Lesser Evil? Obama More Likely to Attack Iran than Romney

[apple0154]

I seriously disagree with that assessment .. and it was Obama, a democrat, who invaded and destroyed Libya. You cannot blame republicans for Obama's horrors and atrocities. That is a completely partisan view that ignores the obvious truth.

Troops were sent into Libya? I wasn't aware of that.

So much for "Obama won't start a war with Iran." Of course he could .. and partisans will back whatever horror comes of it.

If they try to build nuclear weapons.

You don't think droning planet earth hasn't turned much of the world against the west?

Barack Obama's Global Job Approval Down Sharply, Poll Says

"There remains a widespread perception that the U.S. acts unilaterally and does not consider the interests of other countries," the Pew report found. "In predominantly Muslim nations, American anti-terrorism efforts are still widely unpopular. And in nearly all countries, there is considerable opposition to a major component of the Obama administration’s anti-terrorism policy: drone strikes."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/barack-obamas-global-job-_n_1593299.html

No country in the world approves of Obama's drone strikes .. and the fact that democrats do proves my point about the non-existence of lesser evil.

While I agree every country has a right to do what it wants I also realize nuclear weapons are an no-no. If a country requires nuclear power, for example, it has to be supervised. If it is forbidden and has the knowledge then the rest of the world should contribute to the cost of them not having it. Simply put, it's too dangerous and wackos can get access to it.

It is extremely naive to think that blowing up a site puts an end to Iran's desire to protect itself from the US and Israel .. or that it would put an end to the program at all.

The Iranians have every right to protect itself from nuclear assault.

Why should they trust Americans or Israel? Please answer that question.

Their security is not up to par. Wackos may get it. Who knows? It's too dangerous to take a chance and the US is currently the big boss. As a Canadian I sure as hell prefer being neighbors with the US rather then Iran or Iraq or Turkey....Talking about Turkey I dated a gal from Bulgaria for over a year. Dark hair, blue eyes, tall...but I digress.

Anyway, I asked her how she managed to get access to travel outside the country so easily. (This is going back to the early 90s.) She competed in chess matches so she was allowed to travel around Europe and finally, here. Naturally I asked her about her country and Communism and all sorts of things so she told me a story. One day she was on a train in Turkey. As she went between two cars a "Policeman" stopped her and took her to a room (cabin) for questioning. He told her she has a choice. Either she submitted to him or he would arrest her for assault and beat her at the same time. She said she had no problem having sex with him but "I hope you have a condom because I'm obliged to tell you I have AIDS." (Remember, she was a chess player.) The "Policeman" changed his mind and let her go.

If you're up for another

Question: Should America be droned?

Surely if you think it proper to drone innocent people all over the world, you believe the same "justice" should be served to America .. given that we are the world's biggest terrorist.

Are you up for another story? That Bulgarian lady and I decided to cohabitate. I asked her if her parents would like to visit. She informed me about visa requirements and I offered to put up a bond ensuring her parents would leave the country when the visa ended. She told me that wasn't the point. If both her parents came here the authorities would ransack their home. They were reasonably well off and corruption was rife. Imagine living in those conditions.

A PURELY partisan view. Any idea how many INNOCENT people Obama is murdering with drones?

Any idea how far this puts us at odds with countries like Pakistan?

Libya got rid of its WMD and still got destroyed. Perhaps Gaddafi's biggest mistake.

Tell me that you supported the war on Iraq .. which would of course be wrong as hell, but it would at least make you consistent.

Lesser evil .. or less principled voters.

God knows the US is not a saintly country but compared to the rest.....would you want the "Policeman" on the train in Turkey or the authorities in Bulgaria, not to mention the religious wackos in Iran or Iraq or Syria having access to nuclear weapons? While the US is wrong to invade foreign countries they have every right to prevent those countries from developing nuclear weapons.

One can think of it as a choice between two evils regarding Dems and Repubs but the evils are quite different. The Dem position is don't build nuclear weapons and we won't bother you. The Repub position is we want to change your entire way of life whether or not you have any weapons. Big difference.

