 02:53 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
"With Saddam supporting terrorism"
Wrong, stupid. Get that from Fox news, dumb ass?
You're not keeping up. Saddam had plenty of terrorists ties... Nothing to do with FOX News..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505590 - 03/22/11 03:13 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Um, US GDP is actually about $14T per year. It's our annual fiscal deficit that approaches $2T per year (more, if the $233B deficit that Obama ran up for February 2011 is the run rate for the year).
Yeah, that whole post on the economics of oil I did was fucked up. I was typing shit in and telling myself not to type it in because I wasn't current on a lot of it.
I think I got the $2T number because that's how much the federal government takes in in revenues yearly.
Did way too much browsing on the issue last night. Clearest thing I found was an economics professor's blog equating losing Libya oil mean we could lose 0.5% of GDP growth. Click
I'm not going to link all this stuff, because I didn't save all the links. But Iraq has significantly more oil than Libya and so would have a much bigger effect on our GDP. Iraq thinks they can ramp oil production up to similar levels as what Saudi Arabia is doing now. And, Saudi Arabia has "8 times the oil production of Libya": Click (that's a shitty link, but can't find the better BBC one I had right now...)
So, last year there was a number floating around saying we had spent $800 billion on Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined. Say it's $900 billion now. Then we've spent more on Iraq than Afghanistan, so guess $600 billion?
With a $15T per year GDP, people who are interested can do the math to get the fraction Wallbanger asks for. Considering how up in arms this country gets over temporary recessions, something as lasting as what our oil supply, it the fraction significant to me.
But no, adding even significant amounts of oil to global supplies shouldn't be a driving reason to go to war. But, I could easily see how frictions related to the oil supply would lead to war.. It's just something that should be considered when your looking at whether or not to go.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505591 - 03/22/11 04:57 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
When I posted that Obama would handle Libya better than 43 did Iraq, perhaps I set the bar rather low.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505592 - 03/22/11 05:02 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
You're not keeping up. Saddam had plenty of terrorists ties...
Name 'em.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505595 - 03/23/11 07:05 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 5287
Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
|
I'd have more support for this conflict if we could come up with a good anti-Quadaffi slogan to put on t-shirts & bumper stickers and sell them to rednecks. Like when I was a kid and every drunk redneck had a "Kiss my Assahola, you Ayatollah!" t-shirt on. Or during the Iraq thing, when you'd see rednecks with "Saddam Hussein = So Damn Insane!" bumper stickers. I support anything that exploits rednecks for profit. They're the real enemy. And they hate everything, so they're easy to exploit.
Now I need to go write a song about them towers that fell that day.
_________________________
"Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505597 - 03/23/11 01:34 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Name 'em.
It's not like I have names memorized. And, I'll spend time looking into interesting questions I'm curious as to the answer to. Not just left field nonsense people who are looking for any kind of argument to use against "the other side".
The terrorist angle is old that's been looked into plenty. Yet you still get guys on the left who'll just stand there and say "never happened".
The thing is, all those middle-eastern dictators have ties with terrorists organizations. Saddam was just another one. Well, there are exceptions, like Ghaddaffi, who had decided their biggest security threat was USA, so they severed just about any relations and opened up for inspection. Well Ghaddafi, till now. No doubt he's working the telephones, seeing if there any Al-Qaeda/Hezebollah crazies he can use to his advantage somehow.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505599 - 03/23/11 02:01 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
Name 'em.
It's not like I have names memorized... hemmm... haw... HELP!!!
Aww, fer fuck's sake, Nothrust, just man up and admit you have no idea what you're talking about and got caught parroting the same tired lies that Bush and Fox have been spinning since '03. Or are you going to go on about non-existent WMD as well?
Quote:
The terrorist angle is old that's been looked into plenty...
Then why can't you name a single terrorist he supported? Not even one.
Saddam was a terrorist, all right, but the terror he inflicted was upon his own people and not remotely or by proxy. Qaddaffi's henchmen killed Americans over Lockerbee and in Germany.
Quote:
Nothing to do with FOX News..
Quote:
Yet you still get guys on the left who'll just stand there and say "never happened".
I am hardly "on the left," and the fact that you're using this ploy not only proves how ignorant you are, but that you'll accept anything from Fox as gospel.
