Your Republican Guide to Criticizing Obama on Libya

[Perknose]

My comment is that I find this comic guide a bit mirthful and somewhat insightful.

 

[jonks]

did mccain really call for ground troops?

 

[BoberFett]

Funny. A Democrat president is bombing yet another country that has done nothing to us, and his sphincter suckling sycophants still can't think about anything other than Republicans.

Bravo.

 

[Lemon law]

Yep, its really strange, when many republican law makers, especially John McCain called for unilateral intervention in Libya, and in instead Obama choose instead to follow the lead of the Arab League, the GOP republirtats choose instead to blame only Omama.

A classic case of Obama, dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. As the republirats have the luxury of taking no position.

 

[jonks]

I posted this in the "Libia" thread but it properly belongs here:

Mr. Gingrich. Your thoughts about Libya from March 7?

VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?

GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, provided help to the rebels to replace him

I see. Very interesting. And now that Presidnet Obama has essentially done that, what is your position now?

GINGRICH: Let me draw the distinction. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.

Ok, this is cut and paste from Slate and we should know by now not to trust quick video edits as they may be misleading, http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/we...ely-changes-position-on-libya-in-16-days.aspx

but if someone wants to have a go at reconciliation there, please have at it.

 

[werepossum]

I posted this in the "Libia" thread but it properly belongs here:

Mr. Gingrich. Your thoughts about Libya from March 7?



I see. Very interesting. And now that President Obama has essentially done that, what is your position now?



Ok, this is cut and paste from Slate and we should know by now not to trust quick video edits as they may be misleading, http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/we...ely-changes-position-on-libya-in-16-days.aspx

but if someone wants to have a go at reconciliation there, please have at it.

That's even funnier than the chart, which was cute but could have been funnier.

 

[BoberFett]

What does Newt Gingrich have to do with anything? Last I checked Obama was the Commander in Chief.

 

[Kadarin]

What does Newt Gingrich have to do with anything? Last I checked Obama was the Commander in Chief.

Nothing whatsoever, other than to very clearly display that Republicans are far more about positioning themselves against the President himself as opposed to the merits of specifically what issue the President is actually dealing with at any given time.

 

[Genx87]

That is cute. Now back to reality. Lefties supporting attacking a country we have nothing to do with because their guy is doing it.

 

[BoberFett]

Nothing whatsoever, other than to very clearly display that Republicans are far more about positioning themselves against the President himself as opposed to the merits of specifically what issue the President is actually dealing with at any given time.

Great, if Newt Gingrich runs for president I won't vote for him.

So now, why is a Democrat bombing yet another country that did nothing to us?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

That is cute. Now back to reality. Lefties supporting attacking a country we have nothing to do with because their guy is doing it.

You know, i hate that fucked up retarded style of pretending that this is a war that was started by someone else than Khadaffi and that it is the same as the war in Iraq.

NO nation wanted this war, not ONE sought it out but the situation escalated and something had to be done.

EVERYONE knows that this is under a UN mandate, that no one wanted it and that's why it took so long, the AU had to request it and the US were reluctant even after that.

But hey, let's pretend reality isn't real and Obama just went up and invaded a nation based on known lies, just like Bush because that way he's just as bad... derp derp...

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Great, if Newt Gingrich runs for president I won't vote for him.

So now, why is a Democrat bombing yet another country that did nothing to us?

Because the UN requested intervention and the French, Canadian and UK forces were already there before the US decided that they could help a nations population in need.

 

[BoberFett]

That's why we're in all of those other African nations with brutal dictators, right?

 

[Genx87]

You know, i hate that fucked up retarded style of pretending that this is a war that was started by someone else than Khadaffi and that it is the same as the war in Iraq.

NO nation wanted this war, not ONE sought it out but the situation escalated and something had to be done.

EVERYONE knows that this is under a UN mandate, that no one wanted it and that's why it took so long, the AU had to request it and the US were reluctant even after that.

But hey, let's pretend reality isn't real and Obama just went up and invaded a nation based on known lies, just like Bush because that way he's just as bad... derp derp...

I cant remember. When did Kaddafi forces attack those of France, Britain, Italy, and the United States? Oh that is right, they didnt. So how did Khadaffi start a war with us again?

If no nation wanted this war why in the hell are we fighting it?

The United States doesnt have to support a UN mandate if we dont choose to. Nothing stopped Obama from tell the UN to go fuck themselves. And quite frankly I think he should have. Let the English, French, and Italians fight the war and take the heat. We dont need to be wiping their asses anymore. They are grownups.

 

[werepossum]

You know, i hate that fucked up retarded style of pretending that this is a war that was started by someone else than Khadaffi and that it is the same as the war in Iraq.

NO nation wanted this war, not ONE sought it out but the situation escalated and something had to be done.

EVERYONE knows that this is under a UN mandate, that no one wanted it and that's why it took so long, the AU had to request it and the US were reluctant even after that.

But hey, let's pretend reality isn't real and Obama just went up and invaded a nation based on known lies, just like Bush because that way he's just as bad... derp derp...

Two points. First, Iraq was a war started by Saddam Hussein, when he invaded Kuwait. That war was never ended, but rather a ceasefire was declared with certain conditions that Hussein unarguably violated repeatedly.

Second, it is not true that "something had to be done." This is no worse than a half-dozen other uprisings concurrent within the Muslim world, for which nothing is being done, and it pales next to Darfur. Clearly this situation is viewed as having unacceptable consequences for Europe, which is why "something had to be done."

