Presidential Election: 2012

[Dapper]

And it was a largely French-led, British backed operation. The US had barely any involvement whatsoever. I have to say it came as startling news to me that Libya was Obama's war - Sarkozy might object.

We'll call it a war that happened under Obama's presidency, that is better verbiage than 'Obama's war'.And he deserves credit for not doing what the US has historically done, which is what you pointed out, letting others do the world policing. Sorry if my point wan't clear.

 

[arora]

Always nice when the truth comes out in here, even if Dapper still needs to give out a trophy

 

[shmogt]

Obama let the "war" continue which to me makes him equally as bad as bush. You sent troops there on a lie the absolute first thing he should of done is said this was wrong lets bring them home.

 

[Joey D]

Obama let the "war" continue which to me makes him equally as bad as bush. You sent troops there on a lie the absolute first thing he should of done is said this was wrong lets bring them home.

You do realize that you can't just stop a war right? As Americans we put the Iraqi's in a bad situation, it would have been worse to just up and leave and let them fend for themselves. That's how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world.

Obama should have taken steps for a speedier solution, but it's not like he could have came into office January 1, 2009 and said the war is over.

 

[shmogt]

You do realize that you can't just stop a war right? As Americans we put the Iraqi's in a bad situation, it would have been worse to just up and leave and let them fend for themselves. That's how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world.

Obama should have taken steps for a speedier solution, but it's not like he could have came into office January 1, 2009 and said the war is over.

Well that's kinda what I meant. Like he would say first thing in doing is pulling out the troops. It wouldn't have been like that day lol, but within a few months after they have an election or whatever they do over there.

 

[ChaosStar79]

You do realize that you can't just stop a war right? As Americans we put the Iraqi's in a bad situation, it would have been worse to just up and leave and let them fend for themselves. That's how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world.

Obama should have taken steps for a speedier solution, but it's not like he could have came into office January 1, 2009 and said the war is over.

WE are how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world generally come to power. Obama very well could have done exactly what you said and ended it on Day One. Of course there are logistics to work out so not everyone would just be magically whisked away back to their home states, but it certainly isn't like he had to wait for congress to back him. Clearly they are uninvolved. What possible reason could there be that he could not do this? Because the region is "too unstable"? Check the past 3-4k years out and rethink that one, then come back and tell me why We MUST stay there one second longer.

 

[Dapper]

Calling war time decisions with no experience or in depth knowledge of the situation is kind of dewy-eyed.

 

[ChaosStar79]

Calling war time decisions with no experience or in depth knowledge of the situation is kind of dewy-eyed.

Obama as CIC?

 

[Tornado]

Obama very well could have done exactly what you said and ended it on Day One.

Only in the technical sense. Not in the sense that doing so wouldn't have made things worse.

Because the region is "too unstable"? Check the past 3-4k years out and rethink that one, then come back and tell me why We MUST stay there one second longer.

This statement doesn't prove what you are trying to use it to prove.

 

[Dapper]

Obama as CIC?

You wanted him to make a decision on day one! That is a complete contradiction. You can't elect a guy and expect him to make worldly decisions that he has no experience in on his first day. But that is what you think he should've done.

 

[ChaosStar79]

You wanted him to make a decision on day one! That is a complete contradiction. You can't elect a guy and expect him to make worldly decisions that he has no experience in on his first day. But that is what you think he should've done.

I am pointing out that Obama is exactly what you described with your statement. "no experience or in depth knowledge of the situation"

Only in the technical sense. Not in the sense that doing so wouldn't have made things worse.

We don't know that anything would have gotten any worse, but we do know that our involvement in the war could be over by now if he had done as promised.

This statement doesn't prove what you are trying to use it to prove.

I disagree. That part of the world will be a pit for easily the next thousand years and probably long after that. Yes I am speculating, but c'mon... That's the safest bet there is. Just as long as you have multiple groups of opposing peoples all laying claim to the same areas and believing that they have some divine affiliation and authority to do so, there will be problems. We cannot settle them and we should not try. We can however, not add fuel to the fire or waste our efforts trying to change a system that does not want to be changed.

