Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42
Thanks Tree24Thanks

Thread: Obama is really taking us into the pit of hell

  1. #1
    Senior Member Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,441
    Thanks
    2850

    Obama is really taking us into the pit of hell

    In the NYT today we see the story (and picture) of seven Syrian soldiers tied up and summarily executed by the rebels by a gunshot to the back of the head. As recently as August the rebels executed at least 51 soldiers who had surrendered and now we get this international news.

    Iran will support Syria 'to the end': military chief

    Iran will support Syria "until the end" in the face of possible US-led military strikes, the chief of Iran's elite Quds Force unit was quoted Thursday by the media as saying.

    Iran is Syria's main regional ally and some analysts believe a wider goal of US President Barack Obama's determination to launch a strike against the Damascus regime is to blunt Tehran's growing regional influence and any consequent threat to Washington ally Israel.

    "The aim of the United States is not to protect human rights ... but to destroy the front of resistance (against Israel)," Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani was quoted as saying.

    "We will support Syria to the end," he added in a speech to the Assembly of Experts, the body that supervises the work of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
    Iran will support Syria 'to the end': military chief

    And this:


    Putin warns Russia could come to Syria's aid over US strike

    As he touched down in St. Petersburg on Thursday morning, President Obama greeted his host Vladimir Putin with a handshake and a smile.


    But the cordial greeting belies the tinderbox the two leaders are sitting on, as they posture and deliberate over a potential U.S. strike on Syria -- one of Russia's closest Mideast allies.

    Putin escalated concerns about the fallout from any strike when he indicated in an interview published Wednesday that his country could send Syria and its neighbors in the region the components of a missile shield if the U.S. attacks.

    U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified this week that the Russians might even replace any military assets the U.S. destroys in a strike.

    The warnings raise the possibility of a supposedly "limited" strike on Syria turning into a proxy tit-for-tat between Russia and the U.S.
    Putin warns Russia could come to Syria's aid over US strike | Fox News

    At least Bush went to war with a man who really had no allies but Obama's complete lack of experience and inability to back off is leading our nation to what could amount to be a catastrophe in the making.

  2. #2
    Islamic Ebola Zombie Cicero's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    25,796
    Thanks
    8884

    From
    Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    <snip>

    At least Bush went to war with a man who really had no allies but Obama's complete lack of experience and inability to back off is leading our nation to what could amount to be a catastrophe in the making.
    Ah, so Bush was such a pussy he had to get his "coalition of the willing" to beat up on a man with no allies?
    Yeah, that would be consistent with Saddam being NO THREAT to the US.

    btw, and on edit, how's that whole Iraq thing working out anyways? Not quite the, stable, bastion of freedom and democracy we were promised would arise from Bush's boondoggle...now is it?
    Thanks from HenryPorter and Shanty

  3. #3
    Islamic Ebola Zombie Cicero's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    25,796
    Thanks
    8884

    From
    Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Ah, so Bush was such a pussy he had to get his "coalition of the willing" to beat up on a man with no allies?
    Yeah, that would be consistent with Saddam being NO THREAT to the US.

    btw, and on edit, how's that whole Iraq thing working out anyways? Not quite the, stable, bastion of freedom and democracy we were promised would arise from Bush's boondoggle...now is it?

    Oh, and as a corollary: Bush managed to fuck up the Iraq campaign so badly that it took ten years for us to be able to leave...even though Saddam was without any allies.

    Yeah, you might want to rethink THAT position.
    Thanks from HenryPorter and Shanty

  4. #4
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    899
    Thanks
    238

    From
    Stanger in a Strange Land
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Ah, so Bush was such a pussy he had to get his "coalition of the willing" to beat up on a man with no allies?
    Yeah, that would be consistent with Saddam being NO THREAT to the US.

    btw, and on edit, how's that whole Iraq thing working out anyways? Not quite the, stable, bastion of freedom and democracy we were promised would arise from Bush's boondoggle...now is it?
    Saddam was an open supporter of terrorism,and was OUR ENEMY, who broke hi sown agreement to be allowed to stay in power.

    Mubarek and Ghaddafi were our ALLIES, whom Obama DEPOSED, and empowered our ENEMIES.

    The Egyptian Military is stuck doing EXACTLY WHAT MUBAREK HAD TO DO, to stop terrorism in Egypt.

