Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Screamin SeaMonkees
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
My head is spinning...

I've got classmates that think and talk like this. We are in our fifties for Christ's sake!

:)devil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
That's funny, I don't agree with either action, however there are some differences between Iraq and Libya. At the time of invasion of Iraq, Sadaam was not massacring his people on a large scale like Gadaffi was doing. Sadaam had done it in the past to the Kurds, yet that was in the late 80s. Also, we are mainly providing air and naval power in Libya, where we were an invading army in Iraq. The main difference between the two is that we are not leading the charge in Libya, it's a NATO operation, and hopefully our involvement will be limited. Like I said, I can not support either action, however there is a difference between the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
That's funny, I don't agree with either action, however there are some differences between Iraq and Libya. At the time of invasion of Iraq, Sadaam was not massacring his people on a large scale like Gadaffi was doing. Sadaam had done it in the past to the Kurds, yet that was in the late 80s. Also, we are mainly providing air and naval power in Libya, where we were an invading army in Iraq. The main difference between the two is that we are not leading the charge, It's a NATO operation, and hopefully our involvement will be limited. Like I said, I can not support either action, however there is a difference between the two.
Although it is a NATO action we are the largest supporter in military and financing of the whole shabang. That is why I am against giving control of our forces to any other country. If another country was to be the largest contributor in troops, aircraft, artillary, and financing and we just had a small supporting role like the other countries do now, than I would have no problem with another country running the mission. But untill another country steps up and is the major contributor then we should run the show.:)sphss
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Although it is a NATO action we are the largest supporter in military and financing of the whole shabang. That is why I am against giving control of our forces to any other country. If another country was to be the largest contributor in troops, aircraft, artillary, and financing and we just had a small supporting role like the other countries do now, than I would have no problem with another country running the mission. But untill another country steps up and is the major contributor then we should run the show.:)sphss
From what I have read we were the largest contributor in the beginning because our capability to take out air defense systems is second to none. I kind of doubt we will be the major contributor for the duration. I am not familiar with all the back room deals between ourselves and France, Great Britain, Italy, and the rest of the contributors, but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason we got invovled is as a payback for these other countries who backed our play in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,020 Posts
That's funny, I don't agree with either action, however there are some differences between Iraq and Libya. At the time of invasion of Iraq, Sadaam was not massacring his people on a large scale like Gadaffi was doing. Sadaam had done it in the past to the Kurds, yet that was in the late 80s. Also, we are mainly providing air and naval power in Libya, where we were an invading army in Iraq. The main difference between the two is that we are not leading the charge in Libya, it's a NATO operation, and hopefully our involvement will be limited. Like I said, I can not support either action, however there is a difference between the two.
Wrong again Goofy ,refer to the videos.
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
There's another difference that our resident troll and libs will neglect to mention:
The Iraq resolution was approved by congress (not Bush alone) prior to the first strike as per the constitution while the Kenyan's actions were clearly unconstitutional. Isn't it unusual that the mainstream media (and our liberal crowd here) has neglected to focus upon this simple truth? Seems that information wasn't available on moveon.org. hil:) hil:)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Seems our resident king tea bagger is not very well informed about what powers the Constitution grants the President. That of course falls completely in line with what to expect from tea baggers, as they have repeatedly shown an ignorant misunderstanding of our highest laws.hil:)
 

·
Living in a cage of fear
Joined
·
16,462 Posts
Seems our resident king tea bagger is not very well informed about what powers the Constitution grants the President. That of course falls completely in line with what to expect from tea baggers, as they have repeatedly shown an ignorant misunderstanding of our highest laws.hil:)
Define "our".....

You are an isolated troll, without a boat.
Why are you even here?
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
The Kenyan disregarded his own words in 2007 and ordered air strikes on Libya on March 19, 2011 without obtaining approval from the U.S. Congress.

CNSNews has the details:

As a presidential candidate, The Kenyan (D.-Ill.) emphatically stated that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack unless it is needed to stop an actual or imminent attack on the United States.

The Kenyan made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress.

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” The Kenyan responded.

[The Kenyan added:] “History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.”

The Kenyan did not seek congressional authorization before joining allies, including Great Britain and France, in taking military action against the regime of Libyan dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi in order to establish a no-fly zone over that country. The action was approved by the United Nations Security Council but not by the U.S. Congress.