 

[shmogt]

WE are how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world generally come to power. Obama very well could have done exactly what you said and ended it on Day One. Of course there are logistics to work out so not everyone would just be magically whisked away back to their home states, but it certainly isn't like he had to wait for congress to back him. Clearly they are uninvolved. What possible reason could there be that he could not do this? Because the region is "too unstable"? Check the past 3-4k years out and rethink that one, then come back and tell me why We MUST stay there one second longer.

Lol too stable. Even these terrorist groups they said were there makes me laugh. Sadam didn't let anyone go against his orders and if they did they were jailed or killed. They said Osama was responsible for 9/11 and went to Iraq to get him. Don't you think Sadam would of been like you stupid idiot Osama why would you do that and kill him. Dictators don't let these free radicals make moves. That's what makes them dictators is that no one does anything unless there told to. You think Castro has people in Cuba going around planning things against his orders, of course not.

 

[hampus_dh]

You do realize that you can't just stop a war right? As Americans we put the Iraqi's in a bad situation, it would have been worse to just up and leave and let them fend for themselves. That's how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world.

I hope you do know that they never should have went in the first place?

More people have died during the US era down there then when Saddam was ruling the place with an iron fist.
Sure he did some sick things but it´s no comparison to what the US did down there.

And it was all based on a lie...

 

[Joey D]

WE are how dictators, terrorist groups and other groups arise that cause harm to the world generally come to power. Obama very well could have done exactly what you said and ended it on Day One. Of course there are logistics to work out so not everyone would just be magically whisked away back to their home states, but it certainly isn't like he had to wait for congress to back him. Clearly they are uninvolved. What possible reason could there be that he could not do this? Because the region is "too unstable"? Check the past 3-4k years out and rethink that one, then come back and tell me why We MUST stay there one second longer.

The US isn't a dictator nation, you really need to look up what a dictator is. Sure we could be seen as a terrorist group, but that really would only be outside the Western World an even then I'm going to guess most countries don't see us that way at all.

And no Obama couldn't have ended it day one without a catastrophic backlash from war supporters in the US and out allies. Just opting out of a war that we started would basically be leaving an entire region in shambles and letting the people fend for themselves after we completely shook up there way of life. It would be similar to me coming into your house with you still living in it, destroy everything and then just tell you to deal with it as I leave.

And if you don't know why the Middle East region is important perhaps you should do some more investigating. The number one reason the Middle East is so important to the Western World is oil, they have and we need it. A close second is religious ties, the 3 or of the 5 biggest religions in the world have roots in the Middle East. You need to protect those interests whether you agree with it or not.

Yes, I would have preferred if we hadn't gone into Iraq a if we really wanted to get Saddam I think black and special ops would have been the way to go. But Bush wanted it his way and that's what Obama was stuck with when he took office. I do think Obama took two years to long to pull out of Iraq, we could have had everything in order by early 2010 and ready to end the war.

I hope you do know that they never should have went in the first place?

More people have died during the US era down there then when Saddam was ruling the place with an iron fist.
Sure he did some sick things but it´s no comparison to what the US did down there.

And it was all based on a lie...

Where did you get your information? I'm going to need a source that shows the US doing worse things to the Iraqi people then Saddam did. I agree there were a group of soldiers that did some pretty shameful things, but I heard nothing that was even close to what Saddam did.

And I don't believe it was based on a lie, it was based on bad information. There is a difference. It doesn't diminish the fact it wasn't a huge screw up but do you really think the President would lie to the citizens to go to war? Bush may have been an awful president and done quite a few bad things, but I don't believe lying was one of them.

