So todays right wing extremists are to the right of the Nazi fascists? I agree entirely. Not quite so genocidal but full-on whackadoo. I slam their ideas in posts, not them personally. I don't call them "shills" for the Republicans and try to tell them what their own political beliefs are. I'm not so naive as to imagine that there won't be opposing views on a political debate forum. I fail to see what is patronizing about calling people common nicknames, Gilligan.
I'm not a knee-jerk Republican with a limited worldview. You are caught up in the same old "everything Obama does is wrong' mantra. You believe your own right wing propaganda and ignore the broad support that Obama does have. You will ride this hellhound train right into another election defeat in 2016. How exactly? Obama has shown no reticence to use military force! He ordered the surge in Afghnaistan. bin Ladin is dead from an Obama-ordered raid, along with 30 other top Al Qaida leaders from Obamas missile strikes. Somali pirates no longer target American ships because Obama ordered their executions. Moammar Quadaffi is dead because of Obama military action to defeat Libya. We are hitting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Hard facts. This is the point where you hit and run, ain't it.
The surge in Afghanistan that was in part, an exercise to find bin Laden? Of course he wasn't there. He was in Pakistan....like dozens of other terrorists who left Afghanistan and went to Pakistan and Yemen and still continue to fester. In 2011, 63% of Americans opposed the war there and it sent the cost to $120B/year...and for what, exactly? Karzai is still in charge, the government is still totally corrupt, and Afghans are still not capable of dealing with the Taliban. Obama's raid to kill bin Laden? After years of intelligence. The groundwork was laid by Bush whether you want to give credit or not. You think any President wouldn't have ordered that raid once we had the confirmation? And pirates are all taken care of, are they? Pirates operate on land, too. "The threat is still present, however, especially off the northern coast of Somalia, in the Gulf of Aden and in the southern Red Sea", according to the IMBPRC. "On the flip side, the waters off the coast of Indonesia have developed into a major trouble spot, especially in the Straits of Malacca. One report said there were 107 reports of piracy in the region last year, a 700 percent increase in five years. On June 30, for example, five robbers reportedly boarded an anchored ship in Indonesia carrying vehicles, according to the piracy reporting center. They tied and blindfolded one man, stole engine parts and then escaped. Piracy also is still a significant issue off the western coast of Africa. The Gulf of Guinea and other waters off the coast of Nigeria are particularly at risk. Pirates there are “often violent and have attacked, hijacked and robbed vessels/kidnapped crews along the coast, rivers, anchorages, ports and surrounding waters,” the piracy reporting center says. “Generally all waters in Nigeria remain risky,” says the center’s last update. “Vessels are advised to be vigilant as many attacks have gone unreported.” Interesting that many have compared Obama's war on Libya to Bush's war on Iraq. And that was a NATO operation that finally killed off Qadaffi. Question....how many Navy SEAL's have been killed during the Obama Administration? Hint: It's more than 30. ISIS still going strong. Obama has now committed 800 troops. I thought you were opposed to any more than the original 300.
Obviously missing the point . . . Obama has not been shy about the use of military power like Tiga suggested. Again, the point is that Obama did use the sword without hesitation, Tiga is full of shit. And you just can't give Obama credit for anything. Everything he does is wrong, even when it is right. It clouds your logic.. I didn't say they were taken care of, I said that they don't mess with US flagged ships any more. That was because of the swift and overwhelming use of military power by Obama who is not shy about using it, tiga is wrong once again. Very little international shipping is US flagged or US crewed. It's not our responsibility to clean the seas of pirates so that our economic competitors can operate pirate free. Let those countries protect their own shipping. Let them call upon Russia or China to protect them and see what they get. We protect our own and cooperate with our allies when they step up to the plate themselves. How so? Are you sure that you want to go there? Obama's military choices have all been better than Bush's. And for that matter, far better than Jimmuh Carter, Tiga. We are the biggest part of NATO, you know. Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kososvo were all NATO interventions. Without US airpower the Libyan intervention would have failed. Does that sound like Obama is shy about utilizing military power? Tiga is wrong once again and you are agreeing with me. ISIS is not our fight. Our troops are there to protect Americans in Iraq, however many it takes. Are you still lobbying for another invasion of Iraq? Want to try and justify that?
