critizising Israel is one thing. constantly stating Israel is committing a genocide and downplaying the actions of Hamas as "fighting for freedom" is another.
welcome back, haven't seen you in a while. anyway:
what do you call downplaying Israel's actions has "retaliation"?
and answer me this as well, what is Hamas fighting for?
it doesn't lend your argument any credibility if you overblow and oversimplify it in such a way. Israels misdeeds have to be called out.
which Obama is not doing.
yet one should always keep in mind Israels unique situation. and this has nothing to do with being politically correct, but being correct about reality.
and what situation is that? are you referring to the occupation? that is a pretty unique situation, I guess, one that should be dealt with, not ignored by Obama.
All i've gotten from any one else is a crap response on point #1. The shortest of 8. So much for "this is a discussion board.
It's not how much one says, but what. Your first point, sorry to say, discredits you straight away. I'm not even aboard the Bash Obama Express, but that was such a piss-poor response that it takes away any credibility your post may otherwise have.
Still doesn't change the fact that the Economy, Health Care, Education, Iraq, Iran, Gas Prices, etc etc are all more important then Israel.
Most Americans could care less about the conflict like it or not.
So Americans do care, right?
Oh wait, of course you mean they could NOT care less. And that's pretty much true, because the truth about what goes on isn't being spoon fed to them by the media... I wonder why? Hmmmmmmmmm...
The whole Israel-Palestine conflict has such far-reaching consequences, it boggles the uninformed mind. It has everything to do with US foreign policy and economics.
completely unrelated. what happened to answering these questions:
do you agree with him giving ALL of Jerusalem to Israel? do you agree with him when he said the Palestinians suffer as a result of them and NOT from the Israeli occupation? do you agree with him when he thinks funding the Israeli "defense" budget is fine? do you agree with the no talks policy on hamas?
the question was "do you guys agree pushing tougher sanctions on Iran BEFORE we begin talks with them?"
you agree with his stance on diplomatic talks with Iran, right? well then, why is he pushing for sanctions BEFORE he begins talks with them? don't you think that'll only make the Iranians want to comply LESS?
Iran has no military options on their table, currently. however, they did say that if they were attacked, they would retaliate. Obama on the other hand is keeping pre-emptive strikes on the table, when there is no proof the program is for nuclear weapons.
actually, there is plenty of sufficient proof that Iran's program is not for weapons, and that includes several IAEA reports. as for it being for weapons "in the future"... what the fuck kind of question is that?
that's a very poor analogy, and of course it matters whether or not the PRESIDENT thinks Iran's program is ILLEGAL or not.
hahaha, you have the most ridiculous analogies. the "compromise" Obama supported is still terrible. FISA is still unconstitutional, and is an infringement upon our rights, and as long as you excuse Obama "compromising" on that, no real change will ever come about. why would you support Obama if you don't support FISA?
yet he still voted for a "compromise" of it. compromise means dick, the Patriot Act is a terrible law and Obama voted for it.
funny, I said blank checks for IRAQ. not for war. and I never said "it's in support of war." you really love to spin words, but it's a shame that you're terrible at it.
so you agree with giving Bush checks that go towards continuing the war? do you think that if Congress were to not approve all this money going to Bush, he would be forced to actually DO something?? I love how you guys always mention it as if if Bush didn't get all the money he wanted, the soldiers would automatically be dead. give me a break.
he voted in favor of her which led to her being appointed, and of course it's an issue because it shows past actions he took, which were not very good...
Yes, i support diplomatic talks with Iran. No, i don't think sanctions will make them less likely to comply.
Iran has no military options on the table? Really? You know this how? They've emoved military options from their table? Correct me if i'm wrong but "Retaliating if attacked" sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table. As does "wiping Israel off the face of the map". In fact, that sounds like a direct threat.
If you have "plenty of proof that Iran's nuclear program is not for weapons, and can prove it never will be, pony up with that proof. i'd like to see it.
My analogy is not poor simply because you refuse to see the point. Point is Iran is a threat or could easily become a threat to parts of the world,
removing any options "from the table" to prevent that is stupid and naive. It does not equal war mongering or sabre rattling. Its just preparedness.
My analogies are not ridiculous. A compromise is a step in the right direction. The FISA compromise might suck, but it sucks less than what we had before the same is true of the patriot act. Obama never supported Bush's patriot act. Thats spin. Its nonsense.
Obama didn't vote to ontinue the war. He saw the necessity of the kids there being funded. Period. Cutting off funds would not end the war. It wouldn't bring a single kid home outside of a ziplock bag.
Voting to confirm Condi Rice is about the dumbest Obama attack i've read in this forum. No further response is necessary.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
Correct me if i'm wrong but "Retaliating if attacked" sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table. As does "wiping Israel off the face of the map". In fact, that sounds like a direct threat.
