Obama on Iraq

my2hands
my2hands Posts: 17,117
edited April 2008 in A Moving Train
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYBaiXQoI5Q
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • brandon10
    brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    Common sense.
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    war mongers.

    ;)
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    I like how in the first 30 seconds he says sometimes you must go to war.

    Interesting choice of words to use right at the very beginning
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    I like how in the first 30 seconds he says sometimes you must go to war.

    Interesting choice of words to use right at the very beginning

    So I guess you are saying that "no matter what, you should never go to war"?
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    brandon10 wrote:
    Common sense.


    what is common sense? Common Sense was written by Thomas Paine.. are you making a reference to that?
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ledvedderman wrote:
    So I guess you are saying that "no matter what, you should never go to war"?

    I just liked where he decided to establish the sentiment in his speech. Interesting that he chose to set more of a first precedence with it rather than later on.
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    I just liked where he decided to establish the sentiment in his speech. Interesting that he chose to set more of a first precedence with it rather than later on.

    So you're ignoring the whole "you must never go into war unless you must" line that was directly before the line you are talking about?
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    putting your fate in the hands of someone you dont know is not only dangerous...but fucking stupid.
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ledvedderman wrote:
    So you're ignoring the whole "you must never go into war unless you must" line that was directly before the line you are talking about?

    You can play around with words, but the bottom line is he said at the beginning of his speech that sometimes you must go to war....but oh it's bad.,, but sometimes you must (but it really sucks). But were still going...
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    You can play around with words, but the bottom line is he said at the beginning of his speech that sometimes you must go to war....but oh it's bad.,, but sometimes you must (but it really sucks). But were still going...

    I have never met anyone in my life who only hears what they want to more than you.

    It's simple...sometimes you must go to war. This is not one of those cases, but we have to be careful about getting out.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ledvedderman wrote:
    I have never met anyone in my life who only hears what they want to more than you.

    It's simple...sometimes you must go to war. This is not one of those cases, but we have to be careful about getting out.

    Sometimes we must all get used to the fact that we have to go to war says Obama. But war sucks don't get me wrong he says. Oh yeah it's bad. And he's kidding himself if he thinks he won't be tits deep in Iran without a paddle. His lips move but I don't hear what he's saying.
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    And he's kidding himself if he thinks he won't be tits deep in Iran without a paddle.

    The only candidate to not support the bill that practically gave the Bush administration what it needed to go after Iran is the one you think will be "tits deep in Iran"?
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ledvedderman wrote:
    The only candidate to not support the bill that practically gave the Bush administration what it needed to go after Iran is the one you think will be "tits deep in Iran"?

    Do I think Obama is going to keep his word after he gets elected? That would extremely foolish at the very outset.
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Do I think Obama is going to keep his word after he gets elected? That would extremely foolish at the very outset.

    So you are basing all of this on a gut feeling that you think Obama will change his tune?
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    You can play around with words, but the bottom line is he said at the beginning of his speech that sometimes you must go to war....but oh it's bad.,, but sometimes you must (but it really sucks). But were still going...

    I'm not an Obama supporter ... but I pretty much agree with everything you just wrote.

    War is evil. But sometimes it's necessary.

    The trick is determining when it's necessary.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ledvedderman wrote:
    So you are basing all of this on a gut feeling that you think Obama will change his tune?

    If he's talking like he is already...yeah...and what politician of late hasn't? Just in the gambling sense alone it would be a bad bet.
    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.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/302/t/6080/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=986


    I wonder how Obama will vote in April. If he votes to not fund the war then it would destroy all you guy's arguments about why he had to vote for it before. But if he votes to fund it again, he'll risk losing even more anti-war voters. We'll see.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • WMA
    WMA Posts: 175
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/302/t/6080/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=986


    I wonder how Obama will vote in April. If he votes to not fund the war then it would destroy all you guy's arguments about why he had to vote for it before. But if he votes to fund it again, he'll risk losing even more anti-war voters. We'll see.

    I'm pretty sure that the funding bill coming up is for '09. It is basically a political move by the administration. If Dem's don't vote on it, they (and you probably) will say the Democrats do not support the troops.

    Luckily, there is plenty of time for it to be taken care of later, so it is very easy for them to tell them to stuff it.
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    WMA wrote:
    I'm pretty sure that the funding bill coming up is for '09. It is basically a political move by the administration. If Dem's don't vote on it, they (and you probably) will say the Democrats do not support the troops.

    Luckily, there is plenty of time for it to be taken care of later, so it is very easy for them to tell them to stuff it.

    Oh yeah, it is paid for until 09. It is lucky for them that they don't have to vote right now. I would definitely be interested to see how it would have played out if it were this year.

    Why do you think I would say the dems don't support the troops? I'm not the type to just want to bitch at the dems just because. I've been consistently critical of funding and supporting this war and the ineffectiveness of the democrat party well before this election year and Obama hasn't changed my mind on this. Also, I support Dems like Kucinich who voted against funding the war so your speculation is baseless.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • brandon10
    brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Oh yeah, it is paid for until 09. It is lucky for them that they don't have to vote right now. I would definitely be interested to see how it would have played out if it were this year.

    Why do you think I would say the dems don't support the troops? I'm not the type to just want to bitch at the dems just because. I've been consistently critical of funding and supporting this war and the ineffectiveness of the democrat party well before this election year and Obama hasn't changed my mind on this. Also, I support Dems like Kucinich who voted against funding the war so your speculation is baseless.


    Well I see you are still obsessed with Obama. This vote really means nothing. I'm not sure how you can't see that!! It is a lose/lose situation. If he votes against funding, the republicans spin it so that he is against the troops. If he votes for funding, the wack jobs on the left spin it so that he is a warmonger.

    So ya, I'll just listen to his plans and hope that he carries them through when he take office. You go ahead and keep worrying about an insignificant vote.

Categories