Is Obama going to stop the war?

MasterFramer

macgyver06 wrote:

he said he was against the war in iraq...or he is against the continuation of it?

"end the war by 2009" :rolleyes: What exactly is your confusion on his position? You are misinterpreting his position for the sake of arguing.

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

he couldnt vote for it! the fact you would rather remain in denial is not my problem..

He gave a hell of a speech in 2002 against the war in Iraq. I'm not in denial that he couldn't vote for it. I was on his fucking US Senate campaign, I know his history.

He was against this war before it was "cool" to be against it politically.

macgyver06

MasterFramer wrote:

"end the war by 2009" :rolleyes: What exactly is your confusion on his position? You are misinterpreting his position for the sake of arguing.

no...i question people who are questionable...pardon me for putting thought into a vote rather blinding believeing someone means all troops out of iraq by 2009..

SPEEDY MCCREADY

can obama stop the war????

no...

because he will never be elected president.....

macgyver06

ledvedderman wrote:

He gave a hell of a speech in 2002 against the war in Iraq. I'm not in denial that he couldn't vote for it. I was on his fucking US Senate campaign, I know his history.

He was against this war before it was "cool" to be against it politically.

lol.. i was against war before it was thought up.

ledvedderman

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

can obama stop the war????

no...

because he will never be elected president.....

I think you are wrong Speedy.

macgyver06

MasterFramer wrote:

"end the war by 2009" :rolleyes: What exactly is your confusion on his position? You are misinterpreting his position for the sake of arguing.

WHICH WAR?

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

lol.. i was against war before it was thought up.

How many Democrats did you see running anti-war in 2004? Not many. The country was still on 9/11 hangover and the President kept putting out phony terror threats to keep it all fresh in the publics mind.

Obama was one of the few.

Did you watch that video yet?

macgyver06

ledvedderman wrote:

I think you are wrong Speedy.

stick to these arguments..opinion based is more your style

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

WHICH WAR?

Does it really matter if you are against all wars?

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

stick to these arguments..opinion based is more your style

Opinion based arguments trump constitutional law? You're the one who might want to look into the law.

macgyver06

ledvedderman wrote:

Does it really matter if you are against all wars?

he isnt against war... lol


unbelievable!

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

he isnt against war... lol


unbelievable!

He is against the war in Iraq and will bring the troops home. You really make no fucking sense at all. Be against all wars that you want, but I think anyone who wouldn't support a candidate who would support military action against a nation who attacked us would be off the fucking reservation.

macgyver06

ledvedderman wrote:

Opinion based arguments trump constitutional law? You're the one who might want to look into the law.

i dont know what this mean...and why do you have desire to post crap like this


what are you talking or driving at??

chipboy

MasterFramer wrote:

He is against the permanent bases being set up in Iraq. His position is clear, not sure why you are over complicating it. End the war in Iraq. Provide security without having bases. No US president will ever be elected if he pears soft on defense, ever.

I don't think it's clear that's why I'm reading about it and trying to engage in thoughtful debate trying to decipher what he really means. Is he really soft on defense and is just trying to appear tough by saying he is going to protect the Iraqis and fight al Qaeda? Or is he going to attempt to actually do what he says on his website which is just a different strategy to defeat al Qaeda in Iraq by getting Iran and Syria to help?

It seems like everyone has already made up their mind and will disregard what the candidate is actually proposing if it doesn't fit their TV produced image.

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

i dont know what this mean...and why do you have desire to post crap like this


what are you talking or driving at??

That you don't have the slightest fucking clue how government works.

macgyver06

ledvedderman wrote:

He is against the war in Iraq and will bring the troops home. You really make no fucking sense at all. Be against all wars that you want, but I think anyone who wouldn't support a candidate who would support military action against a nation who attacked us would be off the fucking reservation.

a new argument arises lol.... military action against a nation who attacked us.... who would this be vedderman?


this is so tiring..this is the result of arguing..hey maybe if your senator cared so much he would be doing his job he got elected to do..


yes ledvedderman..its us the citizens who are against you and your politicians credibility...


hope the fight goes well for you and your man..

macgyver06

chipboy wrote:

I don't think it's clear that's why I'm reading about it and trying to engage in thoughtful debate trying to decipher what he really means. Is he really soft on defense and is just trying to appear tough by saying he is going to protect the Iraqis and fight al Qaeda? Or is he going to attempt to actually do what he says on his website which is just a different strategy to defeat al Qaeda in Iraq by getting Iran and Syria to help?

It seems like everyone has already made up their mind and will disregard what the candidate is actually proposing if it doesn't fit their TV produced image.

this is what irks me... i will never understand why people put faith and all trust in another human being.. while at the same time having a false image of someone.

ledvedderman

macgyver06 wrote:

a new argument arises lol.... military action against a nation who attacked us.... who would this be vedderman?


this is so tiring..this is the result of arguing..hey maybe if your senator cared so much he would be doing his job he got elected to do..


yes ledvedderman..its us the citizens who are against you and your politicians credibility...


hope the fight goes well for you and your man..

You have stated that you are against all wars. If a nation were to attack us why would you have a problem with going after them. What is your problem w/ the Afghanistan War?

The fight is going really well for my candidate.

MasterFramer

chipboy wrote:

I don't think it's clear that's why I'm reading about it and trying to engage in thoughtful debate trying to decipher what he really means. Is he really soft on defense and is just trying to appear tough by saying he is going to protect the Iraqis and fight al Qaeda? Or is he going to attempt to actually do what he says on his website which is just a different strategy to defeat al Qaeda in Iraq by getting Iran and Syria to help?

It seems like everyone has already made up their mind and will disregard what the candidate is actually proposing if it doesn't fit their TV produced image.

Give me a fucking break dude. Why are you even trying to understand my motives for voting for Obama. If you want to mind fuck yourself over his stance be my guest. But dont pretend you know why anyone is voting for a canidate, you have no idea, just like anyone else.