A tale of two thank yous

A tale of two thank yous (Full Version)

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

Message

DomKen -> A tale of two thank yous (8/22/2011 4:32:49 PM)
http://news.yahoo.com/libyans-us-celebrate-fall-tripoli-083716349.html and http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/11/world/middleeast/11letter.html?_r=1 Which side of the Arab Spring would you prefer the US be on?

Arpig -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/22/2011 6:25:41 PM)
quote: The Libyan leader has maintained a vigorous one-way correspondence with President Obama over the last two years, sending him several letters that have tried to appeal to his sense of justice and fairness. I don't know about anybody else, but I really wish they would publish those letters. [:D][:D][:D]

erieangel -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/22/2011 9:23:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: The Libyan leader has maintained a vigorous one-way correspondence with President Obama over the last two years, sending him several letters that have tried to appeal to his sense of justice and fairness. I don't know about anybody else, but I really wish they would publish those letters. [:D][:D][:D] Oh, me too. It would be important to see what kind of correspondence is occurring from Qaddafi.

Real0ne -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/22/2011 9:30:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://news.yahoo.com/libyans-us-celebrate-fall-tripoli-083716349.html and http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/11/world/middleeast/11letter.html?_r=1 Which side of the Arab Spring would you prefer the US be on? adding a call for the rebels to respect human rights and move to democracy. I got this far and that was all I needed to see [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/democracy-1.jpg[/image] exchanging one tyrant for another. everyone break an arm waving your flags now.

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 5:56:05 AM)
I'm pretty comfortable in the side I was on. Predicting how revolutions will change a people, for or against you, isn't something you can judge up front. How that plays out in Libya, time will tell. Either way, I'm always on the side of people who are willing to fight for their liberty. I supported Obama going into it, and will support this action coming out of it. That doesn't change the fact that when it comes to needing an ally, Obama isn't the man I'd put my faith in. If he demonstrated anything, it was the inability to make a decision until the world agreed with him. A couple more days of waffling and there would have been no revolution to ponder. That's how close G/Q/K - pick your spelling - was to crushing the rebels.

mnottertail -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 6:14:18 AM)
Yeah, I didnt see the waffling, I saw a bunch of whiney neocons stomping around like tom turkeys in heat or wringing their hands and hysterically flailing around saying the democrats are getting us into another one of their Iraqs........ and him pretty much ignoring the fools.

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 7:45:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yeah, I didnt see the waffling, I saw a bunch of whiney neocons stomping around like tom turkeys in heat or wringing their hands and hysterically flailing around saying the democrats are getting us into another one of their Iraqs........ and him pretty much ignoring the fools. Then you didn't pay attention. And who did you see stomping around? Oh that's right, liberals don't stomp. They wring their hands a lot and whine.

mnottertail -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 7:50:14 AM)
Yeah, I paid attention. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/152675-bachmann-on-libya-i-would-not-have-gone-in- This is one of the hand wringers at the time, Beaner, others (although I would loathe to call them liberals). Yeah, I guess there were no toms stomping other than McCain.

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 8:01:56 AM)
Really? You did? Or do you just look at one side of the aisle? http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/03/28/nadler-criticizes-obama-for-not-seeking-congressional-approval-for-libya-action/ http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/21/kucinich-obama-could-be-impeached-for-attacking-libya/ http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57683.html http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/03/22/larson.obama.libya/index.html?eref=rss_politics I could keep going for you, but again, one sees what they want to see. In this case, I think it apparent as to what you want to see.

mnottertail -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 8:21:32 AM)
I said and him (that would be Obama) pretty much ignoring the fools. Which I do not equate with waffling, since they mean such disparate things. So, I wasnt looking at aisles, you were. If you mean everybody else running around like perimenapausal drag queens and Obama ignoring them, then you should have used that language instead of waffle, which never happened. He just didnt run on the hysterical time schedule or do what you wanted to gainsay him for later, but by god you clowns made a run at it with the 'in violation of the constitution' schtick you ran, to no avail, later having Boener begging Obama to file so they could stamp their preaproved bi-partisan letter on it.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 10:41:27 AM)
Where is Julian Assange when we need him? quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: The Libyan leader has maintained a vigorous one-way correspondence with President Obama over the last two years, sending him several letters that have tried to appeal to his sense of justice and fairness. I don't know about anybody else, but I really wish they would publish those letters. [:D][:D][:D] Oh, me too. It would be important to see what kind of correspondence is occurring from Qaddafi.

