User avatar
By blumpkin
#386157
So uh...

The Syrian government is killing their own people today...

Yemen's government has been killing their people all week...
and uh...

God only knows what goes on in "the kingdom" of Saudi Arabia

Are the Libyans the only people worthy of a "kinetic military action"...

Shouldent we be spreading the "humanitarian" love by dropping bombs
on all of these countries.
User avatar
By flybug.pa.
#386193
Lockerbie bomber release, huge BP contract in Libya, oil for europe. british SAS troops with diplomat captured while trying to make contact with rebel forces. if it smells like shit its shit.no oil here , no sir :coffee
User avatar
By Lenny
#386202
Pure shit, no doubt. These silly little wars.....I mean kinetic incursions..........NATO-led humanitarian missions.........whatever, are much easier to pull off when you have a compliant media in your back pocket.

Too bad the foaming liberals here in Maine are too busy worrying about our governor taking down the agitprop murals at the Labor Dept.

Wonder when the Women in Black and Bridges for Peace people are gonna come out of hiding? Their silence is deafening.
User avatar
By West Chester
#386260
Interesting story developing

al Qaeda joining the "rebels"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... links.html

US, Britain and France are considering arming the "rebels"
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World- ... ews_Learns
While the U.S. is eager to take a backseat role in the international military campaign in Libya, it is considering stepping up its assistance to rebel forces through humanitarian, political, economic and even military aid, a U.S. official said Friday.
"Nothing is off the table right now," Gene Cretz, a U.S. ambassador to Libya, said at a news conference.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03 ... z1HkVwaCuI

So does this mean that the US government is helping to arm al Qaeda? Maybe I am confused about Kinetic actions
User avatar
By canook
#386261
Sounds exactly the same as Reagan covertly funneling billions in arms and training to al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Tragic repeat of history if it's true.
By SOBF
#386333
Image
I thought BO was going to have the radical Muslims thinking the US was wonderful....mmmmmmmmm not so much
User avatar
By canook
#386336
He said that when, exactly? Worthless comment without proof.

BTW - The picture you used is from a protest in Sri Lanka (can be found on the India Times website) - a close POLITICAL ally of Libya. Not sure it has anything to do at all with religious extremism. Qaddafi is not known for his tolerance of extreme religious views.
User avatar
By m.b.
#386342
he doesn't have a clue what he's doing. but what else would you expect from a guy who's leadership experience it limited to community organizing?

many thanks to all of you who helped put us in this situation.
User avatar
By canook
#386355
Hmmm, getting rid of a corrupt dictator and bringing democracy to the region. Where have I heard that before? At least he skipped the specious excuses of weeding out terrorist training camps and wmd's. Expect to see him in front a 'Mission Accomplished' banner soon.
User avatar
By West Chester
#386358
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... rvene.html
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Libya did not pose a threat to the United States before the U.S. began its military campaign against the North African country.

On “This Week,” ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Gates, “Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?”

“No, no,” Gates said in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

During his campaign for the Presidency, in December, 2007, Barack Obama told The Boston Globe that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
Unfortunately, our president has no idea what he is doing.

IF the United States is really there in a humanitarian role as is being claimed why have we not been involved in all the mid and south African nations conflicts of mass genocide?
User avatar
By LTD
#386454
West Chester wrote:http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... rvene.html
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Libya did not pose a threat to the United States before the U.S. began its military campaign against the North African country.

On “This Week,” ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Gates, “Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?”

“No, no,” Gates said in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

During his campaign for the Presidency, in December, 2007, Barack Obama told The Boston Globe that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
Unfortunately, our president has no idea what he is doing.

IF the United States is really there in a humanitarian role as is being claimed why have we not been involved in all the mid and south African nations conflicts of mass genocide?
WC....Why even ask these lib fucks a question that they will never answer/can't answer?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 10

I rolled into sarmulminnow’s town, drove […]

Waters of the United States.

Apparently the Pebble Mine poses no threat and is […]

show your tying space plz!

What they were trying to say was Fuck OFF.

Thumbing Through Some SBSs

Fighting foam https://live.staticflickr.com/6553[…]

Subscribe to The Drake Magazine