RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya.

RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (Full Version)

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

Message

Moonhead -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 2:57:33 PM)
Fairy nuff. My bad. [;)]

mnottertail -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 3:07:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Video - RAF Tornado jet destroys Libyan tanks Since when did tanks fly, or shoot down aircraft? Perhaps the question is in the domain of the RAF. The difficulty with you is your simplistic kneejerk responses and thought processes. Hint: We ain't the fuckin RAF; its either gonna be Canada, UK, or Trinidad and Tobago, you seem to have difficulty with perspective and proportion, so I will give you a bigger hint, it is where you take Coals to Newcastle. This doesn't even deserve to be called a specious argument.

Moonhead -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 3:11:42 PM)
The RAF is the UK: I think we keep dibs on that name (it being the name that destroyed Hitler's Luftwaffe during the battle of Britain, which is pretty nifty), and the colonies have to call their airforces something else entirely...

mnottertail -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 3:40:05 PM)
And no one other than imbiciles continue to carry coals to Newcastle, having once been demonstrated their futile and ignorant errors, but we got those folks out here who are gonna see that Newcastle has the coal it needs even if they gotta do it singlehanded like.

Moonhead -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 3:44:52 PM)
Yep. I love these explanations that I live in a socialist country myself: you just read them thinking, wtf? wtff? That Cassandra who runs the brokeback coalition doesn't look like a socialist to me, matey...

tweakabelle -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 3:48:37 PM)
Today's reports from Liyba tell of a rapid rebel advance towards Tripoli. Towns including Abdabja, Brega, Ras Lanuf and Ben Jawad have fallen to the rebels. La Clinton talks of "mass defections" from Ghadaffi's army, and there are rumours of Ghadaffi negotiating political exile with Italy. All parties, the rebels, the media, politicians attribute this stunning turnaround to NATO-led air support. For some reason, some of the predictions made by our resident right wing pundits came to my mind. These included, for example, the usual anti-Obama claims of inevitable disaster from self-appointed military expert and accomplished armchair general Willberightonceinabluemoon, such as this doozy: "There is no question. NATO can't carry on air or ground combat operations without the US".^ or his repeated assertions that the coalition would "inevitably"* fall apart. The predictions of disaster have failed to come true. The predictions that Obama's policy would fail catastrophically seem likely, at this point, to themselves fail catastrophically. Thousands of lives have been saved - genocide has been prevented. While there's a long way to go yet, it seems there's only one outcome - Ghadaffi's removal and the collapse of the loyalist forces. All the indications at the moment suggest that the multi-lateral approach will achieve all its aims - a stunning success and vindication of the wisdom of multi-lateral approaches - with the happy side effect of facilitating regime change and hopefully democracy in Libya. It would be too much to expect our right wing pundits to publicly recant or apologise. But it does seem fair to point out that, at this point, their credibility is about as intact as one of Ghadaffi's tanks in Benghazi ie shot to pieces. * http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/27/libya-rebels-advance-gaddafi-home-town ^Willberightonceinabluemoon's post #212, page 11 on the "Too late for the NFZ" thread ** post #190, page 10 same thread for example

popeye1250 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:24:15 PM)
Tweak, how about, "it's none of our business?" Even if the rebels win there'll be another dictator there to replace Gadaffy. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!"

Sanity -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:47:33 PM)
Hint - its the agenda, stupid. quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Video - RAF Tornado jet destroys Libyan tanks Since when did tanks fly, or shoot down aircraft? Perhaps the question is in the domain of the RAF. The difficulty with you is your simplistic kneejerk responses and thought processes. Hint: We ain't the fuckin RAF; its either gonna be Canada, UK, or Trinidad and Tobago, you seem to have difficulty with perspective and proportion, so I will give you a bigger hint, it is where you take Coals to Newcastle. This doesn't even deserve to be called a specious argument.

Politesub53 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:51:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Hint - its the agenda, stupid. Its in the mandate, the one we spoke about and you claimed we never spoke about. Before you get excited, mandate isnt me inviting you to dinner either.