Quote:
nonsense people who are looking for any kind of argument to use against "the other side".
You mean like asserting things as fact and then failing to produce a scintilla of evidence when called on it?
Go sit in the corner, Dunce.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505602 - 03/23/11 02:38 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
JB, I apologize but this is old news that is already well understood by informed people. It's just not interesting enough to me to go do a bunch of web searches any more. If you would like to educate yourself, you, or anyone else here who is interested, will have to do their own research. If you would like to remain ignorant, just carry on as now..
Res ipsa loquitor. Pipe down, pipsqueak.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505603 - 03/23/11 03:56 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
To my knowledge Saddam Hussein had connections with Palestinian organizations that might have committed terrorist acts against israelis, but not Americans. i believe that American use of military force ought to be used to promote American interests, and the ironic thing is that israel wasn't really even that keen for use to invade iraq as they view iran as the greater threat.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505604 - 03/23/11 05:05 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
To my knowledge Saddam Hussein had connections with Palestinian organizations that might have committed terrorist acts against israelis, but not Americans.
Whom? Abu Nidal? The guy who was sentenced to death in absentia by both the PLO/Fatah and the Jordanians? The guy who was declared persona non grata by both the Syrians and Qaddaffi? The guy whose tales were so tall that one of his Lieutenants said "If an American soldier tripped in some corner of the globe, Abu Nidal would instantly claim it as his own work?" Died of multiple gunshot wounds in Baghdad nearly a year before we invaded. Both The Sunday Times and Jane's suggest he was killed on Saddam's orders.
Or Hamas? Yeah, he sent them a few bucks, but it pales in comparison to his arch-enemies in Iran, who were sending them, at minimum, $30 Million annually.
Mostly, though, the groups he supported were Mujahadeen-e-Khalq, dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian regime, and, ironically, a little group known as the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK in Turkish) that was fighting against the Turkish government. All in all, most of the "terrorism" he sponsored was directed at Tehran. Remember, Saddam was a secular dictator who had no use for the jihadis, nor they him.
But none of that's really the point. The point is that, once again, Nothrust hadn't a clue what he was talking about and looked like a tool.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505605 - 03/23/11 05:30 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
Abu Nidal as well as Achille Lauro hijacker Mahmoud Abbas, but i agree with your overarching point that both were relative small fry. That motherfucker Abu Nidal's organization murdered an extremely distant relative of mine, an Arab BTW. Went to school with some Iranian kids back in the 70s who were MeK militants. Saw one in the Baltimore area in the 80s, but i fear the rest may have perished at Evin prison.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505608 - 03/24/11 04:18 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
But none of that's really the point. The point is that, once again, Nothrust hadn't a clue what he was talking about and looked like a tool.
JB - You arguing with yourself, already shifting your position around in your last two posts and contradicting yourself. But, then it's SOMEBODY ELSE who doesn't know what they're talkin' about!!  Keep going man, this is good stuff...
Quote:
When I posted that Obama would handle Libya better than 43 did Iraq, perhaps I set the bar rather low.
It felt weird, but I don't mind the "let the Europeans handle it" experiment. They're always bitching about how we do it... So, let them take the reins. The Europeans are all fussing over who gets to be in charge over this failing operation. But I'd be surprised if the US could have done any better in preventing a Benghazi slaughter and not leaving a torn apart Libya.
It's unfortunate we got into this. Maybe it was necessary, only the people involved in the private negotiations know. Hopefully the Europeans can leave Libya in the same State H W Bush left Irag in the early '90's. A no-fly zone where the Kurds in the north basically ended up with a semi-autonomous region.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505609 - 03/24/11 04:28 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
H W Bush is the precedent to follow, while Dubya's is the one to avoid.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505610 - 03/24/11 05:40 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
JB - You arguing with yourself, already shifting your position around in your last two posts and contradicting yourself. But, then it's SOMEBODY ELSE who doesn't know what they're talkin' about!! Keep going man, this is good stuff...
Ummm, I'm the one who knew which terrorists Saddam supported. You didn't,you got caught on it, and now you're all butthurt about it. Kinda like Newt Gingrich, who was for imposing a no-fly zone when Obama had his head in the sand and against it when Hillary manned up and kicked barry in the ass to get him to do something.
There's no difference whatsoever between Newt, Pelosi or their minions. Their knees jerk reflexively when the other guy does something. This entire threwad you started proves the point.
