- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is the Liberal "Base" excited that Obama Declared War on ISIS?
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:18 am to TT9
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:18 am to TT9
quote:
Thanks to the retard getting rid of Saddam he had no other choice.
sees hook swims away
just keep swimming just keep swimming
just keep swimming just keep swimming
0
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:19 am to TT9
quote:
Clinton didn't get us in a full scale war for nothing.
Don't bring up that appeaser, who openly passed on even taking Osama Bin Laden, what 3 times...Dude is more responsible for 911, than anyone, and all the wars since...Surely you aren't holding his arse up...
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:19 am to Ace Midnight
quote:His dereliction of duty started most of this. But he had a surplus!!!
True, but his cowardice in the face of the enemy led directly to 9/11 - which is bad enough.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:28 am to TT9
quote:Ever notice that the same people that spit on troops, called them baby killers, etc upon their return from Vietnam conveniently throw the adjective "brave" in there now when talking about the Troops, even though they detest the military to their core? Anything to stay in power, I guess. The elitist hypocrisy is absolutely sickening.
Clinton didn't get us in a full scale war for nothing. Trillion dollars and thousands of brave troops lives for nothing.
This post was edited on 9/11/14 at 7:30 am
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:30 am to Crow Pie
You guys actually see no difference in wars under Clinton and wars under Bush?
Let me give you a few hints.... In the wars under Clinton, American lives lost was in the single digits; with Bush 4 digits. In treasure under Clinton the costs was in the hundreds of millions and low billions. With Bush it reach a trillion. With Clinton we had no occupation. With Bush we had occupations.
You got one thing right... Clinton had a surplus. Bush lied and said Iraqi oil would pay for it all.
And yet I have never seen one Con blame Bush for that lie.
Go figure.
Let me give you a few hints.... In the wars under Clinton, American lives lost was in the single digits; with Bush 4 digits. In treasure under Clinton the costs was in the hundreds of millions and low billions. With Bush it reach a trillion. With Clinton we had no occupation. With Bush we had occupations.
You got one thing right... Clinton had a surplus. Bush lied and said Iraqi oil would pay for it all.
And yet I have never seen one Con blame Bush for that lie.
Go figure.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:32 am to Vegas Bengal
Would Bush have gone to war if Clinton had accepted the Sudanese offer of Bin Laden?
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:34 am to Carville
quote:
even though they detest the military to their core
Leave the liberals alone. It is not their fault that they are pathetic and weak.
A liberal is pretty much the equivalent of a castrated Imam who supports ISIS .... from Britain.
Liberals have no spine, no balls. The only real reason liberals don't like ISIS right now ... is because their HMF-sac-less-messiah-IC tells them so.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:39 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
Let me give you a few hints.... In the wars under Clinton
No American interests were pursued - merely humanitarian.
OEF (Afghanistan) were directly in response to 9/11. OIF was discretionary, but justifiable (and Congressionally approved) based on Hussein's misconduct. I can disagree with how we fought both wars, but not the goals themselves - and they were both directly in support of U.S. interests (unlike Clinton's playing at war.)
quote:
Clinton had a surplus.
Myth. Propoganda. Spin. Accounting games. I can't call them lies, but the most fair way to describe this was the budget was in "near balance".
The reason I know this? The debt never went down. So, if there was a surplus (Hint: there wasn't) - somebody stole it.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:45 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
quote:Clinton had a surplus. Myth. Propoganda. Spin. Accounting games. I can't call them lies, but the most fair way to describe this was the budget was in "near balance". The reason I know this? The debt never went down. So, if there was a surplus (Hint: there wasn't) - somebody stole it.
Yep, Clinton had a surplus for a short time, but He left America in debt, and Bush a recession, those are facts. Leaving the US with a free Osama Bin Laden proved to be even worse, and he's even said so...
Posted on 9/11/14 at 7:49 am to CamdenTiger
quote:
Clinton had a surplus for a short time
Must have been seconds. It did not translate into an end-of-year reduction in debt - ergo, it didn't happen.
Accounting games. It is amazing how that works when a D is in the White House.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:03 am to Crow Pie
quote:
Is the Liberal "Base" excited that Obama Declared War on ISIS?
Does it help them win an election? If so, yes.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:23 am to Crow Pie
quote:
His dereliction of duty started most of this. But he had a surplus!!!
He gutted the CIA with his budget cuts. Watched a History channel doc on OBL and how they tracked him down etc and a few times they described how the CIA was 20-30 years behind with ground assets because of those budget cuts.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:24 am to geauxtigs99
Let's see how the plans actually get carried ot. he needs to use 100% force to eradicate them and not just talk about it.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:25 am to TT9
quote:
Clinton didn't get us in a full scale war for nothing. Trillion dollars and thousands of brave troops lives for nothing.
No, Bill did not.
His wife, Hillary, however, along with dozens of other Democrats, VOTED FOR IT.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:26 am to Crow Pie
quote:
Help me understand the hypocrisy.
Help me to understand your stupidity.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:28 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Help me to understand your stupidity.
And deflection number 3....
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:30 am to geauxtigs99
Lib's always try to have it both ways. I was working in Oregon shortly before 9/11 and Afghanistan. Several times a week, for almost 2 years, I would get emails from far lefty's on the Taliban and how bad they were (human rights, women children etc) they called for every action possible against them, even military action. The US had barely begun its campaign in Afghanistan and the same groups were stunned at our actions. Marching, protesting, chaining themselves to trees and National Guard gates.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:32 am to TT9
quote:
TT9
Are you excited Obama declared war on the non Islamic group ISIS?
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:41 am to StrangeBrew
TT9 has already admitted on here that he is an Obama "fanboy". We aren't going to see anything like objective analysis of anything Obama does from TT9.
He's an Obama Fanboy. He's a cheerleader for the administration. That's it.
He's an Obama Fanboy. He's a cheerleader for the administration. That's it.
Posted on 9/11/14 at 8:43 am to geauxtigs99
quote:
He gutted the CIA with his budget cuts.
Honestly, that started in the late 1970s.
However, the significant cuts during the Clinton Administration, which led to the mythical, non-existent "surplus" were primarily in the Department of Defense, and in particular, the Army - the organization which would ultimately bear the lion's share of work in the GWOT (tm).
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News