Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Obama defends US wars


Kosar_For_President

Recommended Posts

If this is my last post because the secret service will be at my door so be it.

 

After promising during his campaign to bring home the troops... NOW he's actually defending what Bush did. What a f*cking joke. I guess the swine flu bullshit has quieted down, they need something to keep us busy.

 

Even a bigger ass clown then before

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is my last post because the secret service will be at my door so be it.

 

After promising during his campaign to bring home the troops... NOW he's actually defending what Bush did. What a f*cking joke. I guess the swine flu bullshit has quieted down, they need something to keep us busy.

 

Even a bigger ass clown then before

 

 

Wow.

Haliburton is still running the show.....

Now they're the good guys right lefties?

Harder to follow than professional wrestling.

But less honest.

:wacko:

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did Obama promise to bring the troops home from Afghanistan? He pledged to send more in the campaign, and then did. And then he did again. You're just flat-out wrong.

 

He pledged to bring them home from Iraq in the campaign. And that process has already begun, and finishes by the end of 2011. Read the Status of Forces Agreement. It's all there.

 

And if you listened to the speech, Kosar, which you clearly didn't, he didn't even mention Iraq. He listed a bunch of conflicts where he said a military response was justified. Iraq wasn't one of them. Then he repudiated Bush's detention and interrogation policies.

 

How this is "defending what Bush did" in Iraq? How was what he said about Al Qaeda and Afghanistan inconsistent with what he said in the campaign? It's only true if you imagine that he pledged to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in the campaign, but he clearly didn't. You just don't know what you're talking about.

 

Here's Obama in July of 2008: "The greatest threat to that security lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train and insurgents strike into Afghanistan. We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as President, I won't. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO to secure the border, to take out terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights."

 

Here he is writing in Time Magazine that same summer: "My first order as Commander in Chief will be to end the war in Iraq and refocus our efforts on Afghanistan and our broader security interests. Let me be clear--my plan would not abandon Iraq. It is in our strategic interest to maintain a residual force that will go after al-Qaeda, train Iraqi security forces and protect U.S. interests. But we must recognize that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was. The central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

...I will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan and use this commitment to seek greater contributions--with fewer restrictions--from NATO allies."

 

You guys are just clueless. Just clueless. And being 100% wrong never stops you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, you keep trying to cloak Obamao's suckiness with invisibility.

 

Hint: It does not work. The bark is really ,really, really falling off the

 

FREAKIN UGLY OBAMAO TREE.

 

By the way:

 

1. You referenced tree rings as proof of global warming. Right. It was

 

only ONE TREE in SIBERIA they found that matched up with their fraud.

 

2. The color black also absorbs heat. It's a scientific fact, Heck. Look it up.

 

Do you know what a spectrophotometer is, Heck? Can you spell it? @@

 

It sends a precision light beam into a sample, and the degree of light reflectance

 

is a scientific value that directly relates to a specific color.

 

3. Heck, you breathe out CO2. It isn't a poison, it's a waste product of the process

 

of breathing. But, it's also what is taken in by plant life. You should break away

 

from moveonupgore'scrotch.orgy, and drop the arrogant pretense. You stand to learn a lot...

 

I'm just sayin...

 

4. So, I don't believe you ever answered the question:

 

Did you know Shep, maybe Al and mz the pussy, on some other forum before you came to the Browns board?

 

I just ask because you four seem to be cloned from the same narrow minded, liberal DNA.

 

Or, maybe you all worship the same socialist professor you had in college.

 

Just asking, just curious, you understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did Obama promise to bring the troops home from Afghanistan? He pledged to send more in the campaign, and then did. And then he did again. You're just flat-out wrong.

 

That's correct.

He pledged to escalate in Afghanistan.

A pledge that was ignored by the anti war throngs that supported him and called Bush a warmonger.

 

 

You guys are just clueless. Just clueless. And being 100% wrong never stops you.

 

Well it never stopped you Heck.

 

The hawks and doves only exchange uniforms after a political shift.

 

Ten hut.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was winning by doing nothing - like not standing up for our country, not

 

rejecting a global spread the wealth from the U.S. to the world, not having

 

any values whatsoever, having no courage nor convictions...

 

Obamao is a disgrace, and all the mao-style propaganda won't change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Steve. Kosar was wrong. What he said was that Obama pledged to bring the troops home. That was wrong. Obama never pledged to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. He clearly pledged to increase the troop levels in Afghanistan, over and over. Anyone who paid a basic level of attention to the campaign, or the months since the election, would understand this.

 

So it makes him - and you - look sort of foolish when you're dinging the guy for being inconsistent, or calling him a "douche bag", when you don't have your facts right; when the thing you're accusing him of being inconsistent about is something he hasn't been inconsistent about. You can't say he defends Bush policy in the speech when he's clearly not defending Bush policy - or I should say you shouldn't say it, because it makes you look clueless.

