RE: An honest liberal (Full Version)

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



Message


KenDckey -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:22:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

A quote that I don't know who originated (I do know who I heard it from)

Politics is war without bloodshed

War is politics with bloodshed.

Whether a person is liberal/conservitive or whatever, a truely honest man is hard to find.

Clausewitz,of course the quote is a bit mangled...but it seems you got the point.



Thank you I looked them up the true quotes are

“War is the continuation of policy (politics) by other means.”
- Carl von Clausewitz
or
“It is clear that war is not a mere act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political activity by other means”


This is from a translated version of “On War” from 1976

http://www.military-quotes.com/clausewitz.htm





slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:24:21 AM)

Told you....guys got a long list of quotes in Bartlett's




Lucylastic -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:32:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Meanwhile, in news not dredged from the dumbass districts of the statehouse in a dumbass state, Egypt is calling for a UN mandate to deal with the mess President Obama decided to create and make sure was all his very own

quote:

Barack Obama destroyed Libya.

What he did to Libya is as bad as what Bush did to Iraq and Afghanistan. He doesn't deserve a historical pass.


http://commondreams.org/views/2015/02/17/obama-destroyed-libya


Isn't it the conservatives in the Republican/Tea Party that gave the 'OK' President Obama in the first place with dealings with Libya? I seem to recall the President asked them 'What do you want me to do"? He didnt have to do anything of the kind. But he did it, because the Republican/Tea Party have this crazy thought process:

1 ) If the President is for 'A', Republican/Tea Party was for 'B'.
2 ) If the President is for 'B', Republican/Tea Party was for 'A'.
3 ) If the President uses the good parts of 'A' and 'B', Republican/Tea Party was for 'C'.

Had we McCain/Romney, would we have 'invaded' Libya? Oh fuck yeah! No question about it. And would conservatives on here, be defending it as 'just', 'right', 'true', and 'for liberty'? Fuck yeah! Lets dispense with the bullshit....




I remember the screaming from the right at the time, Id love to drag up some of the comments from back then, but I wont, cos Im tooooooooo busy today.




slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:39:17 AM)

The meme was all about "leading from behind" ....lol
Conservatives swore he wasn't doing enough,now it seems they think he's done too much and is solely responsible for the mess there.
If I recall correctly that was a French run op.....why not blame the French,oops that doesn't square with the whole "Obama is responsible with all that is wrong,and got lucky with anything that went right"
Fucking jokes.




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:48:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Meanwhile, in news not dredged from the dumbass districts of the statehouse in a dumbass state, Egypt is calling for a UN mandate to deal with the mess President Obama decided to create and make sure was all his very own

quote:

Barack Obama destroyed Libya.

What he did to Libya is as bad as what Bush did to Iraq and Afghanistan. He doesn't deserve a historical pass.


http://commondreams.org/views/2015/02/17/obama-destroyed-libya


Isn't it the conservatives in the Republican/Tea Party that gave the 'OK' President Obama in the first place with dealings with Libya? I seem to recall the President asked them 'What do you want me to do"? He didnt have to do anything of the kind. But he did it, because the Republican/Tea Party have this crazy thought process:

1 ) If the President is for 'A', Republican/Tea Party was for 'B'.
2 ) If the President is for 'B', Republican/Tea Party was for 'A'.
3 ) If the President uses the good parts of 'A' and 'B', Republican/Tea Party was for 'C'.

Had we McCain/Romney, would we have 'invaded' Libya? Oh fuck yeah! No question about it. And would conservatives on here, be defending it as 'just', 'right', 'true', and 'for liberty'? Fuck yeah! Lets dispense with the bullshit....



If they were installing radical Muslims I would have been opposing it from the beginning regardless of who was behind it.




Kirata -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 8:54:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Sad as it is to say, Libya was better off under Gaddafi.

Apparently we all were...

Islamic State 'planning to use Libya as gateway to Europe'

Exclusive: Jihadists hoping to use Libya as a "gateway" to wage war across the whole of southern Europe, plans by Isil supporters reveal... The jihadists hope to flood the north African state with militiamen from Syria and Iraq, who will then sail across the Mediterranean posing as migrants on people trafficking vessels, according to plans seen by Quilliam, the British anti-extremist group. The fighters would then run amok in southern European cities and also try to attack maritime shipping.

K.




GoddessManko -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:00:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Sad as it is to say, Libya was better off under Gaddafi.

Apparently we all were...

Islamic State 'planning to use Libya as gateway to Europe'

Exclusive: Jihadists hoping to use Libya as a "gateway" to wage war across the whole of southern Europe, plans by Isil supporters reveal... The jihadists hope to flood the north African state with militiamen from Syria and Iraq, who will then sail across the Mediterranean posing as migrants on people trafficking vessels, according to plans seen by Quilliam, the British anti-extremist group. The fighters would then run amok in southern European cities and also try to attack maritime shipping.

K.



This is a scary position to have. Gaddafi had WMDs unlike Saddam. And the current middle eastern crisis was caused by the toppling of Iraq under Bush. They were only able to meet 5 of 18 political benchmarks set by the GAO under his presidency. At least learn about how Gaddafi was one of three leaders in history to use the type of weaponry he did on his own people and kill thousands of them. Assad being another.




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:02:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Sad as it is to say, Libya was better off under Gaddafi.

Apparently we all were...

