calfoxwc Posted August 24, 2014 Report Share Posted August 24, 2014 seriously? Mr. Psycho radical marxist dumbass in our WH wants to be helping all radicals, even Muslim radicals, but now he is going to be an ally of Assad because some of the rebels have taken off and become a Muslim "Borg" ? What a clusterfook Obamao is - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/west-poised-to-join-forces-with-president-assad-in-face-of-islamic-state-9686666.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted August 24, 2014 Report Share Posted August 24, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted August 24, 2014 Report Share Posted August 24, 2014 seriously? Mr. Psycho radical marxist dumbass in our WH wants to be helping all radicals, even Muslim radicals, but now he is going to be an ally of Assad because some of the rebels have taken off and become a Muslim "Borg" ? What a clusterfook Obamao is - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/west-poised-to-join-forces-with-president-assad-in-face-of-islamic-state-9686666.html Backing assad in the first place would have been the smart thing to do. Now the genies out of the bottle. Good luck getting it back in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted August 25, 2014 Report Share Posted August 25, 2014 Backing Assad for sure! Obuma will be crossing all those red lines he drew in the sand with his back to Assad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted August 25, 2014 Report Share Posted August 25, 2014 DIdn't another politician say Iraq had WOMD? And they didn't? They all lie cal. Regardless of what letter is in front of their name Remember this good ole ditty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted August 25, 2014 Report Share Posted August 25, 2014 DIdn't another politician say Iraq had WOMD? And they didn't? They all lie cal. Regardless of what letter is in front of their name Remember this good ole ditty if you wont take the past reports of the shell game played in Iraq and Syria when it came to WMD.... then maybe you'll take it from ISIS? ISIS In Iraq Find Saddam Hussein’s WMD Stockpiles Of Chemical Weapons… George W Bush Was Right? http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-in-iraq-find-saddam-husseins-wmd-stockpiles-of-chemical-weapons-george-w-bush-was-right/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted August 25, 2014 Report Share Posted August 25, 2014 if you wont take the past reports of the shell game played in Iraq and Syria when it came to WMD.... then maybe you'll take it from ISIS? ISIS In Iraq Find Saddam Hussein’s WMD Stockpiles Of Chemical Weapons… George W Bush Was Right? http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-in-iraq-find-saddam-husseins-wmd-stockpiles-of-chemical-weapons-george-w-bush-was-right/ OK KILL THEM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! should have done it from the start Being "Politically correct" and trying to win a war........................WILL NEVER HAPPEN EVER!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted August 25, 2014 Report Share Posted August 25, 2014 You convinced me with the large font Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 You convinced me with the large font of course you are tricked by anything lojwe bhwvhjc...............woody translation................It's Bush's fault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouthKC Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 Huge difference between backing Assad and destroying ISIS. I can't stand the guy but I'm not for a minute looking at this as backing Assad. I look at it as insuring America's security. ISIS' capital is Raqqa, Syria. It needs to go. It will go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big red one Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 Huge difference between backing Assad and destroying ISIS. I can't stand the guy but I'm not for a minute looking at this as backing Assad. I look at it as insuring America's security. ISIS' capital is Raqqa, Syria. It needs to go. It will go. Americas security has been compromised due to the fact that ISIS has members with western passports. any proactive attacks to slow down ISIS in Syria and then back into Iraq by air strikes are temporary and may be too late? Obama is completely comfortable STILL by leading (from behind) the so called and unnamed "coalition" as far as support goes... After all, the terrorists can very well be right here in the US - imagine that ? we have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 of course you are tricked by anything lojwe bhwvhjc...............woody translation................It's Bush's fault Oh god please don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 I think whoever the president of the United States maybe we find ourselves in a no win situation when mediating a struggle between a spider and a scorpion. we were probably (possibly?) better off with Kadafi Mubarak and Assad. we tend to forget that the rebels are not Jeffersonian Democrats. