RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

rikigrl -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/19/2009 5:57:46 PM)

omg, is this ridiculous thread still active? lmao



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/19/2009 6:02:18 PM)

What can I say? I avoided it for as long as I could. Then I had to come and throw in my two cents.



Lostkitten3 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/19/2009 6:10:54 PM)

MusicMystery: Thanks. You can block people? How awesome. And how does one go about that?
[/quote]

Yes, the rest is you. Your citations are the followup to me calling you on it.

Obfucation of my opinion?

One thing happened. You asked a question. I speculated on an answer.

If you don't agree with my speculation, if you think those voices are silent for different reasons, fine. If you'd like to make a case for it, fine. If you're really wondering why I'm not screaming, now you know.

Welcome to my block list. Time waste over.
[/quote]



thishereboi -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/19/2009 8:01:04 PM)

Look at the lower left corner of the post you want to block. You should see a Hide button. Push it and it will hide what they say.



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 6:43:25 AM)

quote:

Then why are you blaming the president by asking how many kids he's killed?
Not blame - a statement of fact due to his responsibility as President.
quote:

Why do you prefer that our enemies murder our civilians rather than sending our troops to stop them?
Better to defend the US with US soldiers than either Afghanistan or Iraq, who don't want us there and who have an agenda counter to US citizen interests.
quote:

if their parents paid for them to attend college, they'd never have enlisted in the first place.
Apparently you don't belief in self accountability at any level; commander in chief to a decision made by an adult.



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 12:25:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Not blame - a statement of fact due to his responsibility as President.


Really? In that case he hasn't "killed" nearly as many as other presidents then, so he's perfectly fine by that standard. Look at past wars and see the sheer number of casualties. Obama's doing GREAT by those standards. How nice of you to notice. Hell, we lost 416,000 during WWII alone. At his current rate, Obama would have to lose MANY more to come anywhere close to that number.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Better to defend the US with US soldiers than either Afghanistan or Iraq, who don't want us there and who have an agenda counter to US citizen interests.


Ahh but when the terrorists are on our home turf, it's MUCH more difficult to defend against them. Because when they're already here, all they have to do is press a button or crash a plane to make their attack. If a military jet shoots down a jetliner headed for a building, we've already lost a couple hundred civilians. If we are on their home turf, and they are prevented from even getting to that jetliner, that's all the better, don't you think?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Apparently you don't belief in self accountability at any level; commander in chief to a decision made by an adult.


Oh of course I do. Which is why I take issue with the assinine question in the OP to begin with. It's the same bullshit rhetoric that is as meaningless as it is lame. Obama sends troops to do a job. He doesn't shoot them. If in the course of the duties they SIGNED UP FOR, they are killed, that is on our enemies. For if it's not our enemies who are responsible, then I say again, you must hold accountable the commanders who issue orders and even parents who, by their failure to provide college tuition for their kids, leave them no choice but to join the military. After all, Obama doesn't make people join the military now, does he?



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 12:39:54 PM)

quote:

At his current rate, Obama would have to lose MANY more to come anywhere close to that number.
Applying a consistent answer received regarding any of Obama's results so far, "He needs more time."

Don't worry the pace is picking up in Iraq; and Afghanistan.
quote:

If we are on their home turf, and they are prevented from even getting to that jetliner, that's all the better, don't you think?
No - Ask the question anyway you'd like and my preference would be to allocate the military personal and resources at home, around home, and above home; versus protecting something like oil fields and political campaign contribution source interests.
quote:

you must hold accountable the commanders who issue orders
I agree with your suggesting and do hold the ultimate 'commander' responsible.

quote:

Which is why I take issue with the assinine question in the OP to begin with.
Trying to answer it is a very curious way to show it.

PS - It is 'asinine'; unless you are being self labeling.



Starbuck09 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 12:44:39 PM)

But your country needs oil fields mercnbeth same as mine . No country is an island anymore intersts are global and so affected by events in other countries.



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 12:47:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Applying a consistent answer received regarding any of Obama's results so far, "He needs more time."


Did you major in 'spin' in college? [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
No - Ask the question anyway you'd like and my preference would be to allocate the military personal and resources at home, around home, and above home; versus protecting something like oil fields and political campaign contribution source interests.


Well if all our forces are "here" then what about the Americans on planes around the world? What, do you think no one travels and that all of our people are within our borders?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
I agree with your suggesting and do hold the ultimate 'commander' responsible.


And yet, while exercising that wonderful 'idea,' you conveniently leave out the rest of those who would be 'more' responsible by your logic. Obama can't send troops that never enlisted. Obama can't issue direct combat orders on the ground. Tsk tsk tsk. You're letting so many people off scot-free, it's a wonder you care about Obama at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
PS - It is 'asinine'; unless you are being self labeling.


Oh I'm well-aware of which spelling I'm using and to whom the label belongs, thanks.



