Saying Obama definitely won't means nothing. When push comes to shove, he will and has said he will again and again.
What the hell does this even mean? The last time I checked, your Zionists were bitching at Obama for having the nerve to say he'd talk to Iran. I guess it's all just B.S. and part of a plan for global domination by Israel. If the issue is nukes, not even Arabs want Iran to have atomic weapons.
Seriously doubt we're invading Iran, but what would I know? You, however, surely know.
"Almost all those politicians took money from Enron, and there they are holding hearings. That's like O.J. Simpson getting in the Rae Carruth jury pool." -- Charles Barkley
What the hell does this even mean? The last time I checked, your Zionists were bitching at Obama for having the nerve to say he'd talk to Iran. I guess it's all just B.S. and part of a plan for global domination by Israel. If the issue is nukes, not even Arabs want Iran to have atomic weapons.
What parts did you miss on the Obama saying he would do everything in his power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities/weapon? I guess all of it?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Seeing as from his cabinet picks he clearly is anything but a radical or left winger. Most if not ALL of his cabinet voted for the war in iraq.
Hillary clinton for one, I remember on some c span special, talking about how she wouldnt apologize for voting for the war. This was in 2007.
I am sure she still believes this.
So, what are the people who elected him going to do about it?
He was elected, because people were pissed off, about the economy, war and all the lies.
Evidently, this is lost on mr obama.
Remember the 2006 midterms? Democrats won big, all because people wanted the iraq war to end. And of course we know how the dems delivered on that promise right?
Obama presented himself, and the left wing believed he was some radical or a person who wouldnt play politics like they have been played for all of american history.
How can people say he is anything other than a politician by his cabinet picks?
I am going to be very pleased, as I voted for him because he was a centrist candidate. I'm sorry to break it to you far left liberals, but Obama never claimed to be one of you and the country doesn't agree with or want the policies of the far left. I'm glad that he's going to respect the majority by not forcing an extreme fringe partisan platform on the general population like Bush did. This election was not some mandate for a leftist agenda, it was a rejection of partisan bickering and the extreme, insular politics of the last administration.
I am going to be very pleased, as I voted for him because he was a centrist candidate. I'm sorry to break it to you far left liberals, but Obama never claimed to be one of you and the country doesn't agree with or want the policies of the far left. I'm glad that he's going to respect the majority by not forcing an extreme fringe partisan platform on the general population like Bush did. This election was not some mandate for a leftist agenda, it was a rejection of partisan bickering and the extreme, insular politics of the last administration.
exactly. well said. the rhetoric of the thread starter scares the crap out of me. an admitted far left radical. yikes!
whoa. who said Afghanistan will be a cake walk? you made up a nice round number of 500,000 american troops will be needed/deployed. thats laughable.
I can post links all day long of more accurate estimates from General from the US, Europe, Canada, Nato.
I think their crystal ball is a little cracked in that regard. The phrase "build it, and they will come" comes to mind. "Just a few more troops" seems to be the slogan of the day.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
What parts did you miss on the Obama saying he would do everything in his power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities/weapon? I guess all of it?
That's exactly what Iran wants. They're firing off rockets and testing new surface-to-air missiles. We already know Iran has nuclear materials. Russia is attempting to build a power plant there.
But, I guess this is one of the quotes you're referencing: “I think that a nuclear armed Iran is not just a threat to us, it’s a threat to Israel. And it is a game changer in the region. It’s unacceptable. And that’s why I’ve said that I won’t take any options off the table, including military, to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
P-E Obama said he wouldn't take any options off the table. That includes negotiation.
Are you comfortable with a nuclear Iran? Should their neighbors be OK with it? What about the world?
"Almost all those politicians took money from Enron, and there they are holding hearings. That's like O.J. Simpson getting in the Rae Carruth jury pool." -- Charles Barkley
I am going to be very pleased, as I voted for him because he was a centrist candidate. I'm sorry to break it to you far left liberals, but Obama never claimed to be one of you and the country doesn't agree with or want the policies of the far left. I'm glad that he's going to respect the majority by not forcing an extreme fringe partisan platform on the general population like Bush did. This election was not some mandate for a leftist agenda, it was a rejection of partisan bickering and the extreme, insular politics of the last administration.
What, I can't just pull a number out of my ass? Plus, that 500,000 seems like something that came out of one's ass.
Maybe look at the big picture perhaps? This war on terror is not a quick fix solution approach by any means. It was never designed to be in the first place.
If Bush was left in office he wouldn't approach additional middle eastern countries with military influence? Really? I think you're the only one to think this.