Thanks for playing, Dingus.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505611 - 03/24/11 10:49 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Ummm, I'm the one who knew which terrorists Saddam supported.
Any jackass can Google to find the names of the terrorist organizations Saddam supported. Which apparently you finally managed to do a little of after running your mouth, getting excited about "it never happened!!" only to come slouching back from a Google search, "well okay, maybe he did a little..."
Keep Googling JB, there's more out there.
And, I have no idea what happened to Newt. He used to be all about proposing ideas and solutions, just always with kind of an unpleasant countenance on his face people never responded to well. Then at some point in the last several years while I wasn't watching, he starting doing this strange grimace all the time that he intends to be smile. But, the words he says, it's nothing but partisan hackery.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505612 - 03/25/11 04:58 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Any jackass can Google to find the names of the terrorist organizations Saddam supported. Which apparently you finally managed to do a little of after running your mouth, getting excited about "it never happened!!" only to come slouching back from a Google search, "well okay, maybe he did a little..."
Heh, you're not spinning your way out of this one Nothrust. I never said that he didn't. I said you couldn't name one. And speaking of Google, it must've been tough doing all that hemming and hawing when you figured out that the main recipients of Saddam's larges were targeting Tehran. Yep, we prolly should've left him alone until AFTER we took out bin Laden, huh Dingus?
Your knee jerks to Beck and Bush. The Left's knees jerk to Barry and Olbermann. You're both simplistic sheep. Deal with it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505614 - 03/25/11 11:59 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Heh, you're not spinning your way out of this one Nothrust. I never said that he didn't.
Well, apparently JB's stuck doing knee-jerk reactions, refusing to look at what he's saying so there's not much point trying to reason with him. But, for the benefit of any readers who may still be reading this god-forsaken thread. Here's what he said a few posts above:
Quote:
Saddam was a terrorist, all right, but the terror he inflicted was upon his own people and not remotely or by proxy.
But as JB begins to admit begrudgingly later in this thread, "well okay, maybe he gave a little money to Hamas...". lol
Quote:
And speaking of Google, it must've been tough doing all that hemming and hawing when you figured out that the main recipients of Saddam's larges were targeting Tehran.
Of course most of his "terrorism" was against the enemies he created in the middle east. That's where he was. It's like saying you've got something on the Green Bay Packers indicating they're not that much of a threat. Because they do most of their playing and practising, in Wisconsin! So, why should we worry about them in Pennsylvania?
Quote:
Yep, we prolly should've left him alone until AFTER we took out bin Laden, huh Dingus?
With hindsight and at the very least, the Iraq war would have been better off postponed until after Afghanistan was more stable...
That much, even W Bush would admit. But as he consistently points out in interviews, hindsight wasn't available at the time he made the decision.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505619 - 03/25/11 02:53 PM
Re: Politicocks
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Writing about issues, rather than each other, is slightly less gay.
You must have missed something on the way to the store this morning Wallbanger...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505620 - 03/25/11 03:07 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
you did see the super bowl, right?. wtf???
bad choice of random teams, d00d.
I could have made the point better by saying don't worry about the losing team? I was going for pizazz!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505624 - 03/25/11 04:41 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Writing about issues, rather than each other, is slightly less gay.
Now you've done it, Doc:
Quote:
I was going for pizazz!
The second you ask for the ghey, Nothrust whips out the "pizazz!" and the show tunes to distract from the fact that he didn't know what he was talking about at the start of this thread and still doesn't know.
I'd be careful, Doc, or the next thing you know he'll start sending you PMs asking if you like him.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#505625 - 03/26/11 08:52 AM
Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
TRIPOLI, Libya — A Libyan woman burst into the hotel housing the foreign press in Tripoli on Saturday morning and fought off security forces as she told journalists that she had been raped and beaten by members of the Qaddafi militia. After nearly an hour, she was dragged away from the hotel screaming...
A wild scuffle ensued, captured in a video published by The Telegraph in London, as journalists tried to interview, photograph and protect her. Several journalists were punched, kicked and knocked on the floor. A television camera belonging to CNN was destroyed in the struggle, and security forces seized a device that a Financial Times reporter had used to record her testimony. A plainclothes security officer pulled out a revolver.