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted August 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 It's better to kill them over there, before they kill us over there, or come here and kill us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouthKC Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Americas security has been compromised due to the fact that ISIS has members with western passports. any proactive attacks to slow down ISIS in Syria and then back into Iraq by air strikes are temporary and may be too late? Obama is completely comfortable STILL by leading (from behind) the so called and unnamed "coalition" as far as support goes... After all, the terrorists can very well be right here in the US - imagine that ? we have to. Not 100 why you quoted me. These two posts don't seem related too much. That's alright, though. If people think an attack on the homeland isn't going to happen they are naive. We are blessed it hasn't happen yet on a big scale. You're right attacks in Syria/Iraq may be too late but there is little doubt in my mind that if we wanted to we could annihilate the extreme build up these douchebags have made. I do think that the perception of weakness and hands off approach has opened a void that someone is going to fill in the great power struggle. I think that is what we are seeing in the Middle East, Ukraine, China. Ain't nobody said to not imagine terrorists here. I guarantee they are here. It would be preposterous to think otherwise. I just hope we decide to unleash holy hell on them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouthKC Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 I think whoever the president of the United States maybe we find ourselves in a no win situation when mediating a struggle between a spider and a scorpion. we were probably (possibly?) better off with Kadafi Mubarak and Assad. we tend to forget that the rebels are not Jeffersonian Democrats. WSS We may have even been better off with Saddam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 We may have even been better off with Saddam. I am curious as to what would have happened had the United States allowed him to go into Kuwait. That's what caused the problems in the first place. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 I am curious as to what would have happened had the United States allowed him to go into Kuwait. That's what caused the problems in the first place. WSS Iraq would have increased in size small, but greatly in wealth(with better shipping lanes) and more oil. They would have also erased the last of their debt from Iraq-Iranian war. The US would have never proven to world the advances in military air power that we had achieved(and would use to deter/bomb such as sebia later), US and our allies in the regions(Saudia Ariba) would have lost face and standing among other nations in that region. Other nations/dictators could have taken advantage of the situation..... Oil prices would have probably increased at the same rate it increased with the gulf war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Or, as the devil's advocate mights say, they would most certainly be a stronger ally of the United States and the largest oil producers in the region and that oil would be traded in US dollars. They would replace Saudi Arabia as the United States number one strange bedfellow. Iran would be shit out of luck. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Its possible, we were really supportive of their war with Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Saddam was a colossal piece of shit but he at least kept his country under wraps. Saddam ran a secular government albeit with an iron fist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Saddam was a sunni muslim, and his gov was involved with arms trafficing to rebel/terrorist/sunni extremist groups/etc orgs.... he -was- isis before there was isis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Saddam was a sunni muslim, and his gov was involved with arms trafficing to rebel/terrorist/sunni extremist groups/etc orgs.... he -was- isis before there was isis. Most of this was(if at all) after the first Gulf War, when we where preventing exports/imports and enforcing the no fly zones. Then why are we not attacking Saudi Arabia, most terrorist(including 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 terrorist and many key former al-qaeda figures) are from or recruited in Saudi Arabia, and a lot of financing comes out of this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Most of this was(if at all) after the first Gulf War, when we where preventing exports/imports and enforcing the no fly zones. Then why are we not attacking Saudi Arabia, most terrorist(including 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 terrorist and many key former al-qaeda figures) are from or recruited in Saudi Arabia, and a lot of financing comes out of this area. Because even though the terrorists were of Saudi Arabian nationality they were not supported by the Royals. In fact they were rebelling against the Royals and their connection with the west. When I said strange bedfellows I meant it. We need the Saudis, they need us. Saddam expected us to turn a blind eye on his invasion of Kuwait. When we did not he felt betrayed. Possibly rightly so. But no matter Saddam Hussein is, or was, the power structure in Iraq. Osama bin Laden was not the power structure in Saudi Arabia. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.