jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (12 posts)

I asked about Iraq and Libya the other day...

  1. habee profile image89
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    and tonight I found this clip, evidently before LaLo found it! lol

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ … ained.html

  2. Paraglider profile image89
    Paragliderposted 6 years ago

    That's quite funny smile
    Trouble is, it would be just as easy to use the same technique to 'prove' the exact opposite!

    1. habee profile image89
      habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not supplying this as "proof." I just thought it was funny! I have, however, pondered some of the same points.

    2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      How would you go about proving the opposite?

      1. Paraglider profile image89
        Paragliderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        By equal and opposite selection of 'facts' and by making the dumb blonde the right winger. It's just a game when it gets this superficial.

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The overwhelming reality is that the criticisms leveled at Bush over Iraq are equally applicable to Obama's Libyan adventure but remain ignored by Obama supporters ( read Bush critics) and the press.  The justifications for waging war on Libya are even more diaphanous than those used by Bush to attack Iraq.

          1. profile image0
            Texasbetaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Really? First of all, Libyans are protesting in the streets, trying to take their country away from a dictator who was killing them en masse. There is not committal of ground troops of any kind, and we have a unilateral force. That is Libya.
            In Iraq, there was no uprising. Hussein wasn't sending tanks into his own streets to fire on crowds. Bush and the administration came out on several occasions stating that there was a link between 9/11 and Hussein, that Hussein had WMDs and was going to use them, and they knew for a fact where they were. They said he was an immediate threat. It turned out they lied, and later we found out that they knew they were lying. We sent 150,000 ground troops in.
            So tell me, what is the link? Tan people and guns? Is that really all you have?

  3. uncorrectedvision profile image61
    uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago
  4. habee profile image89
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    I'm kinda surprised the far left hasn't jumped in. lol

  5. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    I don't know what you all are talking about.

    1. habee profile image89
      habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The funny clip in the first post. Well, it's supposed to be funny, at least.

  6. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    The latest is 'humanitarian intervention'.

 
working