 

[cancel2 2022]

I want to be fair .. so I'll try again.

Gaddafi was not the business of the United States. We murdered him for profit.

What is my personal opinion of him?

That's my opinion of Gaddafi.

Did you know that?

If not, what does it matter what your opinion of him was?

Now please answer my questions.

If Gaddafi was so wonderful, why did his people hate him so much?

 

[Socrtease]

Gary Johnson would be less likely to go to war with Iran than both of them.

 

[blackascoal]

If Gaddafi was so wonderful, why did his people hate him so much?

Does this look like his people hated him so much?

That's the largest demonstration in world history .. one third of the entire population of Libya .. WHILE the nation was being bombed.

All the green is support FOR Gaddaffi.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Does this look like his people hated him so much?

That's the largest demonstration in world history .. one third of the entire population of Libya .. WHILE the nation was being bombed.

All the green is support FOR Gaddaffi.

Yet weeks later they had all disappeared into the night, also how many of those were there voluntarily?

 

[blackascoal]

Troops were sent into Libya? I wasn't aware of that.

We used AL QUEDA. Were you aware of that?

If they try to build nuclear weapons.

Why shouldn't they have them when the US and Israel threaten Iran with them?

The notion that if they don't build them we will leave them alone is far from the truth. Gaddaffi got rid of his WMD and attempts at nuclear development .. then we attack and destroyed his country .. using AL QUEDA .. who supposedly attacked us.

While I agree every country has a right to do what it wants I also realize nuclear weapons are an no-no. If a country requires nuclear power, for example, it has to be supervised. If it is forbidden and has the knowledge then the rest of the world should contribute to the cost of them not having it. Simply put, it's too dangerous and wackos can get access to it.

What makes you believe that Iran is a country of wackos? Are you aware that the US and UK overthrew their democratically-elected government and installed the Shah and his brutal secret polce SAVAK that Israel trained to be monsters? WE did it to steal their resources. Are you aware of that?

Pakistan and North Korea have nukes ... and have had them for some time.

Which one of these countries recently mass-murders countless innocent people for profit?

The US or Iran?

Their security is not up to par. Wackos may get it. Who knows? It's too dangerous to take a chance and the US is currently the big boss. As a Canadian I sure as hell prefer being neighbors with the US rather then Iran or Iraq or Turkey....Talking about Turkey I dated a gal from Bulgaria for over a year. Dark hair, blue eyes, tall...but I digress.

Why did you stop digressing :0) I was getting excited.

To your point .. Pakistan and North Korea. Invented fears.

Anyway, I asked her how she managed to get access to travel outside the country so easily. (This is going back to the early 90s.) She competed in chess matches so she was allowed to travel around Europe and finally, here. Naturally I asked her about her country and Communism and all sorts of things so she told me a story. One day she was on a train in Turkey. As she went between two cars a "Policeman" stopped her and took her to a room (cabin) for questioning. He told her she has a choice. Either she submitted to him or he would arrest her for assault and beat her at the same time. She said she had no problem having sex with him but "I hope you have a condom because I'm obliged to tell you I have AIDS." (Remember, she was a chess player.) The "Policeman" changed his mind and let her go.

Are you up for another story? That Bulgarian lady and I decided to cohabitate. I asked her if her parents would like to visit. She informed me about visa requirements and I offered to put up a bond ensuring her parents would leave the country when the visa ended. She told me that wasn't the point. If both her parents came here the authorities would ransack their home. They were reasonably well off and corruption was rife. Imagine living in those conditions.

I feel you and I agree .. but we can't determine life for all people, nor in many cases can we even judge. But I get your point.

God knows the US is not a saintly country but compared to the rest.....would you want the "Policeman" on the train in Turkey or the authorities in Bulgaria, not to mention the religious wackos in Iran or Iraq or Syria having access to nuclear weapons? While the US is wrong to invade foreign countries they have every right to prevent those countries from developing nuclear weapons.