.
I'm surprised that someone such as yourself who pride's himself on "facts" and NOT ridiculous, speculative, horribly spun, completely rhetorical and hypothetical nonsense; still uses that " Wipe Israel off the map " crap.
It was proven two years ago that the interpretation which made the claim of that quote, was in fact incorrect and inaccurate.
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.
HA! you're a real freakin' comedian. Don't quit your day job of surfing youtube for crap videos from conspiracy theorists.
Anytime you want to stop shooting yourself in both feet by showing that you're not quite familiar with the situation...go for it.
Color it whatever you want to pump the ol ego...it matters nothing to me.
dust in the wind..
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.
Obama's attempting to get elected and the American humans have been brainwashed into thinking every Arab is out to do them harm, or better yet is an evildoer. Thus he's attempting to distance himself as far as possible from having Muslim background...only way he has a chance. Imagine if he said he agreed in the palestinian plight, or that Iran has the same rights to protect itself as any other country on this planet...heck if the most powerful country that's just recently acheived regime change tells you your evil and your the problem, I'd arm myself to the teeth as well.
I'm guessing if Obama gets past all the prejudiced week Americans and gets elected he'll make a better attempt at peace in the Middle East than Dubya and his goons that profit from the conflict. War = $$$$$$
Obama's attempting to get elected and the American humans have been brainwashed into thinking every Arab is out to do them harm, or better yet is an evildoer. Thus he's attempting to distance himself as far as possible from having Muslim background...only way he has a chance. Imagine if he said he agreed in the palestinian plight, or that Iran has the same rights to protect itself as any other country on this planet...heck if the most powerful country that's just recently acheived regime change tells you your evil and your the problem, I'd arm myself to the teeth as well.
I'm guessing if Obama gets past all the prejudiced week Americans and gets elected he'll make a better attempt at peace in the Middle East than Dubya and his goons that profit from the conflict. War = $$$$$$
while the rest of the world looks on in astonishment (and horror) at the US voting public
hehe
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 last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".
hehe
More about the decision making in general....but on the Obama thing....we'll see
I'll make sure to bump all the right threads for you
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.
I just love the ....."Everything is anti-semitism when you disagree with, call for accountability/responsibility of .......or criticize anything Israel/Jewish related " .......crowd.
Infinitely entertaining.
you cant be antisemitic and support the palestinians anyway. they too are semitic. people are lazy when it comes to shit like this.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's all a big conspiracy unless I support Obama...
Oh man...
Q: But what does this "anti-semite" know about US history?
A: Nothing unless I support Obama...
hahahaaa
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 last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".
hehe
The rest of the world is openly rooting for Obama for President. It's one of many factors that is influencing my vote.
I feel Obama can rebuild the bridges burned by the Bush Administration.
I want to be able to travel to Europe without being spit on!!!
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Yes, i support diplomatic talks with Iran. No, i don't think sanctions will make them less likely to comply.
Iran has no military options on the table? Really? You know this how? They've emoved military options from their table? Correct me if i'm wrong but "Retaliating if attacked" sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table. As does "wiping Israel off the face of the map". In fact, that sounds like a direct threat.
Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us. Last I checked Iran was it's own fucking country. It would be nice if our "military option" was one of retaliating if attacked like it used to be instead of the bullshit "attacking you if we don't like the look on your face or because you have something we want".
Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us.
.
Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation.
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation.
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.
The only one spinning anything here is you.
Not one person here called Obama a warmonger. In fact, the only one who did is you (sarcastically, of course). Obama's current stance on Iran is pretty much the same as Bush's, unfortunately. Pushing sanctions, with some talks, and keeping military option on the table... he even naively called their nuclear program "illegal."
Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?
Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?
It's more like taking someone's keys if they don't agree with your opinions.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us. Last I checked Iran was it's own fucking country. It would be nice if our "military option" was one of retaliating if attacked like it used to be instead of the bullshit "attacking you if we don't like the look on your face or because you have something we want".
One is defensive, the other is offensive.
exactly. saying you'll retaliate is NOT having military option on the table.
also, if someone thinks that pushing sanctions on Iran won't make talks any more strenuous than it already would be, then that's just naivety speaking. how can you go to Ahmadinejad and ask for friendly talks, but also be pushing for sanctions on their country? it makes no sense.
oh, and Iran never threatened Israel. The wiping off the map comment is bullshit.
exactly. saying you'll retaliate is NOT having military option on the table.
also, if someone thinks that pushing sanctions on Iran won't make talks any more strenuous than it already would be, then that's just naivety speaking. how can you go to Ahmadinejad and ask for friendly talks, but also be pushing for sanctions on their country? it makes no sense.
oh, and Iran never threatened Israel. The wiping off the map comment is bullshit.