 

If you're got a fair critique that hasn't been pulled out of your ass go ahead and level it. But this one isn't fair.

 

Kosar was wrong. That's the point. As much as you'd like it to be, this post has nothing to do with me, or what my opinions on the subject are. "Blind loyalty" is the only place you know how to go to, and what you think passes for insight. It isn't. I know that doesn't leave you with anything else to say, but that's not my problem.

 

And it's that stuff, along with your simpleton cohorts, is probably why everyone who has something to offer went to another board. You can imagine that it's because we all like to agree with each other if you like, but it really isn't, because we don't agree on everything. It's because you guys don't know enough about any of these subjects to have a real debate, this being a perfect example.

 

Though I did like how you chastised everyone who left for only wanting to hear their own opinions right next to the post where your buddy says he loves it now that everyone else is gone because he doesn't have to hear their opinions.

 

Always fun checking in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Steve. Kosar was wrong. What he said was that Obama pledged to bring the troops home. That was wrong. Obama never pledged to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. He clearly pledged to increase the troop levels in Afghanistan, over and over. Anyone who paid a basic level of attention to the campaign, or the months since the election, would understand this.

 

So it makes him - and you - look sort of foolish when you're dinging the guy for being inconsistent, or calling him a "douche bag", when you don't have your facts right; when the thing you're accusing him of being inconsistent about is something he hasn't been inconsistent about. You can't say he defends Bush policy in the speech when he's clearly not defending Bush policy - or I should say you shouldn't say it, because it makes you look clueless.

 

If you're got a fair critique that hasn't been pulled out of your ass go ahead and level it. But this one isn't fair.

 

Kosar was wrong. That's the point. As much as you'd like it to be, this post has nothing to do with me, or what my opinions on the subject are. "Blind loyalty" is the only place you know how to go to, and what you think passes for insight. It isn't. I know that doesn't leave you with anything else to say, but that's not my problem.

 

And it's that stuff, along with your simpleton cohorts, is probably why everyone who has something to offer went to another board. You can imagine that it's because we all like to agree with each other if you like, but it really isn't, because we don't agree on everything. It's because you guys don't know enough about any of these subjects to have a real debate, this being a perfect example.

 

Though I did like how you chastised everyone who left for only wanting to hear their own opinions right next to the post where your buddy says he loves it now that everyone else is gone because he doesn't have to hear their opinions.

 

Always fun checking in.

 

 

Yawn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Steve. Kosar was wrong. What he said was that Obama pledged to bring the troops home. That was wrong. Obama never pledged to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. He clearly pledged to increase the troop levels in Afghanistan, over and over. Anyone who paid a basic level of attention to the campaign, or the months since the election, would understand this.

 

So it makes him - and you - look sort of foolish when you're dinging the guy for being inconsistent, or calling him a "douche bag", when you don't have your facts right; when the thing you're accusing him of being inconsistent about is something he hasn't been inconsistent about. You can't say he defends Bush policy in the speech when he's clearly not defending Bush policy - or I should say you shouldn't say it, because it makes you look clueless.

 

If you're got a fair critique that hasn't been pulled out of your ass go ahead and level it. But this one isn't fair.

 

Kosar was wrong. That's the point. As much as you'd like it to be, this post has nothing to do with me, or what my opinions on the subject are. "Blind loyalty" is the only place you know how to go to, and what you think passes for insight. It isn't. I know that doesn't leave you with anything else to say, but that's not my problem.

 

And it's that stuff, along with your simpleton cohorts, is probably why everyone who has something to offer went to another board. You can imagine that it's because we all like to agree with each other if you like, but it really isn't, because we don't agree on everything. It's because you guys don't know enough about any of these subjects to have a real debate, this being a perfect example.

 

Though I did like how you chastised everyone who left for only wanting to hear their own opinions right next to the post where your buddy says he loves it now that everyone else is gone because he doesn't have to hear their opinions.

 

Always fun checking in.

 

 

"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank. " - Barack Obama Campaign Promise - October 27, 2007

 

If I said this about Bush you would agree. Talk about blind loyalty.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of anger about the policy on the left. There have been countless op-eds and such questioning the wisdom of this. I hear it all the time. But I think a lot of people weren't paying attention, or imagined that Obama just talked a serious game about Afghanistan for the campaign. They didn't think he'd actually do it. Well, he said he would, and then he did. So it's not like I was surprised that this was the decision. He's always been a moderate and a pragmatist. Everyone likes to make him their own caricature: on the right, a dangerous radical socialist who must be stopped at all costs; on the left, the guy who would reverse everything Bush ever did, and immediately. Well, that's not who he is, and that's not what was ever going to happen.