Two members of the hotel staff grabbed table knives to threaten both Ms. Obeidy and the journalists.
“Turn them around, turn them around,” a waiter shouted, trying to block the foreign news media from having access to Ms. Obeidy. A woman on the staff shouted: “Why are you doing this? You are a traitor!” and briefly put a coat over Ms. Obeidy’s head.
There was a prolonged standoff behind the hotel as the security officials apparently restrained themselves because of the presence of so many journalists, but Ms. Obeidy was ultimately forced into a white car and taken away...
Questioned about her treatment, Khalid Kaim, the deputy foreign minister, promised that she would be treated in accordance with the law. Musa Ibrahim, a government spokesman, said that she appeared to be drunk and mentally ill. “Her safety of course is guaranteed,” he said, adding that the authorities were investigating the case, including the possibility that her reports of abuse were “fantasies.”
LINK
Cue Nothrust and Newt crying "It never happenned!!!" in 3... 2... 1...
Attachments
509531-27tripoli2-span-articleLarge-v2.jpg (2 downloads)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505627 - 03/26/11 03:09 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I suppose Nothrust thinks this never happened, either:
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505628 - 03/26/11 03:16 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Oh, and.. AJDABIYA, Libya — Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces retreated from this strategic city on Saturday in the first significant advance for the rebels who are challenging his rule since the American and European airstrikes began a week ago.
The capture of Ajdabiya is the first sign that the allied attacks, directed not only against Colonel Qaddafi’s aircraft and defenses but also against his ground troops as well, are changing the dynamics of the battle for control of the country.LINK
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505629 - 03/27/11 12:18 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
AJDABIYA, Libya — Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces retreated from this strategic city on Saturday in the first significant advance for the rebels who are challenging his rule since the American and European airstrikes began a week ago.
I got excited about this too. But then you read a little more and the rebels are talking about how Ghaddafi's forces just melted away and someone in Ghaddafi's administration called it a tactical pull back.
If Ghaddafi doesn't take our best hope, the exile option, there's a real battle on the ground coming. Probably going to have to see what the rag tag band of rebels really has...
Quote:
I'd be careful, Doc, or the next thing you know he'll start sending you PMs asking if you like him.
I got excited about this being posted too, 2nd time, thinking I really ticked some folks off... But then I realized this is just all JB has. 
Quote:
Gadhafi deserves to be shit-hammered until he falls.
ivor, you've probably seen what they're comparing it too, Syria and Jordan. Do they deserve to be shit-hammered too?
Yesterday's New York Times: Click
Shit is unravelling fast in the Middle East. Sitting here wondering how long it's going to take to see where it all lands?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505630 - 03/27/11 12:26 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Since JB has given up on defending his stringent lefty loony position on Saddam's terrorist activities, just a quick post informing readers of what his involvement really was. It was easier to find on Google than I thought it would be. Search result number 4 from a Google search for "Saddam terrorism". A NY Sun article on a report the Pentagon issues after all the political posturing on the issue was over, from it: Quote:
The report also undercuts the claim made by many on the left and many at the CIA that Saddam, as a national socialist, was incapable of supporting or collaborating with the Islamist al Qaeda. The report concludes that instead Iraq's relationship with Osama bin Laden's organization was similar to the relationship between the rival Colombian cocaine cartels in the 1990s. Both were rivals in some sense for market share, but also allies when it came to expanding the size of the overall market.
Source: Click
There are details in that article as to what his involvement was.
Also, search result number 2 from Google. An interesting article on it from the Weekly Standard: Click
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505632 - 03/27/11 01:15 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Since JB has given up on defending his stringent lefty loony position...
Please show me where I've ever been "lefty," loony or otherwise.
Face it Nothrust. You lost this one and none of your knee-jerk rhetoric will fix it. Just man up and move on.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505633 - 03/27/11 05:48 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
The pertinent distinction is that Gadhafi has American blood on his hands due to his belief that he is a worldwide player, while Jordan is friendly and in Syria the Assads at least usually confine themselves to their Levantine sphere of interest.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505634 - 03/27/11 10:30 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Please show me where I've ever been "lefty," loony or otherwise.