The only nation to EVER use nuclear weapons is the one you're standing in .. and we used them TWICE .. we were testing .. on real humans.

The US has no right nor authority to prevent any nation from protecting themselves from us. Either they are good for all, or they are good for none.

One can think of it as a choice between two evils regarding Dems and Repubs but the evils are quite different. The Dem position is don't build nuclear weapons and we won't bother you. The Repub position is we want to change your entire way of life whether or not you have any weapons. Big difference.

Again, that isn't true good brother.

We exist in a state of perpetual war for profit .. and truth ain't always pretty.

 

[blackascoal]

Yet weeks later they had all disappeared into the night, also how many of those were there voluntarily?

Disappeared is a good word for it.

Care to view where many "disappeared" to? It ain't pretty.

Gaddafi was supported by his people .. except the AL QUEDA rebels in the east. Didn't you know that eastern Libya was the hotbed of world terrorism .. the home of AL QUEDA .. who promptly errected their flag when they toppled Gaddafi?

Al Qaeda Planting Its Flag In Libya?
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/al-qaeda-libya

 

[cancel2 2022]

Disappeared is a good word for it.

Care to view where many "disappeared" to? It ain't pretty.

Gaddafi was supported by his people .. except the AL QUEDA rebels in the east. Didn't you know that eastern Libya was the hotbed of world terrorism .. the home of AL QUEDA .. who promptly errected their flag when they toppled Gaddafi?

Al Qaeda Planting Its Flag In Libya?
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/al-qaeda-libya

How do explain the events in Tunisia, Egypt and Syria?

 

[Howey]

I want to be fair .. so I'll try again.

Gaddafi was not the business of the United States. We murdered him for profit.

What is my personal opinion of him?

That's my opinion of Gaddafi.

Did you know that?

If not, what does it matter what your opinion of him was?

Now please answer my questions.

Sorry, BAC. My question was:

Just wondering...what's your opinion on dictators, such as Ghadaffi and the one in Syria, using children as shields against drones. Who would be the "killer" in this case?

 

[Howey]

My opinion is that the US and NATO rushed into Libya and massacred its people for their own gain .. and to seize Libyan assets .. which they did.

They also used AL QUEDA to do it .. thus negates any argument about terrorists. Terrorists were our partners in this crime against humanity.

The attack on Libya was so blatantly vile and dispicable that it negated all efforts to rush in and attack Syria. The game Obama and NATO were playing became obvious to all the world.

My opinion is that the US has no justification to rush in and destroy nations for profit and power .. exactly as we did in Iraq .. which I'm betting that you were against.

What changed your opinion on needless wars for profit? How do you now cheer, and/or excuse such inhumanity?

While I'm waiting, I'll go ahead and address this.

First, accusing the US, rather, Obama, of utilizing al Qaeda to briing down Ghadaffi, is treading into conspiracy theory/Alex Jones insanity. For that reason,I won't address it.

Ghadaffi: The atrocities committed by his regime were unallowable. For many years, as a kingdom, Libya was the showcase of North Africa. As a travel destination and historical treasure trove, it was a beautiful and strong country. Then Ghadaffi and his Army overthrew the monarchy and the rapid decline of the nation began. Yes, western support of Ghadaffi was shameful, but that's history now. Something had to be done to prevent further killing of innocent people. As has been stated, no matter what Obama did, he would have been criticized. My opinion is that he, with NATO, should have acted sooner to put an end to the Ghadaffi regime.

In this world of violence, sometimes action other than diplomatic is needed to prevent the desolution of a country. This was one of those cases.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

to those obama lovers like howey....how is it you can justify libya and not syria?

 

[blackascoal]

While I'm waiting, I'll go ahead and address this.

First, accusing the US, rather, Obama, of utilizing al Qaeda to briing down Ghadaffi, is treading into conspiracy theory/Alex Jones insanity. For that reason,I won't address it.