 

If you're talking about marches in the streets, there has been some of that too, just not as widespread or well-attended. I don't think that adding 30,000 troops and promising to begin the process of withdrawal in 18 months is the kind of thing that makes people take to the streets.

 

As for what happens, hell if I know. I'd think that some troops start to come home when they say if only because we can't afford to do this forever, and because we don't have an Afghan government worth doing it with anyway. Nor do I think the whole "safe haven" argument makes enough sense to warrant billions of dollars and more dead Americans/NATO troops. But I can see the wisdom of adding more troops because there were never enough to begin with. So it's probably wise to add more even if you want to leave, and that's what I hope he's doing.

 

It's tough. There are lots of people in that region that I'd love to see dead, and we'll be fighting them for years, even if it's in some reduced capacity. But I don't think the prospects for "success", whatever that is, are good. And whatever gains we do see are likely to be temporary. And it costs us a lot of money that we don't have. So I hope we do begin to wind down in 18 months, and I don't really care what the conditions on the ground are at the time. It's Afghanistan. Nation-building here is a bit of a fool's errand, but that's what we're doing.

 

It's funny, too. Everyone is freaking out about the cost of cap and trade, but even when you take the cost of the program in a decade - when it really kicks in - it's only a fraction of what it costs to send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan for a year. But nobody seems to worry about the cost of doing that, especially on the right.

 

So all in all, I understand the logic of the policy, but I'm not a big fan. We're wasting untold billions of dollars overreacting to a horrible day, and there are lots of ways to better spend that money, or not spend it at all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank. " - Barack Obama Campaign Promise - October 27, 2007

 

If I said this about Bush you would agree. Talk about blind loyalty.

 

He's talking about Iraq in that quote, Kosar - Iraq. And we now have a plan that's already gone into effect to bring the troops home from Iraq. Again, read the Status of Forces Agreement. What does that say?

 

The speech yesterday was not about Iraq. He didn't mention it. He spoke about Afghanistan.

 

So here you are accusing him of being an "ass clown" because he "promised during his campaign to bring home the troops... NOW he's actually defending what Bush did. What a f*cking joke."

 

There's not a word of that that makes sense. He did not campaign to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. You've got it entirely backwards. You seem to be going on the premise that there's one war, not two. He always pledged to end the Iraq War, and to escalate the one in Afghanistan. It's not his problem that you can't tell the two apart.

 

You're just wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your perspective, Heck.

 

Despite the lessons the Soviets learned about Afgan, I felt Obama did a good job in justifying these actions. And, yes, he always said that Afgan is a war worth fighting and that Pakistan is a very dangerous country, if not the most dangerous.

 

Was it Gates.........I forget.........but saying things like, "Winning" in Afgan only stirs the conversation toward what, in fact, would 'Winning' look like - lots of shades of gray for lots of interpretation.

 

I hope this works as you described.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though I did like how you chastised everyone who left for only wanting to hear their own opinions right next to the post where your buddy says he loves it now that everyone else is gone because he doesn't have to hear their opinions.

 

Hey I'm glad you're happy in the new board. Why contiually boast about it here?

You guys ban Ghoolie yet? Lums? Rich?

 

AFAIK some of the , er, guys wanted a non Quinn lover banned so inspecta got his dream of his own board.

 

 

But I like ya Heck despite whatever my "buddy" (whoever he is) says.

 

McGlothin wouldn't be the same without Elanor Clift.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have no idea who any of those guys are or what the problems with them were. The board is better because the discussions are better. And the discussions are better because they don't get derailed by idiocy. You can talk to people who actually know things, rather than simply feel things, namely their clannish and impotent rage.

 

I check back in here for the same reason I always did - because you guys let me know what's going on in crazytown USA. Of course, I could just go to Fox News or Drudge and see what you're upset about this week, or on this particular day. But it's always instructive to see just how detached from reality the right-wing base has become, and how they've gotten that way.

 

You guys get your news from - and only from - partisan news outlets and a handful of right-wing opinion makers. You never hear anything else.

 

It wasn't always like that. The facts used to be more of less agreed upon. Now you've got your own "facts": cutting taxes raises revenue, global warming is a hoax, etc.

 

It's a strange era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have no idea who any of those guys are or what the problems with them were. The board is better because the discussions are better. And the discussions are better because they don't get derailed by idiocy. You can talk to people who actually know things, rather than simply feel things, namely their clannish and impotent rage.

 

I check back in here for the same reason I always did - because you guys let me know what's going on in crazytown USA. Of course, I could just go to Fox News or Drudge and see what you're upset about this week, or on this particular day. But it's always instructive to see just how detached from reality the right-wing base has become, and how they've gotten that way.