Wow, JB. I knew you weren't the brightest bulb in the box. But, I had no idea you were this dense. Your insistence that Saddam's terror ties weren't significant to Western interests is entirely a leftist loony position. That was a huge thing the Michael Moores of the world were running around spouting off about, despite that it was untrue.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505635 - 03/27/11 10:58 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
The pertinent distinction is that Gadhafi has American blood on his hands due to his belief that he is a worldwide player, while Jordan is friendly and in Syria the Assads at least usually confine themselves to their Levantine sphere of interest.
That Lockerbie thing JB is going off about, that was in '88. Just after the Iraqi invasion (believe it was '04), Ghaddafi came clean with the US, opened his country up to inspections, and wasn't even suspected of desiring terrorists ties. We took him off our state sponsored terrorist lists and opened trade with him.
I guess you could take the position that once they've terrorized western interests, you are always going to hold them accountable no matter what effort they take to make amends... I don't agree with that opinion. But, there's no blatant disregard of any facts like JB has with his opinions.
And, the guys running the mission, it doesn't sound like they agree with you either. They consider it purely a humanitarian mission on behalf of Arabs: Click
By saying usually Syria confines themself to their Levantine sphere of influence, I guess your making it relative. But the head of the militant wing of Hamas lives in Syria. And, quick Google search: Click. That was in '86, but this Lockerbie thing you guys are up in arms about was in '88.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505636 - 03/27/11 11:05 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
this is good stuff isn't it?. my take and my entire interest is in watching the battle between technology/science and religious suppression. and body counts.
Technology would win in a heart beat, except you got the added interest of limited resources.. How long is Ghaddafi gonna hold out and how much money are we gonna spend on this thing? Figuring that out, that's where the action is.
The NVA would have held out till every last one of them bled to death. And that's why they won. After the North broke their signed agreement saying they wouldn't invade the South, Congress just rolled their eyes at Ford when he said he wanted to go back in.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505637 - 03/27/11 11:18 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Your insistence that Saddam's terror ties weren't significant to Western interests is entirely a leftist loony position...Squawk, Squawk, Squawk.../quote]
Yeah, okay. whatever, parrot. I knew you had nothing. Thanks for confirming it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505638 - 03/28/11 01:47 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
In America, traditionally there is no statute of limitations for the crime of murder. Secondly, Gadhafi's agents blew up a Pan Am jet whose ultimate destination was the uSA and which was carrying many American passengers. Gadhafi committed intentional homicide against Americans, therefore he deserves to be treated as an outlaw.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505639 - 03/28/11 11:07 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
Your insistence that Saddam's terror ties weren't significant to Western interests is entirely a leftist loony position...Squawk, Squawk, Squawk...
Yeah, okay. whatever, parrot. I knew you had nothing. Thanks for confirming it.
Ahhh, JB. Fucking up the quotes and shit. You are usually so meticulous when you post...
You must just not be used to people bothering to talk to you long enough to explain why you don't understand. Do they just usually walk off because you're not worth the trouble?
It's not so bad. You don't have to go into a blanket of denial.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505641 - 03/30/11 05:46 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
AC Cream Wannabe
Registered: 08/07/08
Posts: 572
Loc: USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
You're not keeping up. Saddam had plenty of terrorists ties...
Name 'em.
Maybe these will help. The main thing that worries me about helping armed revolutionaries take out Ghadafi is the possibility that we're just replacing one tyrannical regime with a worse one. Especially if they end up being an Islamic fundamentalist government in the future. Then we'll have bigger problems with them down the road than we ever did with Ghadafi.
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/report-details-saddams-terrorist-ties/72906/
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htintel/articles/20060117.aspx
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505642 - 03/30/11 06:47 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
Gadhafi has murdered more than two hundred Americans and in return we ought to stick it up his ass every day and twice on Sundays. Most of the Libyan opposition just want to get rid of an incompetent and murderous lunatic. If al-Qa'ida is attempting to infiltrate the opposition that is all the more reason for the CIA to be there as a counterweight. How can we pass up an opportunity to fuck with Gadhafi, who murdered infinitely more Americans than did Saddam Hussein?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505643 - 03/31/11 05:32 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
This is just too much. You try to give them the benefit of the doubt because you assume they know shit you don't. But, it's starting to become more and more obvious that they don't know a damn thing more than I do from just having read the paper. I thought this whole thing was putting our money was on the rebels and that was how we were gonna get rid of Ghaddafi. But apparently, we're not even so sure we even wanna do business with the rebels at all: Quote:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who pushed the president to intervene in Libya, was described by an administration official on Thursday as supremely cautious about arming the rebels “because of the unknowns” about who they were and whether they might have links to Al Qaeda.