Owner59 -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 11:31:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I said and him (that would be Obama) pretty much ignoring the fools. Which I do not equate with waffling, since they mean such disparate things. So, I wasnt looking at aisles, you were. If you mean everybody else running around like perimenapausal drag queens and Obama ignoring them, then you should have used that language instead of waffle, which never happened. He just didnt run on the hysterical time schedule or do what you wanted to gainsay him for later, but by god you clowns made a run at it with the 'in violation of the constitution' schtick you ran, to no avail, later having Boener begging Obama to file so they could stamp their preaproved bi-partisan letter on it. You see my friend...for most on the right,leadership is waiting for the slowest to agree, before acting. Not so good when a house is burning or when a genocide is being perpetrated.

Arpig -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 1:53:16 PM)
Thank goodness for Sarkozy then, eh?

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 8:23:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Thank goodness for Sarkozy then, eh? Exactly.

tweakabelle -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 8:35:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yeah, I didnt see the waffling, I saw a bunch of whiney neocons stomping around like tom turkeys in heat or wringing their hands and hysterically flailing around saying the democrats are getting us into another one of their Iraqs........ and him pretty much ignoring the fools. That's pretty much what I saw too. Now that the result is pretty certain, it's time to review who has been proved right by events. Ghadaffi and his murderous clique have gone. There has been no genocide. While many lives were lost it seems safe to say that many many more lives would have been lost had there been no foreign intervention. From a US perspective, the desired result has been achieved with minimal US involvement. Not a single casualty, zero deaths, zero wounded among US serving personnel and civilians. US and NATO support for the victorious rebels will have earned many friends in Libya and throughout the Arab world. There are excellent reasons to anticipate the new regime and the Libyan people will remember and appreciate Western support for their liberation struggle. Not a negative in sight anywhere on the scorecard. Every concern and criticism raised by wing nut critics has proved false and groundless. It all looks like a total vindication of Obama's handling of the situation to me - for the US, an unqualified success thus far.

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/23/2011 8:47:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I said and him (that would be Obama) pretty much ignoring the fools. Which I do not equate with waffling, since they mean such disparate things. So, I wasnt looking at aisles, you were. If you mean everybody else running around like perimenapausal drag queens and Obama ignoring them, then you should have used that language instead of waffle, which never happened. He just didnt run on the hysterical time schedule or do what you wanted to gainsay him for later, but by god you clowns made a run at it with the 'in violation of the constitution' schtick you ran, to no avail, later having Boener begging Obama to file so they could stamp their preaproved bi-partisan letter on it. Bullshit. France and England took the lead, especially France. Obama only sat down to the table once he was sure no one in the world would say bad things about him. He was "focused on jobs" remember? That's what the White House press secretary had to say when asked why the man seemed to be watching from the sidelines like a deer in headlights. I thought it a stupid thing to say when he said it as it implies a president who can only deal with one issue at a time, when the real issue was making sure no one would piss on his parade. I said when the shit started, I supported US involvement. That means I support the president putting us there. That was before you fucks couldn't decide it if was a good thing or not. As far as fools go, you only talked about neo-cons, whoever that is. Good to see that you recognize a good set of fools from the dipshit liberals too.

mnottertail -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/24/2011 7:17:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I said and him (that would be Obama) pretty much ignoring the fools. Which I do not equate with waffling, since they mean such disparate things. So, I wasnt looking at aisles, you were. If you mean everybody else running around like perimenapausal drag queens and Obama ignoring them, then you should have used that language instead of waffle, which never happened. He just didnt run on the hysterical time schedule or do what you wanted to gainsay him for later, but by god you clowns made a run at it with the 'in violation of the constitution' schtick you ran, to no avail, later having Boener begging Obama to file so they could stamp their preaproved bi-partisan letter on it. Bullshit. France and England took the lead, especially France. Obama only sat down to the table once he was sure no one in the world would say bad things about him. He was "focused on jobs" remember? That's what the White House press secretary had to say when asked why the man seemed to be watching from the sidelines like a deer in headlights. I thought it a stupid thing to say when he said it as it implies a president who can only deal with one issue at a time, when the real issue was making sure no one would piss on his parade. I said when the shit started, I supported US involvement. That means I support the president putting us there. That was before you fucks couldn't decide it if was a good thing or not. As far as fools go, you only talked about neo-cons, whoever that is. Good to see that you recognize a good set of fools from the dipshit liberals too. Asswipe. Not a whit of evidence or truth. Neo-con imbecility. Nothing more. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/28/politics/main20048134.shtml Lets see a timeline with your facts on it. However, I think the US had the largest commitment. And like I said, we shouldn't be in a lead role there, (and we are not) because they sold em the shit, they need to clean it up.