I addressed your point. Stay on it. I am unwilling to give him credit when it isn't merited. Your logic is clouded in the opposite direction. That isn't accurate. I looked at the list of flagships from 2005-2014 that fell under attack from pirates. There were more US ships in the 2 years following the Maersk than there were in the 5 years prior. In 2013, Somali pirates attacked just 2 ships in total (including ALL flagships) so they have moved inland, off the sea. They are repelled by something as small as a cruise ship firing flares. It didn't take some heroic action by the President. All? Lol. Cloudy indeed. "The president of the United States makes almost unprecedented assertions of executive authority and launches a controversial war of choice* in the Middle East, targeting for regime change a dictator accused of committing atrocities against his own citizens, producing weapons of mass destruction, and sponsoring international terrorism. Amid the White House's promises of a quick victory, a compliant Congress initially goes along with the war, but months later disgruntlement sets in and Capitol Hill begins to raise concerns. The preceding paragraph might sound like the standard left-wing critique of the Bush administration's Iraq War, of the type that was often written during the Bush years by any number of commentators. But observant readers no doubt realize that here it instead describes the Obama administration's ongoing war -- and yes, it is a war -- in Libya. These are strange times we are in. From the administration's strained interpretation of "hostilities" to contend that the War Powers Act does not apply, to last Friday's conflicting and conflicted votes in the House of Representatives, in which a bill to defund the war failed but a separate bill denying authorization of the war passed, few of our customary political categories apply[/quote] So we are the biggest, we should take all the credit. Without key intelligence flights from the RAF, it wouldn't have worked either. Are you noticing a pattern? Perhaps your reply was to the wrong person. You said you would be opposed to more than 300. We have more than 300. That has nothing to do with an Iraq invasion.
You corroborated my point. You answered my response to tiga who said that Carter was "like Rambo" compared to Obama. That is nonsense of course, so I was entirely on point to point it out. You jumped in objecting to anything I said about Obama whether it had anything to do with the point at all, which was that Obama is not shy about using military power. Period. It was his decision. He could have taken the safe route, but he didn't. Its to his credit, even SabanFan credited him for taking action. More blind anti-Obama rhetoric. And how many have been taken? Zero. Taking Obama's lead countries with shipping have stepped up the patrols in the Red Seas and have inhibited the pirates. It took decisive action by the president. What a shallow, pathetic attempt to equate nine years of war in Iraq that involved a major ground invasion and occupation to a six-month air campaign in which no armies were involved and and no military casualties incurred. How many $Trillions of dollars did we spend in Libya, eh? Did we take 50,000 casualties in Libya? There is no comparison at all! Whoever wrote this is way short on facts. The Libyan revolution was a civil war. We didn't "launch" it. We didn't get invade Libya to promise a quick "victory" (although it was over in months!) nor to retaliate against Qadaffi for terrorism, WMD's, or domestic atrocities. We covered the Libyan rebel forces with airpower. That's all. Entirely beside the point. Was Obama shy about using military power? Tiga hits and runs. You took up his torch and defended his indefensible comments. Don't cry now that he left you holding the bag. You think that I ordered them in? don't be naive. I ask you for the third time . . . What exactly do you propose we should be doing in Iraq? You keep avoiding this question. It's like you are waiting for Obama to do something so that you can be against it. Meanwhile you are against his prudent decision not to return to war for the ungrateful and undeserving Iraqis because whatever he does is wrong, especially if he's right. So the GOP gets to campaign this year to return to war in Iraq, to squash immigration reform, and suppress women's rights. I love it.