    Obama helped turn Libya's military hardware OVER TO AL QAEDA; he is now trying to to the same in Syria.

    At least Bush KNEW our ALLIES from our ENEMIES.

    Obama is an IDIOT.
    Thanks from Mordent, keymanjim and slslady1

  5. #5
    Senior Member Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,441
    Thanks
    2850

    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Oh, and as a corollary: Bush managed to fuck up the Iraq campaign so badly that it took ten years for us to be able to leave...even though Saddam was without any allies.

    Yeah, you might want to rethink THAT position.
    Irrelevant and has nothing to do with other countries talking about directly confronting us. For better or worse, Iraq stayed in Iraq unlike Obama who seems to be building a coalition of the willing against the US. Democrats have a knack for getting America into all sorts of quandary's.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Rorschach's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    23,476
    Thanks
    7747

    From
    America
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Ah, so Bush was such a pussy he had to get his "coalition of the willing" to beat up on a man with no allies?
    Yeah, that would be consistent with Saddam being NO THREAT to the US.

    btw, and on edit, how's that whole Iraq thing working out anyways? Not quite the, stable, bastion of freedom and democracy we were promised would arise from Bush's boondoggle...now is it?
    It's like a natural reflex: Point out any possible fault about the Dali-Bama, and a Leftist is sure to leap up and shout "GEORGE BUSH!!!!"

    Note that this discussion isn't about George Bush, Saddam Hussein or, Iraq.

    It is about Hussein Obama, Bashir Assad and Syria.....
    Thanks from Mordent

  7. #7
    Senior Member Rorschach's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    23,476
    Thanks
    7747

    From
    America
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Oh, and as a corollary: Bush managed to fuck up the Iraq campaign so badly that it took ten years for us to be able to leave...even though Saddam was without any allies.

    Yeah, you might want to rethink THAT position.
    Exactly.

    GLORIOUS ORGANIZER effectively LOST the Iraq War, by surrendering. Now, the Iranians find it much easier to move their troops across Iraq, into Syria......

  8. #8
    Conservatively Liberal NiteGuy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,768
    Thanks
    3861

    From
    Teardrop City
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
    Exactly.

    GLORIOUS ORGANIZER effectively LOST the Iraq War, by surrendering. Now, the Iranians find it much easier to move their troops across Iraq, into Syria......
    Where do you people come up with this shit?

    We had a signed agreement with Iraq to depart by a date certain. An agreement, I'll remind you, that was signed by the previous administration, and as far as the Iraqi's were concerned, was non-negotiable.

    So, how does Obama following the Bush SOFA agreement amount to a surrender?

    Oh, right. It doesn't.

  9. #9
    Partyin' Like A Palin TennesseeRain's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    51,387
    Thanks
    15024

    From
    Rent Free in RWNJ's Heads
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
    Exactly.

    GLORIOUS ORGANIZER effectively LOST the Iraq War, by surrendering. Now, the Iranians find it much easier to move their troops across Iraq, into Syria......
    I thought the bushies claimed Iraq was a victory.... For George Bush

  10. #10
    Senior Member Dr Sampson Simpson's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    12,516
    Thanks
    3081

    Quote Originally Posted by Grokmaster View Post
    Saddam was an open supporter of terrorism,and was OUR ENEMY, who broke hi sown agreement to be allowed to stay in power.

    Mubarek and Ghaddafi were our ALLIES, whom Obama DEPOSED, and empowered our ENEMIES.

    The Egyptian Military is stuck doing EXACTLY WHAT MUBAREK HAD TO DO, to stop terrorism in Egypt.

    Obama helped turn Libya's military hardware OVER TO AL QAEDA; he is now trying to to the same in Syria.

    At least Bush KNEW our ALLIES from our ENEMIES.

    Obama is an IDIOT.
    No, he was not. Saddam spoke out often against Al Quaeda. NO evidence Iraq had any links to terrorism. And, Saddam was enemies with Iran. So it was actually beneficial to the US to have Saddam in power, and we helped him for a while with intelligence in the fight against Iraq.

    Obama had nothing to do with Mubarek and Ghaddafi, the people of Egypt and Libya did.
    Thanks from Dangermouse

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed