BTW, Spurs are blowing them out in an ugly game in case you are really watching.
I said 'instrumental to the proliferation of nuclear weapons to states hostile to our own.' Again he had stockpiles of uranium and enrichment equipment. There was a known collaborative effort between Pakistan, Iran, Libya and North Korea. You are creating a strawman because you lack the reading comprehension and vocabulary of an 8th grader.
You said providing nuclear weapons to states hostile to our own
Seriously dude. Quit fighting the quicksand. You got owned again.
There is always tomorrow if I don't get bored and put you on ignore.
That's not an admission. Your assertion is that I am wrong in stating that and then calling it hyperbole. Given your premise, you clearly did not understand the meaning of the word. You really suck at logic. I am not kidding; your ability to come to a conclusion given iden ies is just .Oh and an incorrect statement is not hyperbole.
Admitting you lied about Libya giving away nukes to try to win your new argument on "hyperbole" definition smack?
This is priceless.
And to think I considered putting you on ignore because you were so ing stupid.
Me saying that something is something is not the same thing as me saying that I myself and doing that thing. You were demonstrated this yesterday yet you repeat the same mistake once again. That is the sign of a lack of intelligence or more specifically the inability to learn.
Let's steer this topic back though:
1) Iraq's invasion of Kuwait is what precipitated the breakdown of relations between our states.
2) Libya was still stockpiling nuclear materials and the equipment used to make them fissionable, chemical weapons, and collaborating with Iran, Iran and North Korea while lying to the IAEA about it's endeavours.
3) Syria has been allied with the Soviets and not us for over 50 years.
So exactly what is your issue with the current administration? The deposing of Mubarak? The intelligence community not getting it right the day after the attacks?
That is the exact quote. Now you are being dishonest. You lack honor.
You ****
I cut and pasted your quote.
The fact that you edited it after the fact and then call me dishonest speaks volumes about what a head you are.
I have no opposition to promoting democracy. Force is not promotion.
I disagree with Hussein, but agree with the other two.
He probably would have had those first 112 cruise missiles heading his way that Gaddafi received instead if he had not complied.
Bull . The writing wasn't written in stone, until it had the backing of our president. Just like in Libya. The Libyan civil war would have ended real fast if we didn't eliminate Gaddafi's ability to repel the rebels.
I see you haven't seen the recent changes. Egypt will now be controlled by a tyrannical dictator.
I now believe he is in bed with them.@ RandomGuy, the Al Qaeda apologist.
LOL...
Seriously...
LOL...
You have to be joking...
LOL...
As partisan as she is...
As much bull as she spews...
LOL...
You can't be that blind...
No .
Anyone who thinks the Brotherhood has any intent other than imposing Sharia law, is pretty damn ignorant.
I have actually defended Bush in some instances concerning foreign policy. Make of that what you will.
Nah, it really is the first time we did anything like this in the region. He'll get the blame if it goes to .
So the net effect is no change.
OK.
Another indication of how ed TX Repugs are, electing this asshole:
GOP Rep. Floats New Conspiracy Theory: Obama Ousted Qaddafi ‘So Al-Qaeda Could Take Over’
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...t-obama-libya/
Bad assumption on your part, or lame trolling. You tell me which.
Yes, I know about Morsi's power grab. As noted before, we need to make sure that we are supporting the secular liberals that might prevent Egypt from becoming a theocracy.
Suck on that as your best, seemingly preferred option. Delicious irony to me.
That does not jibe with any of the analysis I have read.
Our official position was that of a fence sitter, until it was well underway.
You have deluded yourself about how much we could have influenced this, as you delude yourself about a lot of things.
(edit)
In a time honored diplomatic tradition, we hedged out bets until the winner became clear.
What do you think would have happened had we supported him and he been overthrown anyway?
Last edited by RandomGuy; 11-29-2012 at 02:26 PM.
Another indication of how ed TX Repugs are, electing this asshole:
GOP Rep. Floats New Conspiracy Theory: Obama Ousted Qaddafi ‘So Al-Qaeda Could Take Over’
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...t-obama-libya/
Yay, whackadoos!!!
See what happens when you don't need evidence to support stuff? All sorts of fun theories just pop right up.
I would heartily disagree.
Totalitarian regimes are not permanent things. Preserving them is neither moral, nor in in our long term interests.
This is one case where doing the right thing coincides with what is good for us.
"Totalitarian regimes are not permanent things"
they don't have to be permanent, only live as long as the current generation of US propper uppers.
Marcos/philippines
Saddam/Iraq (our ally vs Iran)
All heads of all Gulf Oil regimes
Junta/Greece
military/s. Korea
etc, etc, etc.
When one believes in the fantasies of the Bible or other worshipped text (esp the cherry-picked Bible), then fantasies are available in every realm.
Yay, whackadoos!!!
See what happens when you don't need evidence to support stuff? All sorts of fun theories just pop right up.
not really.
She is entertaining to watch.
BUT
She has her own narrative.
I don't take her interpretations of anything as gospel, but having a viewpoint does not make anything she says automatically wrong, Wild ad hominem Cobra.
Like any commentator, she should be taken with some reasonable skepticism and understanding of her narrative.
That said, she is a fairly astute observer, whether you agree with her or not.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
