The GOP will never give Obama credit ..

josevolution

For his pursuit and killing of the top three terrorist in the world in the past yr ...

Let's see the war in IRAQ which is not over yet and started by GW has cost 1trillion cost 5k American casualties 50k IRAQI civilian lives , yet the GOP refuses to give this President credit , what does he have to do cure cancer :roll: now to his credit ROMNEY did say yes let's give the president credit for this ...But really they sound so pathetic specially the young tea prick Rubio who will be scrutinized for embellishing his parents immigrant story Rubio get it straight your parents left CUBA 1956 CASTRO took over the country new yr's eve 1959 asshole ....

Newch91

They never will. At least Romney, like you said, did give him some credit. John Macain gave Obama credit.

In the US's involvement in Libya over seven months, the total cost was $2 billion, unlike Iraq, which is nearing $1 trillion.

We talked about this in class yesterday:
Reagan went after Ghadafi and couldn't get him. GWB went after bin Laden and couldn't get him. Obama got bin Laden and helped the Libyan people with NATO to get Ghadafi.

josevolution

Newch91 wrote:

They never will. At least Romney, like you said, did give him some credit. John Macain gave Obama credit.

In the US's involvement in Libya over seven months, the total cost was $2 billion, unlike Iraq, which is nearing $1 trillion.

We talked about this in class yesterday:
Reagan went after Ghadafi and couldn't get him. GWB went after bin Laden and couldn't get him. Obama got bin Laden and helped the Libyan people with NATO to get Ghadafi.

Yes you are correct 1 trillion and it took McCAIN three interviews to finally give OBAMA some credit ..

EdsonNascimento

Who cares who gives who credit? Is it really relevant if Romney praises Obama? Who cares?

This is the funny thing - Obama was supposed to be an idiot in Foreign relations and great at community organizing, and it's been 100% the opposite.

He will face the same fate as the last 1 term President for the same exact reason....


It's the economy, stupid!

Jason P

I'll give credit where credit is due. Obama's use of the predator drone program and tactical strike teams has been outstanding. He is concentrating attacks on the head of the serpent. And he has made no bones about going wherever necessary to take care of business.

The next big step he has to contemplate is sending troops into Waziristan ... something that may become a reality based on the latest rhetoric out of the Obama administration.

I know his strategy may be mind-boggling to any pacifist that voted for him, but the only way for the U.S. to get out of Afghanistan and to pull troops out is to destroy senior leadership and weaken these groups to the point that the Afghan government can take over the reigns.

gabers

Yeah, thanks to The Daily Show I saw how Fox News was giving the French and British credit for the operation to take out Qaddaffi (sp?). I got a good laugh out of that. The same xenophobic bunch who probably thought changing the name of French Fries to Freedom Fries was a great idea... In reality, Obama could find a cure for cancer and they'd find a way to criticize. Let's face it, they're gearing up for election season and they don't want to give him an advantage or credit for anything.

pandora

the dead can't speak either ...
wish they would have been taken alive

cincybearcat

Newch91 wrote:

Reagan went after Ghadafi and couldn't get him.

Oh please.

cincybearcat

Jason P wrote:

I'll give credit where credit is due. Obama's use of the predator drone program and tactical strike teams has been outstanding. He is concentrating attacks on the head of the serpent. And he has made no bones about going wherever necessary to take care of business.

Absolutely.

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

Newch91 wrote:

Reagan went after Ghadafi and couldn't get him.

Oh please.

i think reagan WOULDN't get him because he knew we would end up in a nationbuilding situation...this is back when cheney said that nationbuilding in the middle east was a bad thing....anyone remember that????

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Newch91 wrote:

Reagan went after Ghadafi and couldn't get him.

Oh please.

i think reagan WOULDN't get him because he knew we would end up in a nationbuilding situation...this is back when cheney said that nationbuilding in the middle east was a bad thing....anyone remember that????

They were right back then.

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

They were right back then.

so it is ok 30 years later? at this great expense of blood and treasure?

fucking flip floppers...

josevolution

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Who cares who gives who credit? Is it really relevant if Romney praises Obama? Who cares?

This is the funny thing - Obama was supposed to be an idiot in Foreign relations and great at community organizing, and it's been 100% the opposite.

He will face the same fate as the last 1 term President for the same exact reason....


It's the economy, stupid!

No stupid i'm just pointing out that no matter what this president does the GOP will never give him credit stupid !!!

EdsonNascimento

josevolution wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Who cares who gives who credit? Is it really relevant if Romney praises Obama? Who cares?