Ghadaffi: The atrocities committed by his regime were unallowable. For many years, as a kingdom, Libya was the showcase of North Africa. As a travel destination and historical treasure trove, it was a beautiful and strong country. Then Ghadaffi and his Army overthrew the monarchy and the rapid decline of the nation began. Yes, western support of Ghadaffi was shameful, but that's history now. Something had to be done to prevent further killing of innocent people. As has been stated, no matter what Obama did, he would have been criticized. My opinion is that he, with NATO, should have acted sooner to put an end to the Ghadaffi regime.

In this world of violence, sometimes action other than diplomatic is needed to prevent the desolution of a country. This was one of those cases.

Obviously whomever you got tht tidbit about Gaddafi from doesn't have a clue about the history of Libya. Libya was an poor and impoverished country before Gaddafi led Libya into having the highest quality of life in all of Africa .. higher than that of Russians and Brazilans.

Gaddafi SHARED the profits of oil revenues with his citizens. You didn't know that?

They invaded Libya to steal its assets like pirates .. and yes, HELL YES, Obama was an intregal part of that atrocity.

While Gaddafi was not perfect .. as none are .. I've easily demonstrated why many of his people loved him .. and as an African-American, I loved what he was doing for Africa.

Are you aware that he built the Great Man-Made River .. one of the great wonders of the world.

 

[blackascoal]

to those obama lovers like howey....how is it you can justify libya and not syria?

Good question.

 

[cancel2 2022]

to those obama lovers like howey....how is it you can justify libya and not syria?

Simple, the Security Council authorised military action against Libya. One question to you, if you were against action in Libya why did you support the invasion of Iraq?

 

[Howey]

Obviously whomever you got tht tidbit about Gaddafi from doesn't have a clue about the history of Libya. Libya was an poor and impoverished country before Gaddafi led Libya into having the highest quality of life in all of Africa .. higher than that of Russians and Brazilans.

Gaddafi SHARED the profits of oil revenues with his citizens. You didn't know that?

They invaded Libya to steal its assets like pirates .. and yes, HELL YES, Obama was an intregal part of that atrocity.

While Gaddafi was not perfect .. as none are .. I've easily demonstrated why many of his people loved him .. and as an African-American, I loved what he was doing for Africa.

Are you aware that he built the Great Man-Made River .. one of the great wonders of the world.

That "tidbit" about Ghadaffi came from my father and mother, who vacationed in Libya up until 1969. The people were poor, but they were loved. Ghadaffi's regime changed everything. Sure, his government improved schools, housing, and other material things for the people, if only to keep them at bay. One could say he was an effective leader early on. After the discovery of oil, things got worse. Greed took over for pride. You know the rest of the story.

Are you going to answer my question now?

Simple, the Security Council authorised military action against Libya. One question to you, if you were against action in Libya why did you support the invasion of Iraq?

Another case of Obama's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Something has to be done in Syria. I hope it's sooner than later.

 

[blackascoal]

That "tidbit" about Ghadaffi came from my father and mother, who vacationed in Libya up until 1969. The people were poor, but they were loved. Ghadaffi's regime changed everything. Sure, his government improved schools, housing, and other material things for the people, if only to keep them at bay. One could say he was an effective leader early on. After the discovery of oil, things got worse. Greed took over for pride. You know the rest of the story.

No disrespect for the thoughts of your parents, but they are flat out wrong.

1. There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens
2. There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at zero percent interest by law.
3. Having a home is considered a human right in Libya
4. All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 dinar (U.S.$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.
5. Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Muammar Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent.
6. Should Libyans want to take up farming, they would receive farm land, a farm house, equipment, seeds and livestock to kickstart their farms all for free.
7. If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad. It is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300/month for accommodation and car allowance.
8. If a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50 percent of the price.
9. The price of gas in Libya is/was $0.14 per liter.
10. Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally.
11. If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found.
12. A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.
13. A mother who gives birth to a child receives U.S.$5,000.
14. Food is subsidized: 40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $0.15.
15. 25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.
16. Muammar Gaddafi carried out the world's largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.

I defy you to demonstrate that what I just posted is not true .. and if you can't, your parents were wrong.

Are you going to answer my question now?

Not sure how many times you want me to answer it.

From the post you're responding to .. While Gaddafi was not perfect .. as none are .. I've easily demonstrated why many of his people loved him .. and as an African-American, I loved what he was doing for Africa.

Are you aware that he built the Great Man-Made River .. one of the great wonders of the world.

Another case of Obama's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Something has to be done in Syria. I hope it's sooner than later.

Sure .. like something had to be done in Iraq .. something had to be done in Vietnam .. now something has to be done in Iran .. none of which Obama supporters claimed or believed when a republican was in office.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

 

[Disillusioned]

The phrase "something has to be done" is invariably followed by a justified atrocity on the part of somebody.

 

[anatta]

Are you aware that he built the Great Man-Made River .. one of the great wonders of the world.[/b]



Sure .. like something had to be done in Iraq .. something had to be done in Vietnam .. now something has to be done in Iran .. none of which Obama supporters claimed or believed when a republican was in office.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

we bombed the pipeline factory for the Great Man made river. something about "massing vehicles" no other criteria, not provenmilitary targets.

NATO Bombing Libyan Schools, Hospitals, Food Supply and Water Pipeline

 

[apple0154]

We used AL QUEDA. Were you aware of that?

Why shouldn't they have them when the US and Israel threaten Iran with them?

The notion that if they don't build them we will leave them alone is far from the truth. Gaddaffi got rid of his WMD and attempts at nuclear development .. then we attack and destroyed his country .. using AL QUEDA .. who supposedly attacked us.

What makes you believe that Iran is a country of wackos? Are you aware that the US and UK overthrew their democratically-elected government and installed the Shah and his brutal secret polce SAVAK that Israel trained to be monsters? WE did it to steal their resources. Are you aware of that?

Pakistan and North Korea have nukes ... and have had them for some time.

Which one of these countries recently mass-murders countless innocent people for profit?

The US or Iran?

Why did you stop digressing :0) I was getting excited.

To your point .. Pakistan and North Korea. Invented fears.

I feel you and I agree .. but we can't determine life for all people, nor in many cases can we even judge. But I get your point.

The only nation to EVER use nuclear weapons is the one you're standing in .. and we used them TWICE .. we were testing .. on real humans.

The US has no right nor authority to prevent any nation from protecting themselves from us. Either they are good for all, or they are good for none.

Again, that isn't true good brother.

We exist in a state of perpetual war for profit .. and truth ain't always pretty.

My point is the US is going to get resources when and where they want, except from countries that already have nuclear weapons, and that won't change until there is a change of mind or paradigm shift or enlightenment or however one wishes to phrase it.

The average citizen, in most countries, doesn't pay close attention to political deals meaning if the US is taking their natural resources from their country that's not their main concern. They're more concerned about their every day life. We saw that in Afghanistan and Iraq. The citizens were/are upset about interference in their daily lives. I doubt the farmer or the guy growing poppies in Afghanistan gives a damn about anything other than his farm.

They want their children to behave in a certain way. They want to keep their customs as barbaric as they may seem to us. Interfering in that is what causes the strife. If the US is going to take the resources of another country do it in a way that causes the least amount of upset for the citizens. That's the point. If it's going to happen, and it will unless there is a drastic change, it can be done with the least amount of upset and that's the difference between the Dems and the Repubs.

There was the Bush "boasting years" and there's the Obama "we're sorry" years. If saying "we're sorry" while still getting the resources and keeping disruption to a minimum that's better than killing the regular citizen. Ethical? No. Morally correct? No. Saves lives? Yes.

The wackos I was referring to are not the regular citizens. They just want to be left alone. I'm talking about the politically active, religious, "Allahu Akbar" boys. We don't want those guys getting their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Simple, the Security Council authorised military action against Libya. One question to you, if you were against action in Libya why did you support the invasion of Iraq?

For Yurt.