The reality of the situation is that war has been "on the table" with Iran since the Hostage crisis.
It doesn't mean we will ever act on it.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?
My analogy is just fine. Its your understanding of it thats all screwed up. You keep screaming about Iran's nuclear program being legal. SO is getting fitshaced drunk. You follow me so far? Do try and keep up Mr. SAT. Mmmkay?
Now if you decide after getting stumble drunk to drive a car, its no longer o.k. and i'm excercising the option i left on the table to take your keys, forcefully if necessary. Get it? If Iran decided to turn their, apparently legal nuclear program, illegal and threaten us or the region, we better have kept the option to take their damn keys.
That isn't an advocation of war with Iran. It isn't even a threat. Its preparedness, plain and simple.
Go on with your SAT scores. i'm guessing you just took them last year. Good luck with that.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself there.
Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation. .
I got it from your post which I quoted where you said "Retaliating if attacked sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table". I was just attempting to point out that it really isn't, it's just a statement saying you will defend yourself if some asshole aggresses against you. I wasn't even referring to Obama's stance when I wrote that, it was a generalized example of how absurd the thinking is in this nation where people have to threaten others to get their way.
The reality of the situation is that war has been "on the table" with Iran since the Hostage crisis.
It doesn't mean we will ever act on it.
It's just a matter of time. Kinda like carving up a big fat turkey sooner or later the entire bird is on the plate (which is on the table...haha)
Obama is flat out a jackass for parroting the Bush empirical ideology towards Iran, and whether or not you think military options are on the table...WHAT MATTERS is that Iran most certainly believes it. That's what really matters.
Way to make friends Obama...ya jackass
whore yourself for those votes....whore yourself out...oooo...yeah
go bobo go!
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.
My analogy is just fine. Its your understanding of it thats all screwed up. You keep screaming about Iran's nuclear program being legal. SO is getting fitshaced drunk. You follow me so far? Do try and keep up Mr. SAT. Mmmkay?
Now if you decide after getting stumble drunk to drive a car, its no longer o.k. and i'm excercising the option i left on the table to take your keys, forcefully if necessary. Get it? If Iran decided to turn their, apparently legal nuclear program, illegal and threaten us or the region, we better have kept the option to take their damn keys.
That isn't an advocation of war with Iran. It isn't even a threat. Its preparedness, plain and simple.
You're not taking their keys, you're bombing them. You're throwing their car, with them in it, off a cliff. If you think that's the simple answer, then fine. obviously your analogy is off from the beginning though. Iran's nuclear program thus far is legal (which you just admitted, too bad your boy Barack doesn't think so). That's all there is to it. To say "we'll only take their keys if it BECOMES illegal" is stupid because the U.S. already THINKS it's illegal, meaning they're already trying to do something about it, with no proof.
it's more like you stopping a guy driving fine, who isn't drunk, claiming he is, and then throwing his car off the cliff.
Comments
what do you call downplaying Israel's actions has "retaliation"?
and answer me this as well, what is Hamas fighting for? which Obama is not doing. and what situation is that? are you referring to the occupation? that is a pretty unique situation, I guess, one that should be dealt with, not ignored by Obama.
It's not how much one says, but what. Your first point, sorry to say, discredits you straight away. I'm not even aboard the Bash Obama Express, but that was such a piss-poor response that it takes away any credibility your post may otherwise have.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmgphotos/4731512142/" title="PJ Banner2 by Mister J Photography, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1135/4731512142_258f2d6ab4_b.jpg" width="630" height="112" alt="PJ Banner2" /></a>
Talk about ridiculous, speculative, horribly spun, completely rhetorical and hypothetical.
So Americans do care, right?
Oh wait, of course you mean they could NOT care less. And that's pretty much true, because the truth about what goes on isn't being spoon fed to them by the media... I wonder why? Hmmmmmmmmm...
The whole Israel-Palestine conflict has such far-reaching consequences, it boggles the uninformed mind. It has everything to do with US foreign policy and economics.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmgphotos/4731512142/" title="PJ Banner2 by Mister J Photography, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1135/4731512142_258f2d6ab4_b.jpg" width="630" height="112" alt="PJ Banner2" /></a>
Iran has no military options on the table? Really? You know this how? They've emoved military options from their table? Correct me if i'm wrong but "Retaliating if attacked" sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table. As does "wiping Israel off the face of the map". In fact, that sounds like a direct threat.
If you have "plenty of proof that Iran's nuclear program is not for weapons, and can prove it never will be, pony up with that proof. i'd like to see it.
My analogy is not poor simply because you refuse to see the point. Point is Iran is a threat or could easily become a threat to parts of the world,
removing any options "from the table" to prevent that is stupid and naive. It does not equal war mongering or sabre rattling. Its just preparedness.