 

[shmogt]

Seriously no matter what happens its still going to be like you coming to my house smashing everything and leaving for me to clean up. You hear all these officials talking about the troops and how they feel etc, but interesting how they never actually ask the troops. No one wants to be there. I haven't seen the stats that US has done more damage, but I'm willing to bet they have. US policy there is the same as it is in the country. Basically you kill someone and I was with you I would also go down on murder chargers and be just as guilty even tho I didn't kill anyone. So if there in house and a guy they need to kill is there everyone with him whether it be woman, children, old people whatever has to die as there are just as guilty. The amount of deaths are insane over something that should have never happened. The US is the biggest terrorist group ever. Who else do you hear goes around to other countries and just takes over muscling there way threw.

 

[Famine]

We'll call it a war that happened under Obama's presidency, that is better verbiage than 'Obama's war'.And he deserves credit for not doing what the US has historically done, which is what you pointed out, letting others do the world policing. Sorry if my point wan't clear.

I'm just curious how Obama gets credit for starting a war he didn't start and the manner in which a war he had no direct input of any kind in ended:

Obama started a war and it is over and no Americans died.

Obama is equally to blame and credit for the NATO, French- and British-led events in Libya as Mark Rutte or Abdullah Gül. That is "barely".

Yes, no Americans died in the conflict in Libya. That's not hard to acheive when there were very few present*... It just seems a very odd thing to credit Obama for.


*USAF F15s enforced the no-fly zone initially, along with British and French Tornados, Typhoons and Mirages. The USS Enterprise battle group was in the Mediterranean along with British Nuclear submarines, the Charles de Gaulles, all preceded by the Canadian destroyers. The SAS and Canadian JTF2 ran operations, but US special forces did not. All were under NATO control.

 

[Joey D]

Seriously no matter what happens its still going to be like you coming to my house smashing everything and leaving for me to clean up. You hear all these officials talking about the troops and how they feel etc, but interesting how they never actually ask the troops. No one wants to be there. I haven't seen the stats that US has done more damage, but I'm willing to bet they have. US policy there is the same as it is in the country. Basically you kill someone and I was with you I would also go down on murder chargers and be just as guilty even tho I didn't kill anyone. So if there in house and a guy they need to kill is there everyone with him whether it be woman, children, old people whatever has to die as there are just as guilty. The amount of deaths are insane over something that should have never happened. The US is the biggest terrorist group ever. Who else do you hear goes around to other countries and just takes over muscling there way threw.

I would still like to see proof that US soldiers are murdering innocent people in a large scale. I'm sure there are some that have done some rather questionable acts, but as a whole I highly doubt the US military is acting like a terrorist group.

 

[Dennisch]

Obama started a war and it is over and no Americans died.

Where do you get information like that?

 

[3spddrft]

Do I need to read 44 pages to jump in on this conversation?

 

[Dotini]

Do I need to read 44 pages to jump in on this conversation?

No.

The moderators are not that anal.

Just don't double-post. That irritates everybody.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No wars have been constitutional for a long time, and the constitution need completely reformed in my opinion anyway. Troops in Afghanistan... That is not Obama's war, he is trying to fix Bush's problem.

Two wars were started under bush, and they are still going on with people still dieing. Obama started a war and it is over and no Americans died. One guy did a much better job, bringing up other relative minute mistake Obama has done does not mitigate what he has done right.

How can you say that, yet he's implementing Bush fixes still and he's been in office for a while. The all-stars that are his admin should have been able to come up with their own plans, not pander. I also said that I don't give praise to Bush or any of them going as far back as LBJ. He didn't make minute mistakes only...and we'll see how Africa goes for Black ops, the same black ops plan that isn't working out so well in Afganistan. Especially knowing that months under his presidency have seen worse violence than many under Bush.

Either be fair to all sides of the political spectrum and take the hammer to them or don't at all. Doing this party politics, you talk up the side you want and never tear them down for some of the more stupid things they do. How about all of America stops with party politics cause that would clearly shift America into a better path.

Finally the constitution needs rewriting? Why? To me if it were re-written it would make this nation much worse, than the ignoring of it that presidents and House of reps seem to do on both sides. We would have people like you or those from the right trying to gain better footing and shift the nation to their ideals rather than what the founders saw which was a deep need for unity across the board due to those they fought.