The troll will now step up and explain the Kenyan ignoring his own remarks with some lame attempt to stand sheepishly by his Kenyan.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
It seems the resident king tea bagger has retreated from his assertion that President Obama was in violation of the Constitution when he ordered strikes on Libya and has attempted to change the subject.hil:)
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
When your king/hero/messiah lies to himself, it's depressing, huh? hil:)

Get used to it. He's lied to his voters. He's lied to his administration. He's lied to his country. He's lied to congress. He's lied to everyone so why not lie to himself as well. I just provided another example of it. Need more? Google "Obama Lies" and immediately you will find 32,300,000 references. Here's a great one to refer to when you take a break from biting your "Kenyan" pillow.
Obama LAUNDRY LIST OF LIES
 

·
Living in a cage of fear
Joined
·
16,462 Posts
When your king/hero/messiah lies to himself, it's depressing, huh? hil:)

Get used to it. He's lied to his voters. He's lied to his administration. He's lied to his country. He's lied to congress. He's lied to everyone so why not lie to himself as well. I just provided another example of it. Need more? Google "Obama Lies" and immediately you will find 32,300,000 references. Here's a great one to refer to when you take a break from biting your "Kenyan" pillow.

Obama LAUNDRY LIST OF LIES
Seems like it would be a lot simpler (and shorter) to list any truths he may have spoken??:)hand:)hand
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Seems like if the king tea bagger is unsuccessful with his first attempt to change the subject, he will try and try again. Let's refresh his memory:

There's another difference that our resident troll and libs will neglect to mention:
The Iraq resolution was approved by congress (not Bush alone) prior to the first strike as per the constitution while the Kenyan's actions were clearly unconstitutional. Isn't it unusual that the mainstream media (and our liberal crowd here) has neglected to focus upon this simple truth? Seems that information wasn't available on moveon.org. hil:) hil:)
Please explain the powers given the President to command our armed forces by the Constitution. Then you can explain how President Obama's actions are unconstitutional.:)hand

PS please try to concentrate, it might make it easier for you to stay on subject.hil:)
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
The Kenyan disregarded his own words in 2007 and ordered air strikes on Libya on March 19, 2011 without obtaining approval from the U.S. Congress.

CNSNews has the details:

As a presidential candidate, The Kenyan (D.-Ill.) emphatically stated that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack unless it is needed to stop an actual or imminent attack on the United States.

The Kenyan made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress.

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” The Kenyan responded.

[The Kenyan added:] “History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.”

The Kenyan did not seek congressional authorization before joining allies, including Great Britain and France, in taking military action against the regime of Libyan dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi in order to establish a no-fly zone over that country. The action was approved by the United Nations Security Council but not by the U.S. Congress.

The troll will now step up and explain the Kenyan ignoring his own remarks with some lame attempt to stand sheepishly by his Kenyan.
I have been enjoying all my grandkids for most of the afternoon thus the time delay. How's about you?
Now, why should I answer your question when your Kenyan already did? Don't you believe him? Did he lie again? Of course, Article One, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution grants congress the exclusive powers to declare war against another country but you could quote that from memory.
Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 only states the following:
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment".

Without congress, he must do as he stated in the above quoted text which he forgot with Libya. In short: HE LIED AGAIN!

Sorry trollsheep but I'd rather play with my grandkids than answer you foolish attempts to justify this Kenyan's actions. Few in America can justify them so you are nearly alone these days as you eat, sleep and breathe on his every lie without question. He's in a sinking ship and I fear you are going down with him. I wish it wasn't so but it seems to be the case as you will question every word from others but not one from your Kenyan. I believe you are following the wrong shepherd, myself given the obvious circumstances.

Have a great day!:)hand:)hand:)hand
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
That's crystal clear Icy but there's a morbid curiosity into what's really wrong with the nameless/faceless troll that makes me return from time to time. I'll try and cut back.
 

·
Boatless Member :(
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
That's crystal clear Icy but there's a morbid curiosity into what's really wrong with the nameless/faceless troll that makes me return from time to time. I'll try and cut back.
Either way, nice find.

Basically what I've been saying to people about Libya. It's amazing how many respectable people have just abandoned watching news and politics because of how pissed off it makes them. When I try to explain what's going on, they just don't believe it at first...
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top