Source: Click
The whole thing in Iraq was getting rid of this evil guy sitting over there inventing ways to fuck America. And, it's just about to the point where after all these years, we've just about accomplished it. So then here comes Obama and his foreign non-policies. Undoes all the damn work this country has done over the last 10 years and creates a brand new fuck-head to screw with us. Goodbye Hussein! Hello Ghaddafi!!
Fucking hell.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505644 - 03/31/11 06:02 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Are you still bloviating?
"Col. Moammar Khadafy's regime appeared to be falling apart Wednesday night after his foreign minister fled to Britain and four other top officials reportedly abandoned ship.
Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa, one of Libya's most important pols, showed up in London on Wednesday begging for asylum. It was an enormous political and psychological blow to Khadafy just as his army was regaining the upper hand on the ground.
Al Jazeera TV reported that Koussa was negotiating a deal for other senior Libyan officials anxious to defect.
Khadafy's oil minister, intelligence chief and deputy foreign minister, as well as the Parliament speaker, all fled to Tunisia, according to the Arabic network.
LINK
You were wrong. Stop sucking Newt's cock and get over it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505646 - 03/31/11 06:16 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Ummm, He's the former intel chief, and literally knows where the bodies are buried. You think someone like that would bolt if the end wasn't in sight?
It's OK, Petal. We know how hard you tried...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505648 - 03/31/11 07:14 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
there are 50 different reasons why that guy could have defected.
Umm, yes, I supose that dry Libyan desert was bad for his hayfever...
Quote:
Sarkovzy could have offered him a sweet deal.
Sarkozy is in charge of Britain now?
Quote:
your insistence that you know shit is is truly amazing.
See the above, it's really not that amazing. If you're still confused, this may help:
Cameron = Britain
Sarkozy = France
BTW:
Quote:
Sarkovzy
There's no "V" in "Sarkozy." They're not even next to each other on the keyboard, so don't go whining that it's a typo.
Quote:
It could have been he's been wanting to defect for years, just no foreign nation was willing to offer him security from Ghaddafi's vengeance if he left till now.
Yeah, just like it could have been that Nicole Brown Simpson's real killers are still out there.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505649 - 04/01/11 10:43 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Oh dear lord. Now he using misspellings to cling onto the idea that he has some kind of point...
Quote:
Sarkozy is in charge of Britain now?
No, but France and the UK are allies in this mission... With this hint, you should be able to fill in some of the rest on your own...
The thing is, a lot of the shit in the corporate parrot-stream media they've got plastered everywhere just doesn't make sense. Gaddafi must go! (but we will NOT be sending in groumd troops...) Gaddaffi should accept exile! (and we WILL send him to the Hague...) The governmemts are using the media to release propaganda in hopes to put pressure on the other side and most media isn't bothering to look into how much the statements make sense.
David Brooks seems to have figured it out best: Click
Basically, Obama's doing a head fake to see if Gaddafi's regime is made of glass. If it isn't, Obama figures Libya is no worse off than if Gaddafi had done his Benghazi slaughter?
But, Brooks leaves out the other part of the down side. The whole reason a No-Fly zone under Iraq wasn't acceptable any more was Saddam was still down there supporting terrorism against Americans. This has nothing to do with conventional warfare. A no-fly zone doesn't touch it. If the Libya effort fails, maybe Libya is no worse off, but the USA gotta new villian over there colluding with our terrorist enemies.
Our best hope is that Gaddafi actually gives a damn about the Libyan people, realizes his ruling isn't good for them any more, and steps down himself. But, from the few things I know about him, he's never done anything in the past to indicate he would do something like that.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505650 - 04/02/11 06:23 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Oh dear lord. Now he using misspellings to cling onto the idea that he has some kind of point...
I knew you'd be whining about that. You just couldn't resist.
The point was that you have no idea what you're talking about. You couldn't even name a single terrorist Saddam was tied to. I had to do that for you.
You still insist that the handful of terrorists Saddam was tied to were plotting jihad against America instead of stirring up trouble against his neighbors, which was actually the case.