tweakabelle -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/24/2011 10:00:16 PM)
My memory is the US initiated the NATO intervention and carried it out more or less single handed for a week or so. The US withdrew from most direct involvement as NATO countries esp France and the UK too over active operations. The US maintained a watching brief, helping with logistics and participating in the naval blockade. The US did what it needed to do until NATO was ready to handle things without direct US involvement. It seems to me to stretch things a bit to describe the US commitment as the "largest". The US involvement was significant and prolly decisive in preventing the genocide that Ghaddafi threatened to unleash on his own people. But most of the credit for the successful revolution in Libya is owned by the Libyan people themselves. Does the precise level of US participation matter ? Aren't the important things that the monster Ghaddafi is gone, that the Libyan people did the hard work in getting rid of him, and the outside help was critical in helping Libyans free themselves? I have never understood the moans and groans coming from the neo-cons in this matter. Their complaints sound so petty it's almost as though they're whinging that someone stole 'our' war from 'us'. For a group of people with such an awful track record in ME intervention and policy generally, why people waste time indulging the neo-con's whinges is beyond me. Haven't the neo-cons realised yet that the 'Arab Spring' is happening? Are they as terrified of the 'Arab Spring' as the Israelis are? Do they want the Arab Spring and the obvious desire of Arabs for democracy to fail because the implications for Israel are not as favourable as they would like? Isn't it time that US policy in the ME was dictated by US interests and designed in Washington not Jerusalem?

Owner59 -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/24/2011 11:43:31 PM)
So for cons it`s either.... The US controls NATO and that`s bad or..... NATO controls the US and that`s bad.... When in reality, it`s neither. It`s more about the republican instinct to bash President Obama and less about reality tho. They couldn`t give a fuck about Libya, either way. They don`t care about their sucking on gaddafi's ass-hole-opening or the about the Libyans praising the president. What concerns most conservatives ,doesn`t extend much farther than their arm lengths. Much less a small African country on the other side of the world.

StrangerThan -> RE: A tale of two thank yous (8/25/2011 3:20:26 AM)
We discussed this once before - about the point the rebels were on the ropes and gaddi was poised to crush them in their last city. So let's go back to where we started in light of what I said in the beginning that, I supported the action, but in terms of an ally, Obama isn't the one I'd rely on. Since you want a timeline, the other links below will set the stage for you. Obama's vindication came after being dragged into an arena where he had little to say until he could be sure Russia or China wouldn't piss on his parade. Trying to make sure they wouldn't, very nearly ended this revolution before it ever started. So first we have the discussion of the topic here http://www.collarchat.com/m_3599141/mpage_1/tm.htm Since your memory is wrapped around keeping your head up some democrats ass, here's what the world was saying at the time. Note, Obama's reluctance and silence. Note in one of the stories, the white house won't even admit gaddi was a dictator. In another, Obama's silence is defended as being focused on jobs... I'm sure you'll tell us how blindingly successful that was too. It was committee decision that brought us into this fray, the pace of which very nearly ended the debate before it ever started. I have no issue with getting on board with other nations. What I had issue with, and still do is the fact the man either could not, or would not stake out a position on something that was clearly the right thing to do. Note too, neither France nor Britain played cowboy and took it upon themselves to institute a no-fly zone. What they did do, and what we failed to do, was take a fucking stand, one that the world and rebels could see, one that demonstrated purpose and commitment. We couldn't do that publicly until we'd made sure that Russia and China would stay out of the voting. And then some flake comes in and says that Obama's distance was "masterful." You want to rewrite history, at least rewrite it with some acknowledgement of the truth. http://ethiomedia.com/above/2271.html http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/03/pressure-building-on-obama-for-no-fly-zone-over-libya/1 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alexspillius/100077264/obamas-strange-silence-on-libya/ http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/02/23/obama-silent-innocents-are-butchered-libya-finds-time-congratulate-rahm http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/31774 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/23/obama-still-silent-on-libyan-massacres-while-the-mainstream-media-provides-him-with-excuses/ http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/02/obama-stays-behind-the-scenes-on-libya/1?csp=34. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/22/us-libya-usa-idUSTRE71K6D520110222

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875