That's exactly what Iran wants. They're firing off rockets and testing new surface-to-air missiles. We already know Iran has nuclear materials. Russia is attempting to build a power plant there.
But, I guess this is one of the quotes you're referencing: “I think that a nuclear armed Iran is not just a threat to us, it’s a threat to Israel. And it is a game changer in the region. It’s unacceptable. And that’s why I’ve said that I won’t take any options off the table, including military, to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
P-E Obama said he wouldn't take any options off the table. That includes negotiation.
Are you comfortable with a nuclear Iran? Should their neighbors be OK with it? What about the world?
I'm far more comfortable than starting a war with them, and creating an even deeper long term more unresolvable wound, and besides they are going to get there anyways. This is a reality people have to begin to understand.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
its easy to just make up numbers to suit your beliefs.. I'm sure it makes you feel really good about yourself. I however will go with estimates from multiple people who are close to the situation.
Right, the ones who said the war would pay for itself
'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Are you comfortable with a nuclear Iran? Should their neighbors be OK with it? What about the world?
Yes, yes and yes.
Or no, no and no. Depends on how you look at it. I'm not really comfortable with France having nukes, or the US, you know the most aggressive country that starts wars whenever it feels like it?
If Bush was left in office he wouldn't approach additional middle eastern countries with military influence? Really? I think you're the only one to think this.
I'll repeat: If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. Who cares what POTUS Bush would have done? Does it matter if he can't do it?
I'm far more comfortable than starting a war with them, and creating an even deeper long term more unresolvable wound, and besides they are going to get there anyways. This is a reality people have to begin to understand.
We haven't started a war. Saber-rattling has long been a tool of diplomacy. P-E Obama was letting Iran and voters know that he wouldn't be a pussy. It helped take away one of McCain's perceived advantages. We're not at some point of military no-return right now. I hope it leads to the negotiation table, because if Iran gets a nuke, it's not the U.S. about whom they'll need to worry. We'll see what happens.
"Almost all those politicians took money from Enron, and there they are holding hearings. That's like O.J. Simpson getting in the Rae Carruth jury pool." -- Charles Barkley
I think if you followed Barack Obama throughout the 08 campaign, it was prettty evident that he was not a far left candidate.
If you took the time to go over his platform...it was painfully obvious that he was taking a centrist approach from the very start.
This whole idea of Obama being a Card Carrying Communist was a brick shot thrown up by the desperate shit-slinging rightwingers like Palin, Limbaugh, and Hannity.
ok, maybe its just better to pull numbers from my ass. yay this is fun!
The MIC are masters at it. Shame they have fooled you into believing their daydream view of the future conflicts that will arise in order for you to go along with the program.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
The MIC are masters at it. Shame they have fooled you into believing their daydream view of the future conflicts that will arise in order for you to go along with the program.
why are you turning this into something more then its not. you pulled some number out of your ass saying 500,000 troops will need to go to Afghanistan. thats simply not true.
if the Iraqi parliament ratifies the agreement. thousands of troops will come home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some will go to afgahistan, some will come home.
The MIC are masters at it. Shame they have fooled you into believing their daydream view of the future conflicts that will arise in order for you to go along with the program.
Who are the MIC and what the hell is a "daydream view of the future conflicts"? Huh?
"Almost all those politicians took money from Enron, and there they are holding hearings. That's like O.J. Simpson getting in the Rae Carruth jury pool." -- Charles Barkley
I'll repeat: If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. Who cares what POTUS Bush would have done? Does it matter if he can't do it?
The statement was the troops are coming home no matter what. They reality is they aren't coming home no matter what on the current "war against terror" trend, and really who cares if you aunt has a cock and balls or not? lol...
We haven't started a war. Saber-rattling has long been a tool of diplomacy. P-E Obama was letting Iran and voters know that he wouldn't be a pussy. It helped take away one of McCain's perceived advantages. We're not at some point of military no-return right now. I hope it leads to the negotiation table, because if Iran gets a nuke, it's not the U.S. about whom they'll need to worry. We'll see what happens.
The war in Iran has already started. It's beyond Saber rattling at present day. Obama is just rubbing in salt with his "I will do everything...everything" rhetoric. It's extremely counter productive, unless additional war is the goal. Also see his blatant AIPAC pandering for a glimpse into what is to come.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
The statement was the troops are coming home no matter what. They reality is they aren't coming home no matter what on the current "war against terror" trend, and really who cares if you aunt has a cock and balls or not? lol...
