Obama supported sweeping DC handgun ban
- Thread starter WRL
- Start date
Blackflag
Junior Member
"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges... But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. ... If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."
And we did. Good for you Obama and CIA. Shame on you WRL, Bush, and McCain.
And we did. Good for you Obama and CIA. Shame on you WRL, Bush, and McCain.
Blackflag
Junior Member
"In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.
The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan."
Who is weak on terror now bitch? haha.
The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan."
Who is weak on terror now bitch? haha.
Um... Bush and Obama agree on this one too.
Blackflag
Junior Member
Bush attacked him for it.
WRL
Well...the right is right
Insanity, seriously insaine.
Here is the only sane part of that article...
Independent actions by U.S. military forces on another country's sovereign territory are always controversial, and both U.S. and Pakistani officials have repeatedly sought to obscure operational details that would reveal that key decisions are sometimes made in the United States, not in Islamabad. Some Pentagon operations have been undertaken only after intense disputes with the State Department, which has worried that they might inflame Pakistani public resentment; the CIA itself has sometimes sought to put the brakes on because of anxieties about the consequences for its relationship with Pakistani intelligence officials.
Wow, I can't believe I'm the one screaming not to bomb more people here. So many people in this country just want to start wars they'll never see through. FUCK OFF. Packistan is moving along a peaceful path to democratization and we can't bomb every one into democracy, some of it will have to be done through peaceful persuasion...
Here is the only sane part of that article...
Independent actions by U.S. military forces on another country's sovereign territory are always controversial, and both U.S. and Pakistani officials have repeatedly sought to obscure operational details that would reveal that key decisions are sometimes made in the United States, not in Islamabad. Some Pentagon operations have been undertaken only after intense disputes with the State Department, which has worried that they might inflame Pakistani public resentment; the CIA itself has sometimes sought to put the brakes on because of anxieties about the consequences for its relationship with Pakistani intelligence officials.
Wow, I can't believe I'm the one screaming not to bomb more people here. So many people in this country just want to start wars they'll never see through. FUCK OFF. Packistan is moving along a peaceful path to democratization and we can't bomb every one into democracy, some of it will have to be done through peaceful persuasion...
WRL
Well...the right is right
No clearly if we knew where OBL is that is a different game, but just popping people off with bombs at our discretion is going to turn not only the people but the government against us, and make a lot of effort for naught...
WRL
Well...the right is right
Yet it is Bush's CIA doing it. What they attacked Obama for is being a bit foolish diplomatically by not talking around it. (yeah, I know, for not using double-speak)
Shoot, even the Pakistani Government were mostly mad about him using their religion as a tool to promote his Presidency, not about saying he'd actually attack there.
Blackflag
Junior Member
"It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of AUTONOMY by the CIA inside Pakistan."
"At the time, Obama was roundly criticized for his remarks, both by his Democratic competitors for the White House and by the Bush administration.
"We think that our approach to Pakistan is not only one that respects the sovereignty of Pakistan, but also is designed so that we are working in cooperation," said then-Press Secretary Tony Snow.
And just one week ago, President Bush himself lambasted Obama's approach to foreign affairs.
"I certainly don't know what he believes in," Bush said on February 10, about Obama. "The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he's going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad.""
There's a lot of sex in it...so make sure you keep your hands where every one can see them.
I once heard of a guy who got caught..you know, down there...while reading the bible, and he got his ass beat so bad by a couple of nuns? And he's like, man, they give you this stuff to read and everyone's fornicating here and fornicating there, what do they expect?
Those nuns...what characters.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Don't think you're boosting any indie cred by going after WRL.
Mike Savage would go after WRL, too.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Bad day?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Sorry to hear that.
This means Bush didn't approve of it? Rubbish.
Yes, again, for not using double-speak.
And? It is still his policy that got the job done that you are celebrating here. The CIA didn't go in without the okay from Bush.
My point isn't that they didn't criticize him for a bad diplomatic move (rightly or wrongly), but that the policy you espouse is being carried out by one of the people you listed as "bad".