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:04:08 PM)

quote:

Did you major in 'spin' in college?
No consistency and pragmatism.
quote:

Well if all our forces are "here" then what about the Americans on planes around the world?
What about them? Are they currently guarded by armed US military personnel? I didn't notice any while traveling thoughout Europe last month and felt very secure, especially in London with all the cameras focused on the streets.
quote:

'more' responsible by your logic.
I use 'MOST' reponsible - and that would be the Commander-in-chief. Sorry - can't change that reality to suit your agenda.
quote:

it's a wonder you care about Obama
Why? He's our President, the 'commander-in-chief' and is the only person who can order a standing down and evacuation of US troops deployed anywhere in the world. Were their another entity or person with that ability, I'd focus on them.

quote:

your country needs oil fields mercnbeth same as mine . No country is an island anymore intersts are global and so affected by events in other countries.
Starbuck, I could make two different counter arguments. Those countries need a market to sell that oil or its worthless. We're not guarding the oil, we're guarding the oil company interests.

The other argument is one fundamentally against my position of disbelief in the global warming religion. If access to the oil was cut off the development of alternative fuels and/or transportation methods would ultimately be a boon to the economy. Currently, there is no such incentive to change either the common fuel employed or manner of travel. More pragmatic would be the use of fuels within the borders of the US. Oil off the coast of CA and in Alaska; coal just about everywhere east of the Mississippi



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:18:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
I use 'MOST' reponsible - and that would be the Commander-in-chief. Sorry - can't change that reality to suit your agenda.


Oh I see, so you're in favor of letting go all the others who clearly have more direct responsibility just to go after one guy you don't like. Got it. I understand now.



Politesub53 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:19:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

But your country needs oil fields mercnbeth same as mine . No country is an island anymore intersts are global and so affected by events in other countries.


Are you suggesting that gave Bush and Blair the right to invade Iraq ?



Starbuck09 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:26:50 PM)

We ad that one in the war for oil debate polite so I suspect you know my answer. But for the record yes.



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:31:18 PM)

quote:

Oh I see, so you're in favor of letting go all the others who clearly have more direct responsibility just to go after one guy you don't like.
What gives you the impression my like or dislike of the President has any bearing on the reality of his Presidential responsibility?

By your logic Loki, since Madoff was only the 'perpetrator in chief' and didn't actually collect each and every check or write each and every fraudulent investment statement, he shouldn't have been arrested and convicted? He was in charge, it was his responsibility.

President Obama is in charge - it is his responsibility.

Unless of course you don't like facing reality, or are trying to provide a wonderful example of individual as well as political party rationalization.
quote:

Got it.
GREAT!

quote:

Obama can't issue direct combat orders on the ground. Tsk tsk tsk
Oh, and BTW - he CAN! But I can't help with the post nasal drip issue.



Politesub53 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:32:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

We ad that one in the war for oil debate polite so I suspect you know my answer. But for the record yes.


Well at least your honest. Now that you mention it i do recall our debate on this issue. For the record, my answer is still no.



Starbuck09 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 1:33:48 PM)

No worries polite sub it was a good debate.



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/20/2009 9:17:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
President Obama is in charge - it is his responsibility.


Wow, good thing you weren't inlvoved with the trials at Nuremburg. You'd have just gone after hitler (who was already dead) and leave the rest of his cronies alone.

It's hilarious that you can use this asinine logic to explain how the president is 'responsible' for all of our deaths over there, yet you also seem to absolve all the military commanders of the same responsibility. You do know that Obama sends them to do a task, and it's up to the military guys to come up with the plan that eventually leads to troops being in harm's way, right?



Sanity -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/21/2009 8:15:08 AM)

quote:

ABC's Gibson on Cindy Sheehan's War Protest: 'Enough Already'

When George W. Bush was President, ABC and Charles Gibson, like most media members, couldn't get enough of anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan.

Now that Barack Obama is in the White House, the host of "World News Tonight" is no longer interested in Sheehan, even telling WLS radio in Chicago, "Enough already."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/08/20/abcs-gibson-cindy-sheehans-war-protest-enough-already

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/ABCs-Charles-Gibson-to-Cindy-Sheehan-Thanks-for-your-sacrifice-Now-get-lost-53803917.html



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/21/2009 9:51:23 AM)

quote:

Wow, good thing you weren't inlvoved with the trials at Nuremburg. You'd have just gone after hitler (who was already dead) and leave the rest of his cronies alone.
I appreciate your position that the soldiers and commanders in the field in Iraq and Afghanistan are the equivalent of Nazi and Gestapo troop who murdered and tortured civilians in the camps under the German government with Adolph Hitler as their Commander-in-Chief.

Regardless of my position against President Obama's continuing use of US military as an occupational force in Iran or fighting in Afghanistan, I don't make a similar comparison nor judgment.

I respect your position though that the troops and commanders should be treated as Nazis and brought to trial - However, I don't see the similarity and couldn't disagree strongly enough.



Loki45 -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/21/2009 3:10:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
I appreciate your position that the soldiers and commanders in the field in Iraq and Afghanistan are the equivalent of Nazi and Gestapo troop who murdered and tortured civilians in the camps under the German government with Adolph Hitler as their Commander-in-Chief.


You then appreciate the false and untrue. I simply made an analogy to the fact that no "one" person was held accountable then. And yet here, decades later, you absolve commanders and parents and you blame Obama when in fact, he'd have no one to send if no one joined the service. His goals would not be accomplished without commanders to make battle plans and send troops into the fight.

That fact that you absolve everyone BUT the President shows your bias and dislike for him is clouding your judgement.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875