My analogies are not ridiculous. A compromise is a step in the right direction. The FISA compromise might suck, but it sucks less than what we had before the same is true of the patriot act. Obama never supported Bush's patriot act. Thats spin. Its nonsense.
Obama didn't vote to ontinue the war. He saw the necessity of the kids there being funded. Period. Cutting off funds would not end the war. It wouldn't bring a single kid home outside of a ziplock bag.
Voting to confirm Condi Rice is about the dumbest Obama attack i've read in this forum. No further response is necessary.
I'm surprised that someone such as yourself who pride's himself on "facts" and NOT ridiculous, speculative, horribly spun, completely rhetorical and hypothetical nonsense; still uses that " Wipe Israel off the map " crap.
It was proven two years ago that the interpretation which made the claim of that quote, was in fact incorrect and inaccurate.
But far be it for me to point that out.
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)
(")_(")
HA! you're a real freakin' comedian. Don't quit your day job of surfing youtube for crap videos from conspiracy theorists.
Anytime you want to stop shooting yourself in both feet by showing that you're not quite familiar with the situation...go for it.
Color it whatever you want to pump the ol ego...it matters nothing to me.
dust in the wind..
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)
(")_(")
I'm guessing if Obama gets past all the prejudiced week Americans and gets elected he'll make a better attempt at peace in the Middle East than Dubya and his goons that profit from the conflict. War = $$$$$$
while the rest of the world looks on in astonishment (and horror) at the US voting public
hehe
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)
(")_(")
The last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".
hehe
More about the decision making in general....but on the Obama thing....we'll see
I'll make sure to bump all the right threads for you
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)
(")_(")
you cant be antisemitic and support the palestinians anyway. they too are semitic. people are lazy when it comes to shit like this.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Sssshhhhhhhhh.....
No reality permitted:D
Oh man...
Q: But what does this "anti-semite" know about US history?
A: Nothing unless I support Obama...
hahahaaa
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)
(")_(")
The rest of the world is openly rooting for Obama for President. It's one of many factors that is influencing my vote.
I feel Obama can rebuild the bridges burned by the Bush Administration.
I want to be able to travel to Europe without being spit on!!!
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us. Last I checked Iran was it's own fucking country. It would be nice if our "military option" was one of retaliating if attacked like it used to be instead of the bullshit "attacking you if we don't like the look on your face or because you have something we want".
One is defensive, the other is offensive.
Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation.
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.
Do you have a link to a credible news source to support those thoughts?
Bwahahahaha:D:D:D
Not one person here called Obama a warmonger. In fact, the only one who did is you (sarcastically, of course). Obama's current stance on Iran is pretty much the same as Bush's, unfortunately. Pushing sanctions, with some talks, and keeping military option on the table... he even naively called their nuclear program "illegal."
Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?
also, if someone thinks that pushing sanctions on Iran won't make talks any more strenuous than it already would be, then that's just naivety speaking. how can you go to Ahmadinejad and ask for friendly talks, but also be pushing for sanctions on their country? it makes no sense.
oh, and Iran never threatened Israel. The wiping off the map comment is bullshit.
The reality of the situation is that war has been "on the table" with Iran since the Hostage crisis.
It doesn't mean we will ever act on it.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
My analogy is just fine. Its your understanding of it thats all screwed up. You keep screaming about Iran's nuclear program being legal. SO is getting fitshaced drunk. You follow me so far? Do try and keep up Mr. SAT. Mmmkay?
Now if you decide after getting stumble drunk to drive a car, its no longer o.k. and i'm excercising the option i left on the table to take your keys, forcefully if necessary. Get it? If Iran decided to turn their, apparently legal nuclear program, illegal and threaten us or the region, we better have kept the option to take their damn keys.
That isn't an advocation of war with Iran. It isn't even a threat. Its preparedness, plain and simple.
Go on with your SAT scores. i'm guessing you just took them last year. Good luck with that.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself there.
I got it from your post which I quoted where you said "Retaliating if attacked sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table". I was just attempting to point out that it really isn't, it's just a statement saying you will defend yourself if some asshole aggresses against you. I wasn't even referring to Obama's stance when I wrote that, it was a generalized example of how absurd the thinking is in this nation where people have to threaten others to get their way.
It's just a matter of time. Kinda like carving up a big fat turkey sooner or later the entire bird is on the plate (which is on the table...haha)
Obama is flat out a jackass for parroting the Bush empirical ideology towards Iran, and whether or not you think military options are on the table...WHAT MATTERS is that Iran most certainly believes it. That's what really matters.
Way to make friends Obama...ya jackass
whore yourself for those votes....whore yourself out...oooo...yeah
go bobo go!
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's more like you stopping a guy driving fine, who isn't drunk, claiming he is, and then throwing his car off the cliff.