State of the Union

Discussion in 'Political Action Forum' started by 4riverman, Jan 24, 2012.

  1. API

    API Political Action Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    22,051
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    Can't argue with that. Now all we need is leadership with a commitment for decisive wins rather outcomes intent upon leaving everybody feeling good. :tu
     
  2. Steve Borgwald

    Steve Borgwald Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    10,235
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2000
    Location:
    OH
  3. ALMODUX

    ALMODUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    17,290
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama

    Stating facts somehow gets your anti-Bush alter ego going, huh?

    Its got beans to do with opposing or supporting either one. One was a totally different level of commitment than the other....whether one is pro or con, is is.:)
     
  4. pintail2222

    pintail2222 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    18,602
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    Collier Co. Florida
    Anti-Bush alter ego going? Bush was bad - Obama is worse. Period. Nothing "anti" about that - pretty consistent.

    I put policy before party. So when it come to Bush and/or Obama - Republicans and/or Democrats - I am an equal opportunity basher as well as an equal opportunity backer. Just because there is an R or a D next to a politicians name - I am not going to automatically back one politician because of party affiliation over the other - nor am I going to automatically bash one politician because of party affiliation over the other. I bash policies that I disagree with - regardless of party affiliation. I back policies that I agree with - regardless of party affiliation.

    I opposed the US attacking Iraq just as I opposed the US attacking Libya - regardless of size or level of the commitment - regardless if one lasts 5 days and one lasts 5 years. Both were based on "International Permission" Permission from the UN from NATO... What has happened to the War Powers Act? A POTUS (R or D) does not have plenary power to attack a nation at the expense of our own blood and treasure. Regardless of how little blood is shed or how little treasure is spent.
     
  5. ALMODUX

    ALMODUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    17,290
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    If you have a treaty in force, and/or allied agreements, you have to honor them....I just think you are barking up the wrong tree with regards to why we have to be involved in certain issues abroad....dissolve the treaties/alliances through congress, and then you can be isolationist...until then, we're either a liar or we ain't.:)
     
  6. pintail2222

    pintail2222 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    18,602
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    Collier Co. Florida
    Afghanistan was legit... The US was attacked by al-Qaida - we attacked al-Qaida back - we got OBL - can we get out now? We've created quite the quagmire in the graveyard of empires.
     
  7. ALMODUX

    ALMODUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    17,290
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    By treaty (U.N. and/or NATO), so were Korea, Vietnam, Iraq 1&2, and Libya....until we get out of those orgs/treaties, it's not solely our decision sometimes.
     
  8. pintail2222

    pintail2222 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    18,602
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    Collier Co. Florida
    Treaty? By treaty? We don't need no stinkin' treaty - According to Leon Panetta all we need is "International permission" :doh...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5zNwOeyuG84

    Now get back on that unicycle Leon and start back peddling - clown boy!
     
  9. API

    API Political Action Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    22,051
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    Like a typical arrogant Obama appointee, Panetta is somewhere between intentionally destructive and a blithering idiot.
     

Share This Page