The war in Iran has already started. It's beyond Saber rattling at present day. Obama is just rubbing in salt with his "I will do everything...everything" rhetoric. It's extremely counter productive, unless additional war is the goal. Also see his blatant AIPAC pandering for a glimpse into what is to come.
troops are coming home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some, not all, will go to Afghanistan.
man you are really a war hawk huh?
I wish I was able to make up my own reality. you sure do seem to enjoy it.
why are you turning this into something more then its not. you pulled some number out of your ass saying 500,000 troops will need to go to Afghanistan. thats simply not true.
if the Iraqi parliament ratifies the agreement. thousands of troops will come home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some will go to afgahistan, some will come home.
I'm amazed you're still caught up in the specifics when were talking philosophies.
Ok, just a few more troops... pull out then what? It's solved? Hardly. Go back in with a few more troops...repeat...repeat...infinity. it never ends with the military imperialist route, it only widens.
Think ahead into the future a little more.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
troops are coming home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some, not all, will go to Afghanistan.
man you are really a war hawk huh?
I wish I was able to make up my own reality. you sure do seem to enjoy it.
super...how long they coming home for? speaking of reality.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
well according to you, until we invade and occupy Iran. yea speaking of, wow.
Iran will not be able to have nuclear capabilities....do the math.
can you think around that?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
ok you're right. you win. war is imminent. jesus I feel like I'm playing a video game.
You don't see the cause and effect? Maybe you are in a video game
Given the history. What do you think Iran is going to do? roll over and stop because the US says so?
Do you ever get the feeling they [Iran] are extremely fed up, and done listening to western imperialist demands at any point in your calculations?
What do you think is the end result by default given the criteria?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
You don't see the cause and effect? Maybe you are in a video game
Given the history. What do you think Iran is going to do? roll over and stop because the US says so?
Do you ever get the feeling they [Iran] are extremely fed up, and done listening to western imperialist demands at any point in your calculations?
What do you think is the end result by default given the criteria?
Iran will move forward with their program. and from I've read they are many years away from weapons grade stuff. maybe 5+ years from now. at most, bombs would be dropped from afar, probably with Israel's lead, on nuke sites.
a full invasion and occupation of Iran is not on the table.
maybe you should start a world of warcraft thread of something. you seem to enjoy fantasy land.
Iran will move forward with their program. and from I've read they are many years away from weapons grade stuff. maybe 5+ years from now. at most, bombs would be dropped from afar, probably with Israel's lead, on nuke sites.
a full invasion and occupation of Iran is not on the table.
maybe you should start a world of warcraft thread of something. you seem to enjoy fantasy land.
Yes, but it's not about five years from now is it? It's about Iran's nuclear program coming to a full stop altogether or else...and by the way "all options *are* on the table" (which is direct and repeating quote from Obama himself). When you look at the reality of what is going on, there is little room negotiation and interpretation of what this really means.
It's an non negotiable ultimatum leading headlong into military conflict as a means of resolution. Plain and simple.
Try thinking from Iran's perspective on the issue. It definitely helps to evaluate all sides of the equation
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
If my aunt had a cock she'd be my uncle.
What the hell does this even mean? The last time I checked, your Zionists were bitching at Obama for having the nerve to say he'd talk to Iran. I guess it's all just B.S. and part of a plan for global domination by Israel. If the issue is nukes, not even Arabs want Iran to have atomic weapons.
Seriously doubt we're invading Iran, but what would I know? You, however, surely know.
Yeah? Show me one then.
did you not read jeffbr's post about the third term statement I replied to in the first place?...nevermind.
What parts did you miss on the Obama saying he would do everything in his power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities/weapon? I guess all of it?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
whoa. who said Afghanistan will be a cake walk? you made up a nice round number of 500,000 american troops will be needed/deployed. thats laughable.
I can post links all day long of more accurate estimates from General from the US, Europe, Canada, Nato.
I am going to be very pleased, as I voted for him because he was a centrist candidate. I'm sorry to break it to you far left liberals, but Obama never claimed to be one of you and the country doesn't agree with or want the policies of the far left. I'm glad that he's going to respect the majority by not forcing an extreme fringe partisan platform on the general population like Bush did. This election was not some mandate for a leftist agenda, it was a rejection of partisan bickering and the extreme, insular politics of the last administration.
exactly. well said. the rhetoric of the thread starter scares the crap out of me. an admitted far left radical. yikes!
yeah ... but this is an act of the iraqi parliament ... not bush
I think their crystal ball is a little cracked in that regard. The phrase "build it, and they will come" comes to mind. "Just a few more troops" seems to be the slogan of the day.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
It was ridiculous when he said it, too.