Islamic State 'planning to use Libya as gateway to Europe'

Exclusive: Jihadists hoping to use Libya as a "gateway" to wage war across the whole of southern Europe, plans by Isil supporters reveal... The jihadists hope to flood the north African state with militiamen from Syria and Iraq, who will then sail across the Mediterranean posing as migrants on people trafficking vessels, according to plans seen by Quilliam, the British anti-extremist group. The fighters would then run amok in southern European cities and also try to attack maritime shipping.

K.



This is a scary position to have. Gaddafi had WMDs unlike Saddam. And the current middle eastern crisis was caused by the toppling of Iraq under Bush. They were only able to meet 5 of 18 political benchmarks set by the GAO under his presidency. At least learn about how Gaddafi was one of three leaders in history to use the type of weaponry he did on his own people and kill thousands of them. Assad being another.

I noticed you left out Sadam .




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:03:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

Sad as it is to say, Libya was better off under Gaddafi.

Apparently we all were...

Islamic State 'planning to use Libya as gateway to Europe'

Exclusive: Jihadists hoping to use Libya as a "gateway" to wage war across the whole of southern Europe, plans by Isil supporters reveal... The jihadists hope to flood the north African state with militiamen from Syria and Iraq, who will then sail across the Mediterranean posing as migrants on people trafficking vessels, according to plans seen by Quilliam, the British anti-extremist group. The fighters would then run amok in southern European cities and also try to attack maritime shipping.

K.



This is a scary position to have. Gaddafi had WMDs unlike Saddam. And the current middle eastern crisis was caused by the toppling of Iraq under Bush. They were only able to meet 5 of 18 political benchmarks set by the GAO under his presidency. At least learn about how Gaddafi was one of three leaders in history to use the type of weaponry he did on his own people and kill thousands of them. Assad being another.

Saddam repeatedly used wmds against both the Iranians and his own people.




mnottertail -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:04:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Ted Rall (author of the piece at the link, for those who don't read) is my favorite honest liberal in the media, Mari, but you are right that he isn't the only one. Pretty rare critters though.



He is not honest, and he certainly isn't liberal.




GoddessManko -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:05:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I noticed you left out Sadam .


Unlike Gaddafi, Saddam didn't have WMDs or did you miss that report. Also Kuwait was thriving thanks to Clinton. Instead Bush created a power struggle between Syria and Iran within Iraq and this president is trying to sort out the mess. Seriously...LOL.




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:08:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I noticed you left out Sadam .


Unlike Gaddafi, Saddam didn't have WMDs or did you miss that report. Also Kuwait was thriving thanks to Clinton. Instead Bush created a power struggle between Syria and Iran within Iraq and this president is trying to sort out the mess. Seriously...LOL.


Funny you say he didn't have them when he was documented to have used them. Ask the Kurds. There are numerous reasons they weren't found, none of which are that he never had them.




slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:10:44 AM)

Magic genies ?




slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:21:34 AM)

As you can see Lucy,I failed....lol




Lucylastic -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:23:59 AM)

no
no you didnt:)
you got it changed:)




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:32:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Magic genies ?

I suppose you are blissfully unaware of the fact that they found labs, not for developing wmds, but for producing them.




slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:37:37 AM)

So that's what we went to war for,Labs ?
I can swear I remember my President telling me Saddam had actual weapons ?
Where are they now ?


Edited to add: Do you really want to re-visit the whys and what not of Bush's decision to invade Iraq...as someone said on another thread,the history is in....and Bush and his administration lied,to the American people,and via Colin Powell at the U.N.to the world.
Is there any need to revisit this ?
Seriously,it's done and over,though the reverberations persist [8|]




BamaD -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:44:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So that's what we went to war for,Labs ?
I can swear I remember my President telling me Saddam had actual weapons ?
Where are they now ?

I also remember that he had the word of 7 yes 7 different intelligence agencies that they were there. And remember that Saddam did everything he could to make people believe he had them.
Don't know how this proves, even if you were right, that we backed the right side during the Arab Spring, which is actually the point here, except, of course, to make it somehow Bush's fault, after all he was responsible for the black death.




slvemike4u -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:47:43 AM)

This isn't about blaming Bush,it's about an assertion you made a few posts ago....so don't be putting this slight deviation in the subject matter on me....this is all you,you brought it up,you own it.




Lucylastic -> RE: An honest liberal (2/18/2015 9:48:23 AM)

Interesting articles from the NY times last year..in chronological order



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?smid=tw-nytimesworld from october last yearFive years after President George W. Bush sent troops into Iraq, these soldiers had entered an expansive but largely secret chapter of America’s long and bitter involvement in Iraq.
From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.
In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

and

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to-have-bought-and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=0
from three days ago....

The Central Intelligence Agency, working with American troops during the occupation of Iraq, repeatedly purchased nerve-agent rockets from a secretive Iraqi seller, part of a previously undisclosed effort to ensure that old chemical weapons remaining in Iraq did not fall into the hands of terrorists or militant groups, according to current and former American officials.

The extraordinary arms purchase plan, known as Operation Avarice, began in 2005 and continued into 2006, and the American military deemed it a nonproliferation success. It led to the United States’ acquiring and destroying at least 400 Borak rockets, one of the internationally condemned chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein’s Baathist government manufactured in the 1980s but that were not accounted for by United Nations inspections mandated after the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

both very interesting reads no matter your "side"




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625