This is the funny thing - Obama was supposed to be an idiot in Foreign relations and great at community organizing, and it's been 100% the opposite.

He will face the same fate as the last 1 term President for the same exact reason....


It's the economy, stupid!

No stupid i'm just pointing out that no matter what this president does the GOP will never give him credit stupid !!!

Ha, ha, ha. You thought I was calling you stupid, so you did it back to me! Very clever. Except my quote is from the Bush I non re-election, and clearly not directed at you. But, even if it was, very nice. What are we in 3rd grade?

And, who cares what the GOP does? Who cares what the Donkeys do? It's a good thing for the country, it's a good thing for the country. Who give a rats ass who's giving credit to who? Isn't that part of the problem? We care so much as to who's getting credit instead of just doing.

Cliffy6745

Just compare Iraq and Libya, 2 horrible dictators are gone in very different ways. One cost the US citizens trillions, the other a billion, one took years, the other took 6 months, one cost thousands of american lives, ther other cost zero, one destroyed our reputation in a region, and the other boosted it.

If Republicans don't want to take a lesson from Obama and his foreign policy when it comes to terrorists, they can go fuck themselves and have no business being in power.

EdsonNascimento

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

They were right back then.

so it is ok 30 years later? at this great expense of blood and treasure?

fucking flip floppers...

Maybe. And it has nothing to do with flipping or flopping. Circumstances change. Reagan was able to put him in his place, not to be heard from again for 30 years. But, the climate is different now, and perhaps the right move was permanent "removal."

Both create their own problems. As, we shall soon see. Who fills that vacuum will be very interesting.

Cliffy6745

EdsonNascimento wrote:

josevolution wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Who cares who gives who credit? Is it really relevant if Romney praises Obama? Who cares?

This is the funny thing - Obama was supposed to be an idiot in Foreign relations and great at community organizing, and it's been 100% the opposite.

He will face the same fate as the last 1 term President for the same exact reason....


It's the economy, stupid!

No stupid i'm just pointing out that no matter what this president does the GOP will never give him credit stupid !!!

Ha, ha, ha. You thought I was calling you stupid, so you did it back to me! Very clever. Except my quote is from the Bush I non re-election, and clearly not directed at you. But, even if it was, very nice. What are we in 3rd grade?

And, who cares what the GOP does? Who cares what the Donkeys do? It's a good thing for the country, it's a good thing for the country. Who give a rats ass who's giving credit to who? Isn't that part of the problem? We care so much as to who's getting credit instead of just doing.

I think it's less about the credit they give and more about the fact that they can't understand this strategy is incredibly successful. I cringe to think about how McCain would have handled this situation.

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

They were right back then.

so it is ok 30 years later? at this great expense of blood and treasure?

fucking flip floppers...

It's funny that when people hate something, like calling someone a flip flopper for changing their position on something, they start to do it too.

A change in position is not always a bad thing. It was in this case. National building is not only too expensive it is almost impossible to achieve.

EdsonNascimento

Cliffy6745 wrote:

I think it's less about the credit they give and more about the fact that they can't understand this strategy is incredibly successful. I cringe to think about how McCain would have handled this situation.

Ummm. Yeah. Because the previous administration never followed this strategy. Shouldn't we be closing Quantanamo by now?

At least be a little bit objective when you're telling other folks they aren't.

gimmesometruth27

EdsonNascimento wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

They were right back then.

so it is ok 30 years later? at this great expense of blood and treasure?

fucking flip floppers...

Maybe. And it has nothing to do with flipping or flopping. Circumstances change. Reagan was able to put him in his place, not to be heard from again for 30 years. But, the climate is different now, and perhaps the right move was permanent "removal."

Both create their own problems. As, we shall soon see. Who fills that vacuum will be very interesting.

pan am flight 103 in 1988 was direct retaliation for the US tripoli bombings in 1986...so reagan really put him in his place :roll:

you reaganites have to please remain consistent.

if this happened under obama all of you would be calling for obama's head, instead reagan is praised for allowing gadhafffi to remain in power and kill americans..good decision ronnie...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103

Cliffy6745

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

I think it's less about the credit they give and more about the fact that they can't understand this strategy is incredibly successful. I cringe to think about how McCain would have handled this situation.

Ummm. Yeah. Because the previous administration never followed this strategy. Shouldn't we be closing Quantanamo by now?

At least be a little bit objective when you're telling other folks they aren't.

When did the previous adminstration help take out a dictator without putting boots on the ground and losing American lives?

Quite honestly, I don't really have an opinion on Guantanamo. It is surely not a good situation but I am not going to pretend to know what to do with those people.