 

[shmogt]

I would still like to see proof that US soldiers are murdering innocent people in a large scale. I'm sure there are some that have done some rather questionable acts, but as a whole I highly doubt the US military is acting like a terrorist group.

Well when they go into a city and two people shoot at them and they throw a grenade killing 6 innocents as well as the shooters and do this for every time. It adds up. Multiple that by how many years they have been there and the death toll has got to be way up there.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I would still like to see proof that US soldiers are murdering innocent people in a large scale. I'm sure there are some that have done some rather questionable acts, but as a whole I highly doubt the US military is acting like a terrorist group.

Seeing as we invaded a nation on false pretenses not sure how you can come to this conclusion in the first place when we look at Iraq. Iraq had as much right to defend their nation as we would if they invaded us.

 

[Joey D]

Well when they go into a city and two people shoot at them and they throw a grenade killing 6 innocents as well as the shooters and do this for every time. It adds up. Multiple that by how many years they have been there and the death toll has got to be way up there.

That isn't a source now is it? I don't believe it for an instant that they grenade random targets every time soldiers go into the city. Show me documentation that showcases a vast majority of the military killing civilians. Yes innocent people will die in war, it sucks, but it happens. I don't think the US would intentionally target civilians.

Seeing as we invaded a nation on false pretenses not sure how you can come to this conclusion in the first place when we look at Iraq. Iraq had as much right to defend their nation as we would if they invaded us.

I'm not disputing that, but we aren't terrorist. The Iraqi people had every right to take up arms with whoever they saw fit and defend the nation if they stood with Saddam. The US was against Saddam so that means our soldiers fought their soldiers, it's how war works.

==

It's worth noting that I don't support the war and I'm not even a huge fan of the military or military personal. I'm also not even a huge fan of America. I just don't think we are a nation of baby killers or the next thing to a terrorist group.

 

[shmogt]

There is no war it's just the US in there country for no reason. Every death is a civilian. The people are not soldiers they are regular people who just want there country back and the occasional one will figure hey the troops killed all my friends and family I mine as well try to avenge them by putting a bomb in my car and driving directly at them.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm not disputing that, but we aren't terrorist. The Iraqi people had every right to take up arms with whoever they saw fit and defend the nation if they stood with Saddam. The US was against Saddam so that means our soldiers fought their soldiers, it's how war works.

==

It's worth noting that I don't support the war and I'm not even a huge fan of the military or military personal. I'm also not even a huge fan of America. I just don't think we are a nation of baby killers or the next thing to a terrorist group.

Nope just practitioners of imperialism is all

 

[Dapper]

Yes, no Americans died in the conflict in Libya. That's not hard to acheive when there were very few present*... It just seems a very odd thing to credit Obama for.

Considering how the US gets involved in almost every war, Obama did a great thing by not sacrificing American soldiers.

The US is still engaged in 2 wars Bush stuck his nose in starting over ten years ago! Can't you see a between the two strategies?

"U.S. military forces are on the leading edge of the coalition operation, taking out Libya’s integrated air and missile defense system."
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=63225

The US had a major role. Then the US did what it usually doesn't, let others do some work- it is not odd to give the guy in charge credit for the strategy that was implemented.

Ron Paul wouldn't have done anything, which is not a bad idea, and every other republican would have went into a full blown war.

 

[Tornado]

The people are not soldiers they are regular people who just want there country back and the occasional one will figure hey the troops killed all my friends and family I mine as well try to avenge them by putting a bomb in my car and driving directly at them.

At which point they cease to be civilians. You also still seem to be leaning on the "American soldiers are killing everything that moves" mantra that you still haven't made any concessions towards proving.

 

[Keef]

At which point they cease to be civilians.

What is to be done about it?

 

[3spddrft]

How relevant is this to who we should vote for? These big "war" decisions often divide people so it's not surprising that sometimes the president pisses off a lot of the nation because his decision swayed wrong.

I want to see our automotive industry and tech sector thrive and a president who supports the educational values that will make us adapt and improve.