 

You guys get your news from - and only from - partisan news outlets and a handful of right-wing opinion makers. You never hear anything else.

 

It wasn't always like that. The facts used to be more of less agreed upon. Now you've got your own "facts": cutting taxes raises revenue, global warming is a hoax, etc.

 

It's a strange era.

 

You know what's funny is that you think because someone doesn't believe in the left and it's leader you think that person is a right winger. Which with me it is further from the truth. Nice way to generalize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kosar, all I said about you is that, in this case, you don't know what you're talking about. In fact, in order to make the point you made to start this thread, you have to not know what you're talking about. Because it doesn't work in reality.

 

And we didn't even get to the other ridiculous part where you contended that the administration used swine flu as some sort of distraction or scare tactic.

 

Do you still contend that Obama was being inconsistent and that his Oslo speech was backing Bush's policies, or that he's gone against the tenor of something he said about Iraq or Afghanistan in the campaign? You tried one quote already. That proved my point, not yours. Do you have any others? Can you produce a quote where he pledged to bring the troops home from Afghanistan? I produced a couple where he said precisely the opposite. I can get more if you like.

 

What part of the speech makes him an "ass clown"?

 

It's okay to say you got it wrong, you know. And if you don't like me for pointing it out and would like to lash out some more, that's fine with me, too. I'm used to people in here trying to change the subject entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have no idea who any of those guys are or what the problems with them were. The board is better because the discussions are better. And the discussions are better because they don't get derailed by idiocy. You can talk to people who actually know things, rather than simply feel things, namely their clannish and impotent rage.

 

Yeah?

You must be reading something else.

Football talk looks about the same to me.

 

.

 

You guys get your news from - and only from - partisan news outlets and a handful of right-wing opinion makers. You never hear anything else.

 

That's because the lefties were part of the exodus.

Before that we got the news as filtered through Salon or the Huff.

 

It wasn't always like that. The facts used to be more of less agreed upon. Now you've got your own "facts": cutting taxes raises revenue, global warming is a hoax, etc.

 

I don't know what "facts" you accuse me of denying.

Global warming exists or did a number of years ago..

To what extent and to what peril (to use the presidents term) who knows.

Can we stop it or how?

Who knows.

Is somebody looking to make a buck either way.

Damn skippy.

 

WSS

 

 

It's a strange era.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, Salon and HuffPo aren't news sites. They do some reporting on their own, but they're mostly opinion sites with links to news organizations. And I can't remember ever posting a link to either, nor can I remember anyone doing so more than once or twice. And even if they did, there's nothing wrong with that, just as there's nothing wrong with posting a link to an opinion piece from Charles Krauthammer or some nut from World Net Daily.

 

The point that you're missing is that the "news" you guys read, see, and post almost never comes from a real news organization. It's always opinion. It's always partisan. The names of the threads on here are often taken straight from Drudge re-writes, almost as if no one has figured out that's his game. I can see 5 threads on the front page right now that were Drudge headlines, and the body of the thread copy and pasted from what Drudge linked to.

 

So again, your false equivalency arguments are always as off as they are boring. Never once were there 5 headlines taken right from Daily Kos or HuffPo on the front page of this forum. You really should move beyond instantly going to the "you do it too!" argument over and over again, and I should probably stop expecting you to.

 

As for the political discussions on the other board, mine all happen in the private forums, and I disagree with you about the quality of the football analysis. There's no one as good as Alo or Dennis or some of the other guys in here. Not even close.

 

PS - You just said you don't deny global warming, than suggested that it's not happening anymore a sentence later. This would be denying global warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, Heck, you are so good at chasing people around to get questions answered...

 

this isn't a hard question. You don't even have to answer it honestly, as usual, but

 

ignoring the question begs another question, and yet another.

 

So, just answer this question, continue to ignore that those scientists

 

admitted they couldn't prove global warming was caused by man, ignore

 

that even Gore admitted the gw fraud is all about international UN mandated politics,

 

live in your liberal dream world.

 

Just answer the question? It isn't a hard question, you can muster up some kind of

 

reply, and like I already mentioned, you can even bs, as most always, in answering !

 

**************

 

4. So, I don't believe you ever answered the question:

 

Did you know Shep, maybe Al and mz the pussy, on some other forum before you came to the Browns board?

 

I just ask because you four seem to be cloned from the same narrow minded, liberal DNA.

 

Or, maybe you all worship the same socialist professor you had in college.

 

Just asking, just curious, you understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OH, and we get it. Any site that isn't extremely bigoted toward your leftism... is not a news organization.

 

gotcha, oh, grand pewbah of arrogant leftist dogma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...