I can support Obama's decision to go to war on the grounds of supporting our allies and doing what they cannot. As Nebor said, the EU does not have the C&C for an operation of this size. The EU also does not have the stealth or the stand-off precision strike capabilities of the US, although I fail to see why the EU cannot be handling all the strike and CAP missions at this point. But please, let's not romanticize this and pretend that it's something it's not.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Two points. First, Iraq was a war started by Saddam Hussein, when he invaded Kuwait. That war was never ended, but rather a ceasefire was declared with certain conditions that Hussein unarguably violated repeatedly.

There was no violation, the invasion and following searches proved that there was not, there was absolutely no reason to take out every fucking fighting unit and air support out of Afghanistan when we had a chance to win the war against the Taliban, if you think there was, you are too daft to think.

Second, it is not true that "something had to be done." This is no worse than a half-dozen other uprisings concurrent within the Muslim world, for which nothing is being done, and it pales next to Darfur. Clearly this situation is viewed as having unacceptable consequences for Europe, which is why "something had to be done."

This discussion is useless when you deny that an opposition that held all of eastern Libya existed and that most of the Libyan army sided with it while Khadaffis own security forces went on a killing spree to bomb the shit out of his own population. I was in Darfur, this is a lot different, there are two clear sides and easy targets, in Darfur the only ones were covert ops and we couldn't really do much at all, bombing would have resulted in thousands of civilian casualties but you don't know that, you just like to whine about how politics are not fair... Piss off with that, you know better.

I can support Obama's decision to go to war on the grounds of supporting our allies and doing what they cannot. As Nebor said, the EU does not have the C&C for an operation of this size. The EU also does not have the stealth or the stand-off precision strike capabilities of the US, although I fail to see why the EU cannot be handling all the strike and CAP missions at this point. But please, let's not romanticize this and pretend that it's something it's not.

And none of it is needed, if you don't want to commit aircrafts (you have not done so yet) then don't, it's not like it's needed, all you have that shit for is a possible invasion scenario against a nations like Russia, you don't need it in Libya, if it was needed, the Rafeles and our Typhoons would be shot down. The US VOLUNTEERED to help, it wasn't requested.

Just keep your fucking reporters from being human shields, my SAS friends are getting tired of rescuing them and having to cancel missions because they are in the fucking area...

OK?

 

[bfdd]

Nothing whatsoever, other than to very clearly display that Republicans are far more about positioning themselves against the President himself as opposed to the merits of specifically what issue the President is actually dealing with at any given time.

all either party cares about is positioning themselves against their opposition. our politics have devolved into nothing more than Crips vs Bloods with idiots repping their colors.

btw lol at Newt, what a douche.

 

[hal2kilo]

I posted this in the "Libia" thread but it properly belongs here:

Mr. Gingrich. Your thoughts about Libya from March 7?



I see. Very interesting. And now that Presidnet Obama has essentially done that, what is your position now?



Ok, this is cut and paste from Slate and we should know by now not to trust quick video edits as they may be misleading, http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/we...ely-changes-position-on-libya-in-16-days.aspx

but if someone wants to have a go at reconciliation there, please have at it.

Gingrich takes the cake as the biggest hippocryte on earth starting with his impeachment against Clinton while having an affair. His gall knows no bounds.
Presidential material NOT!

 

[Throckmorton]

That's why we're in all of those other African nations with brutal dictators, right?

Did the African Union ask us to intervene in those places?

 

[zinfamous]

That is cute. Now back to reality. Lefties supporting attacking a country we have nothing to do with because their guy is doing it.

I seem to recall that Saint Reagan was the first US President to bomb Qaddafi's house.

Was Libya important to us then? If it was, why is it no longer the case?

:hmm:

 

[werepossum]

There was no violation, the invasion and following searches proved that there was not, there was absolutely no reason to take out every fucking fighting unit and air support out of Afghanistan when we had a chance to win the war against the Taliban, if you think there was, you are too daft to think.



This discussion is useless when you deny that an opposition that held all of eastern Libya existed and that most of the Libyan army sided with it while Khadaffis own security forces went on a killing spree to bomb the shit out of his own population. I was in Darfur, this is a lot different, there are two clear sides and easy targets, in Darfur the only ones were covert ops and we couldn't really do much at all, bombing would have resulted in thousands of civilian casualties but you don't know that, you just like to whine about how politics are not fair... Piss off with that, you know better.



And none of it is needed, if you don't want to commit aircrafts (you have not done so yet) then don't, it's not like it's needed, all you have that shit for is a possible invasion scenario against a nations like Russia, you don't need it in Libya, if it was needed, the Rafeles and our Typhoons would be shot down. The US VOLUNTEERED to help, it wasn't requested.

Just keep your fucking reporters from being human shields, my SAS friends are getting tired of rescuing them and having to cancel missions because they are in the fucking area...

OK?

Dude, we've already lost a Strike Eagle. Those aren't used for whale watching charters, they are ground attack aircraft. The US is the country that fired a hundred million dollars' worth of cruise missiles; the UK fired (I think) two.

 

[RedChief]

Gingrich takes the cake as the biggest hippocryte on earth starting with his impeachment against Clinton while having an affair. His gall knows no bounds.
Presidential material NOT!

Did Gingrich lie about his affair while under oath?

Didn't think so....

 

[hal2kilo]

Did Gingrich lie about his affair while under oath?

Didn't think so....

No, Gingrich just lies in about every other sentence he utters.

 

[Red Dawn]

Muslims being killed, you'd think the Republicans would be happy.

 

[hal2kilo]

Muslims being killed, you'd think the Republicans would be happy.

Yea, but there that "not one of us" running the country.