That's exactly what Iran wants. They're firing off rockets and testing new surface-to-air missiles. We already know Iran has nuclear materials. Russia is attempting to build a power plant there.
But, I guess this is one of the quotes you're referencing: “I think that a nuclear armed Iran is not just a threat to us, it’s a threat to Israel. And it is a game changer in the region. It’s unacceptable. And that’s why I’ve said that I won’t take any options off the table, including military, to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
P-E Obama said he wouldn't take any options off the table. That includes negotiation.
Are you comfortable with a nuclear Iran? Should their neighbors be OK with it? What about the world?
there you go drifting!! ... proof!
Oooh, what did I prove? Do I win something?
Maybe look at the big picture perhaps? This war on terror is not a quick fix solution approach by any means. It was never designed to be in the first place.
If Bush was left in office he wouldn't approach additional middle eastern countries with military influence? Really? I think you're the only one to think this.
I'm far more comfortable than starting a war with them, and creating an even deeper long term more unresolvable wound, and besides they are going to get there anyways. This is a reality people have to begin to understand.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Right, the ones who said the war would pay for itself
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Yes, yes and yes.
Or no, no and no. Depends on how you look at it. I'm not really comfortable with France having nukes, or the US, you know the most aggressive country that starts wars whenever it feels like it?
naděje umírá poslední
We haven't started a war. Saber-rattling has long been a tool of diplomacy. P-E Obama was letting Iran and voters know that he wouldn't be a pussy. It helped take away one of McCain's perceived advantages. We're not at some point of military no-return right now. I hope it leads to the negotiation table, because if Iran gets a nuke, it's not the U.S. about whom they'll need to worry. We'll see what happens.
If you took the time to go over his platform...it was painfully obvious that he was taking a centrist approach from the very start.
This whole idea of Obama being a Card Carrying Communist was a brick shot thrown up by the desperate shit-slinging rightwingers like Palin, Limbaugh, and Hannity.
The MIC are masters at it. Shame they have fooled you into believing their daydream view of the future conflicts that will arise in order for you to go along with the program.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
why are you turning this into something more then its not. you pulled some number out of your ass saying 500,000 troops will need to go to Afghanistan. thats simply not true.
if the Iraqi parliament ratifies the agreement. thousands of troops will come home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some will go to afgahistan, some will come home.
The statement was the troops are coming home no matter what. They reality is they aren't coming home no matter what on the current "war against terror" trend, and really who cares if you aunt has a cock and balls or not? lol...
The war in Iran has already started. It's beyond Saber rattling at present day. Obama is just rubbing in salt with his "I will do everything...everything" rhetoric. It's extremely counter productive, unless additional war is the goal. Also see his blatant AIPAC pandering for a glimpse into what is to come.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
see post #2 and #3 in this thread ...
troops are coming home from Iraq by the end of 2011. some, not all, will go to Afghanistan.
man you are really a war hawk huh?
I wish I was able to make up my own reality. you sure do seem to enjoy it.
I'm amazed you're still caught up in the specifics when were talking philosophies.
Ok, just a few more troops... pull out then what? It's solved? Hardly. Go back in with a few more troops...repeat...repeat...infinity. it never ends with the military imperialist route, it only widens.
Think ahead into the future a little more.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
super...how long they coming home for? speaking of reality.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
well according to you, until we invade and occupy Iran. yea speaking of, wow.
Iran will not be able to have nuclear capabilities....do the math.
can you think around that?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
ok you're right. you win. war is imminent. jesus I feel like I'm playing a video game.
You don't see the cause and effect? Maybe you are in a video game
Given the history. What do you think Iran is going to do? roll over and stop because the US says so?
Do you ever get the feeling they [Iran] are extremely fed up, and done listening to western imperialist demands at any point in your calculations?
What do you think is the end result by default given the criteria?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Iran will move forward with their program. and from I've read they are many years away from weapons grade stuff. maybe 5+ years from now. at most, bombs would be dropped from afar, probably with Israel's lead, on nuke sites.
a full invasion and occupation of Iran is not on the table.
maybe you should start a world of warcraft thread of something. you seem to enjoy fantasy land.
Yes, but it's not about five years from now is it? It's about Iran's nuclear program coming to a full stop altogether or else...and by the way "all options *are* on the table" (which is direct and repeating quote from Obama himself). When you look at the reality of what is going on, there is little room negotiation and interpretation of what this really means.
It's an non negotiable ultimatum leading headlong into military conflict as a means of resolution. Plain and simple.
Try thinking from Iran's perspective on the issue. It definitely helps to evaluate all sides of the equation
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")