You want to pretend that I'm "in denial" because the facts don't fit your Fox-fueled fantasies, like how Kousa was waiting "for years" for a chance to flee Tripoli.
You didn't even know which country Sarkozy was running. Allies? If Sarkozy offered him a deal, Kousa would be in Paris, not London.
You were all pissed off that Obama bombed them. Now you're pissed off that he handed the job off without the loss of a single US casualty. You amuse me no end. Keep it up. This is like watching Panzer trying to talk about sex with an actual, live woman.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505651 - 04/02/11 06:29 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 12/09/08
Posts: 8433
Loc: Great Pacific Northwest
|
Are you fellas gonna get a room soon?
_________________________
Having killed someone doesn't make you a killer- @KINGROCHE
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505652 - 04/02/11 07:59 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
^^^ Nah. He's a poor surrogate for belaborator. Where is the li'l fella, anyway?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505653 - 04/02/11 05:29 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
I knew you'd be whining about that. You just couldn't resist.
The point was that you have no idea what you're talking about. You couldn't even name a single terrorist Saddam was tied to. I had to do that for you.
You still insist that the handful of terrorists Saddam was tied to were plotting jihad against America instead of stirring up trouble against his neighbors, which was actually the case.
You want to pretend that I'm "in denial" because the facts don't fit your Fox-fueled fantasies, like how Kousa was waiting "for years" for a chance to flee Tripoli.
You didn't even know which country Sarkozy was running. Allies? If Sarkozy offered him a deal, Kousa would be in Paris, not London.
You were all pissed off that Obama bombed them. Now you're pissed off that he handed the job off without the loss of a single US casualty. You amuse me no end. Keep it up. This is like watching Panzer trying to talk about sex with an actual, live woman.
Seriously JB, for your sake I genuinely hope your trolling and not really this stupid. Go find a single quote in this thread that verifies any of this stuff your ranting about.
The closest you come to reality is the Koussa stuff. But, that was, apparently, a vain attempt to point out there are other conclusions you could draw besides what the governments are feeding the media as propaganda. But apparently that's too much for you to conceptualize.
Both me and Doe have given you links to reputable sources indicating Saddam's terrorist efforts did extend to America and the West, but you're still in denial about it because you heard that on FOX News one time, so it must be wrong... Amazing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505654 - 04/02/11 06:23 PM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
i don't believe that Saddam terrorist efforts extended to the west. IMO Laurie Mylroie sold Jim Woolsey a bill of goods.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505655 - 04/03/11 06:09 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Gay For Pay
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 1011
|
Quote:
i don't believe that Saddam terrorist efforts extended to the west. IMO Laurie Mylroie sold Jim Woolsey a bill of goods.
I assume your talking about the Pentagon reports linked to in this thread? I wouldn't ask, but you seem pretty good about keeping things succinct, much better than I. So, what makes you think that?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505657 - 04/03/11 09:12 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Seriously JB, for your sake I genuinely hope your trolling and not really this stupid.
Why, thank you. For the rest of our sakes, I genuinely hope you're ineligible to vote.
BTW:
Quote:
me and Doe
You know what you did here, right...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#505658 - 04/03/11 09:25 AM
Re: Why is Nothrust's Head Up His Ass?
|
Porn Fucking Master
Registered: 09/19/05
Posts: 3576
Loc: Baltimore, MD
|
Saddam Hussein always seemed to me to be focused maintaining his grip on power, hence his head fake with respect to nukes, keeping the iranians off balance. Also, under interrogation he maintained that he regarded al-Qa'ida and other Islamist groups as religious fanatics with whom he would not do business. I get the overall sense that Saddam wanted to maintain his family's grip on power and terrorist strikes at the USA would have given us a pretext to overthrow him. Gadhafi OTOH is unquestionably murdered Americans via terrorism.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#527602 - 08/20/11 05:00 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
[Re: Northrop]
|
J.B.
Unregistered
|
“If you can call any mobile number in Tripoli you will hear in the background the beautiful sound of the bullets of freedom..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#528272 - 08/28/11 04:25 AM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
[Re: Northrop]
|
J.B.
Unregistered
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#532344 - 10/22/11 07:04 PM
Re: Why is Obama going to Libya?
[Re: Northrop]
|
J.B.
Unregistered
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
674
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
