Reply With Quote
Not funny really, just sad.... whatever happened to diplomacy and strength through peace? THAT'S a 21st century viewpoint, as opposed to going to war with every country that looks at us funny....
?
Romney just released a statement that was widely panned and even castigated for exploiting the tragedy. If anything, it's probably making Obama's already solid chances of reelection better.
Not funny really, just sad.... whatever happened to diplomacy and strength through peace? THAT'S a 21st century viewpoint, as opposed to going to war with every country that looks at us funny....
So why is Obama aiding in the destruction of other nations?
Why did he allow our cruise missiles to turn the tide for terrorists against a Leader who finally adjusted to actually being a leader?
The neocon wing of the GOP has led the charge for meddling in the Middle East since at least George H.W. Bush's presidency, tbh.... Obama is a neocon on foreign policy for sure, and the Democrats deserve a lot of criticism for going along with our out-of-control foreign policy, but the mainstream GOP paved the way for it....
Ghadaffi was going to compete vs. petrodollar with his gold dinar
and also compte with the Euro and Saudis. He was starting war in the business space.
threatening to take a Saudi/Euro/American's piece of the pie is a much much higher offense than killing a few civilians apparently
How many does this NeoCon wing consist of?
We have been warmongering pretty steady since 1898.
True.
??? Don't remember that one.
Cool...
That would have been awesome! Most certainly not a 13th century at ude.
So our inability to maintain trade balance is his fault, because he would make it worse? Even though it's our fault?
I still see no good reason to take a leader out that took a country farther than any other single leader ever has in modern history.
Speak for yourself.
we do this every decade or so:
Let's see Romney has been saber rattling pretty hard towards everyone from Russia to China to Iran and talking up increasing defense spending.
Gingrich and Santorum outright advocated an attack on Iran.
McCain should be obvious from the 2008 candidates. Huckabee also likes him some national defense.
Even Ryan is changing his tune now that he is in the spotlight.
This should be self evident but stupid is as stupid does.
So less than 1%.
OK.
I think also you should look into the difference of what NeoCon means vs. anyone who believes in strong foreign policy. A NeoCon wants to expand Western influence. Do these people you label as NeoCons want to expand our viewpoints across the world, or just provide protection?
That was every major GOP candidate of the last two presidential elections. It is interesting watching you try and will things to be true.
Still...
You are not separating military defense with military expansion.
Romney, McCain, Santorum, Huckabee, and Gingrich amongst other things have straight up stated that an attack on Iran was merited.
Like I said.
You listed less than 1%.
Now, is this attack warranted for "western expansion" or for actual matters of opinion that it is the right thing to do for national security?
So when all of the GOP candidates not named Ron Paul of the last two elections advocate an attack on Iran then that to you means that less than 1% of the party are warmongering?
Gecko's foreign policy adviser is neocon John BoltonWorld Peace!!
Bolton famously endorsed Bachmann's witch hunt of Muslims in US govt.
He's as big a chicken hawk as they come.Gecko's foreign policy adviser is neocon John Bolton
Bolton famously endorsed Bachmann's witch hunt of Muslims in US govt.
If Obama had been President in 1962 instead of JFK we would have Soviet ICBM's in Cuba. JFK understood that making the other guy understand you mean business can change the way they do business without having to go to war.
Nidal Hasan says hi!Gecko's foreign policy adviser is neocon John Bolton
Bolton famously endorsed Bachmann's witch hunt of Muslims in US govt.
Firstly, a foreign policy that depends on bombs and wars is inherently weak... a strong foreign policy involves diplomacy and actual free trade...
Secondly, the best way to "expand Western influence" is to set a good example and stop forcing our presence on the rest of the world, tbh...
Not to mention, the fact that out of the entire GOP, there was only one non-chickenhawk candidate in each of the past two elections shows that the GOP is extremely pro-warmongering...
There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)
Posting Permissions
