Obama Admin being sued....

Godfather.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/ ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Godfather.

Parachute

It's a start.

he still stands

really disappointed with Obama on this issue (its not the only one)

Eliot Rosewater

he still stands wrote:

really disappointed with Obama on this issue (its not the only one)

+1

I hope this doesn't just go away. Unless he and his administration is held accountable this shit will never end.

Godfather.

IMPEACH !!!!!!


Godfather.

butterjam

Where is the anti-war left on the constitutionality of this "war"? Props to Kucinich for going after Obama on this one. It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

Jason P

311jj wrote:

It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110615/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_libya_11

Cosmo

311jj wrote:

Where is the anti-war left on the constitutionality of this "war"? Props to Kucinich for going after Obama on this one. It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

...
We're still here. And we still think, as you do... that War is not the answer and that we need to quit meddling in Middle Eastern Affairs.

Cosmo

Godfather. wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/war.powers.libya/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Godfather.

...
So... you didn't have a problem with Gaddamffy machine gunning the protestors from helicopters and us... doing nothing, right?
Because as I recall... the very same lawmakers were saying that WE need to do somthing to stop him.
So... what's the deal? Let the machine gunning continue or do something to stop it? Can't do both, you know.

gimmesometruth27

Cosmo wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/war.powers.libya/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Godfather.

...
So... you didn't have a problem with Gaddamffy machine gunning the protestors from helicopters and us... doing nothing, right?
Because as I recall... the very same lawmakers were saying that WE need to do somthing to stop him.
So... what's the deal? Let the machine gunning continue or do something to stop it? Can't do both, you know.

yep, 4 years ago these same people were saying we have to do something and that we are cowards and we are not the leaders of the free world if we do nothing....funny how shit changes when it is not their guy in the white house....

:roll:

gimmesometruth27

Cosmo wrote:

311jj wrote:

Where is the anti-war left on the constitutionality of this "war"? Props to Kucinich for going after Obama on this one. It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

...
We're still here. And we still think, as you do... that War is not the answer and that we need to quit meddling in Middle Eastern Affairs.

exactly.

they want to have a revolution they should fucking REBEL and win it themselves. if they are not strong enough to do it themselves then guess what, it is not the time to be starting a revolution if you can't legitimately win it. don't start shit and beg for the rest of the world to have your back.

Smellyman

In older news, Kucinich sues for biting an olive pit...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/26/kucinich-vs-the-olive/

Eliot Rosewater

Cosmo wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/war.powers.libya/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Godfather.

...
So... you didn't have a problem with Gaddamffy machine gunning the protestors from helicopters and us... doing nothing, right?
Because as I recall... the very same lawmakers were saying that WE need to do somthing to stop him.
So... what's the deal? Let the machine gunning continue or do something to stop it? Can't do both, you know.

Let the machine gunning continue. We have no right to take sides in a civil war. I believe killing is wrong. Him killing his opposition is wrong. Us killing his people is wrong. I believe the attempts to assassinate him are illegal.

I'm not sticking up for Ghadaffi but I know many of the reports are not accurate. No matter how awful he is and how many awful things he's done the some of the reports are just absurd and blatantly wrong trying to vilify him further to support more warring and more killing.

The United States needs to be much more passive in foreign affairs. I'm tired of paying taxes to such an aggressive killing machine.

Cosmo

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

...
So... you didn't have a problem with Gaddamffy machine gunning the protestors from helicopters and us... doing nothing, right?
Because as I recall... the very same lawmakers were saying that WE need to do somthing to stop him.
So... what's the deal? Let the machine gunning continue or do something to stop it? Can't do both, you know.

Let the machine gunning continue. We have no right to take sides in a civil war. I believe killing is wrong. Him killing his opposition is wrong. Us killing his people is wrong. I believe the attempts to assassinate him are illegal.

I'm not sticking up for Ghadaffi but I know many of the reports are not accurate. No matter how awful he is and how many awful things he's done the some of the reports are just absurd and blatantly wrong trying to vilify him further to support more warring and more killing.

The United States needs to be much more passive in foreign affairs. I'm tired of paying taxes to such an aggressive killing machine.

...
That is the SAME position I am taking. If Civil War in in Libya's future, who the hell do we think we are? Why do WE have a say in THEIR outcome.
I remember those asshole Republican Representative douches and FOX News calling for 'intervention' from the 'Spectator in Chief' and thinking... 'What Fucking Assholes'. Don't they remember what happened in Iraq... not the fucking long ago? Where I also believed... if Civil War was in Iraq's future... and THEY wanted to oust Saddam Hussein... that's their gig.
If our NATO Allies want to do something and ask for our help... fine. We'll kick in the air cover, but that's it.
America sucks at nation building. We have the track record to prove it.

LikeAnOcean

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

311jj wrote:

Where is the anti-war left on the constitutionality of this "war"? Props to Kucinich for going after Obama on this one. It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

...
We're still here. And we still think, as you do... that War is not the answer and that we need to quit meddling in Middle Eastern Affairs.

exactly.

they want to have a revolution they should fucking REBEL and win it themselves. if they are not strong enough to do it themselves then guess what, it is not the time to be starting a revolution if you can't legitimately win it. don't start shit and beg for the rest of the world to have your back.