Sanity -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:55:04 PM)
The one YOU spoke about, the one that you lied about, claiming WE spoke about? [;)] And no, the mandate and the agenda are two different things quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Hint - its the agenda, stupid. Its in the mandate, the one we spoke about and you claimed we never spoke about. Before you get excited, mandate isnt me inviting you to dinner either.

isoLadyOwner -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:58:20 PM)
The far right and far left don't realize they are in bed together on Libya. They're too obtuse to see see they are taking the same basic position. Obama is an economic Socialist with a neo conservative foreign policy. Barack Obama (before becoming President) on the powers of the President: "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.” The Libyan Rebels are an armed force very likely to seek a Muslim Theocracy. The Libyan Rebels will probably be the next imminent threat to US interests if they take power in Libya. The US can't afford this war. Each cruise missile could have employed a few US citizens, the Federal Government could have taxed that money. Instead its wasted supporting a new Taliban. Neo cons are shrill because the new war didn't happen fast enough. Obama loyalists tow the party line. Both sides united yet divided in idiocy.

Politesub53 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 4:58:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The one YOU spoke about, the one that you lied about, claiming WE spoke about? [;)] And no, the mandate and the agenda are two different things Aww play fair, I even quoted where you quoted the post. Unless that was one of your normal tricks of selective quoting. Dinners still off. [;)]

Politesub53 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:00:43 PM)
Sanity, isoladyowner claims we are already in bed together. We aint even had dinner.....lmao

Sanity -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:04:22 PM)
You showed where you had mentioned it in the same thread as I was posting in, nothing more than that and certainly nothing that backed your underhanded assertion. quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The one YOU spoke about, the one that you lied about, claiming WE spoke about? [;)] And no, the mandate and the agenda are two different things Aww play fair, I even quoted where you quoted the post. Unless that was one of your normal tricks of selective quoting. Dinners still off. [;)]

isoLadyOwner -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:12:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner Mike I have no idea if your a neocon loon or an Obama cultist and in reading you're posts they are mostly gibberish. I'll assume you like Obama from the content I could get through. Keep reading...different folks have different comprehension skills....sooner or later it will become clear to you...or at least I hope so.Best of luck with it though. Actually I stopped reading any of your posts fairly quickly. I'll skim them at very best. You seem to be railing at someone for not blindly supporting armed Muslim Rebels in Libya. I let other posters sum up your posts, although the one I quoted is semi comprehensible.

isoLadyOwner -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:13:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Sanity, isoladyowner claims we are already in bed together. We aint even had dinner.....lmao Ad hominem attacks. Check that off the list.

Politesub53 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:15:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity You showed where you had mentioned it in the same thread as I was posting in, nothing more than that and certainly nothing that backed your underhanded assertion. No, I mentioned a post of mine where I had used the word mandate, and you had quoted the very post, even if you you did skip a bit of it. Dont make me post the whole thing and make you look silly.

Politesub53 -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:16:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Sanity, isoladyowner claims we are already in bed together. We aint even had dinner.....lmao Ad hominem attacks. Check that off the list. Do whatever pleases you. I couldnt care less.

Sanity -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:20:14 PM)
I posted this in another thread but its even more applicable, timely and relevant here: Defense Secretary: Libya Did Not Pose Threat to U.S., Was Not 'Vital National Interest' to Intervene Insofar as your "Didnt happen fast enough" claim, thats IF we were to aid the rebels. Personally, before we even began discussing the situation in Libya I was asking in these threads who the Muslim Brotherhood was, and to what extent were assorted extremists behind these insurrections. And catching hell from leftists for merely asking the questions, as well. quote: ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner The far right and far left don't realize they are in bed together on Libya. They're too obtuse to see see they are taking the same basic position. Obama is an economic Socialist with a neo conservative foreign policy. Barack Obama (before becoming President) on the powers of the President: "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.” The Libyan Rebels are an armed force very likely to seek a Muslim Theocracy. The Libyan Rebels will probably be the next imminent threat to US interests if they take power in Libya. The US can't afford this war. Each cruise missile could have employed a few US citizens, the Federal Government could have taxed that money. Instead its wasted supporting a new Taliban. Neo cons are shrill because the new war didn't happen fast enough. Obama loyalists tow the party line. Both sides united yet divided in idiocy.

slvemike4u -> RE: Pentagon may add more air power in Libya. (3/27/2011 5:21:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner Mike I have no idea if your a neocon loon or an Obama cultist and in reading you're posts they are mostly gibberish. I'll assume you like Obama from the content I could get through. Keep reading...different folks have different comprehension skills....sooner or later it will become clear to you...or at least I hope so.Best of luck with it though. Actually I stopped reading any of your posts fairly quickly. I'll skim them at very best. You seem to be railing at someone for not blindly supporting armed Muslim Rebels in Libya. I let other posters sum up your posts, although the one I quoted is semi comprehensible. I will ,somehow,get by....though the knowledge that you have stopped reading just might have a deleterious effect on the quality of my posts. I hope you can deal with such a consequence [8\|]

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875