Didn't the U.S. need help to overcome Britain?

I am as anti-war as anyone, but I hate when we ignore people for the simple fact that they are not us. Where do we draw the lines? I'd like to think we are all humans in this and wether it's your next door neighbor, or your neighbor 10,000 miles away, there's someone who will take a stand..


I don't know, just my thought. I really don't like spending my tax dollars on this stuff as much as anyone. And I hate that we pick and choose our battles too.


I don't think there is a right answer for this. I see reasons on both sides of the issue. I guess that's life though.


It would be nice if we all co-existed without government or authority, but people like to take advantage of others sadly. It's in our nature.

Cosmo

Gob wrote:

Didn't the U.S. need help to overcome Britain?

I am as anti-war as anyone, but I hate when we ignore people for the simple fact that they are not us. Where do we draw the lines? I'd like to think we are all humans in this and wether it's your next door neighbor, or your neighbor 10,000 miles away, there's someone who will take a stand..

I don't know, just my thought. I really don't like spending my tax dollars on this stuff as much as anyone. And I hate that we pick and choose our battles too.

I don't think there is a right answer for this. I see reasons on both sides of the issue. I guess that's life though.

It would be nice if we all co-existed without government or authority, but people like to take advantage of others sadly. It's in our nature.

...
Yes... it was France. And look how grateful us free Americans are of France.
And, as you say... it all depends.
What if a revolution in England began and sought the complete dissolution of its useless monarchy and overthrow their government. The Queen's defense of Buckingham calls for guards and air support to open fire on people as the gates are breached.
Who's side would we be on? The side of the England's Established leadership... or the civilians looking to take rule of their country?
We already have an established alliance with England... but, to the extent that we let them slaughter their own people?
Should we even choose a side?

markin ball

I am ignorant on this so please help me out if you can. I was put under the impression that Obama was in the clear because these actions were under NATO jurisdiction and different rules applied.

whygohome

Grenada? Nicaragua?

Parachute

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

311jj wrote:

Where is the anti-war left on the constitutionality of this "war"? Props to Kucinich for going after Obama on this one. It also seems that there is nothing Obama can do foreign policy wise to please the war mongering right wing. There can never be enough bomb dropping for them.

...
We're still here. And we still think, as you do... that War is not the answer and that we need to quit meddling in Middle Eastern Affairs.

exactly.

they want to have a revolution they should fucking REBEL and win it themselves. if they are not strong enough to do it themselves then guess what, it is not the time to be starting a revolution if you can't legitimately win it. don't start shit and beg for the rest of the world to have your back.

you elected a guy who is sending American Forces into a Muslim, Middle-Eastern nation for the purpose of regime change.

Thanks alot. You are not only as bad as anyone who elected Bush..... you are worse.

Own it.

Cosmo

Parachute wrote:

you elected a guy who is sending American Forces into a Muslim, Middle-Eastern nation for the purpose of regime change.

Thanks alot. You are not only as bad as anyone who elected Bush..... you are worse.

Own it.

...
There's still some other thing that need to happen, in order to catch up to you.
The U.S. goal of ousting Gaddamnffy still needs to:
A. Attack Zimbabwe, instead of focusing on Libya.
B. Completely bomb the shit out of Zimbabwe
C. Occupy Zimbabwe with a military run governing body
D. Turn over the government to some nimrod that hates us, but love the money we are giving him
E. Never leave Zimbabwe.
...
After that happens... i'll own it.

gimmesometruth27

Parachute wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

exactly.

they want to have a revolution they should fucking REBEL and win it themselves. if they are not strong enough to do it themselves then guess what, it is not the time to be starting a revolution if you can't legitimately win it. don't start shit and beg for the rest of the world to have your back.

you elected a guy who is sending American Forces into a Muslim, Middle-Eastern nation for the purpose of regime change.

Thanks alot. You are not only as bad as anyone who elected Bush..... you are worse.

Own it.

you might want to check your facts before you attack me...

what regime change are we trying to make???? libya is in a civil war. they tried to overthrow their leader and they are failing miserably on their own. we sent planes, not troops on the ground and i am fucking pissed about getting involved there...

so let me see here.....

obama did not send troops into libya. obama did not start the wars with iraq and afghanistan and nearly pick a fight with iran.... so yeah believe whatever you want but those are the facts...

i voted for obama for several reasons. mainly to change our foreign policy towards the israeli palestinian conflict, which has not happened...and i voted for him to end the wars. we are withdrawing from iraq right now and are drawing up plans to get out of afghanistan now. and obama got bin laden, who was the instigator of the afghanistan war and inspiration for the "war on turrr" , and bin laden by the way had nothing to do with our detour into iraq. that was all bush's choosing...but nonetheless, getting bin laden has made us begin to discuss accellerating our exodus from afghanistan so is that a bad thing?? what more do you want???

i did not vote for obama to be attacking pakistan and libya and i am not excusing him for doing so. if you would look at my posts you would see that i am very critical of obama and his foreign policy especially with his use of drones in those countries. you have not been around long enough to know that, and i am sure you have not searched my posts, so i forgive you for your ignorant assumptions..

obama has done some good things and he has done a lot of things to piss me off severely, but for you to say i am worse than those who voted for bush is absolutely laughable...