Derby Trail Forums
Page 6 of 10 « First < 45 6 78 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   U.S Intelligence a real oxymorn w/ this Nigerian (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33462)

Riot 01-02-2010 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
media blackout and some good old fashond black water Inglorious Bastards
action..
I completely agree. What we should have done to bin Laden back when we had the chance. Blow the hell out of all of them.

Cannon Shell 01-02-2010 08:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
:rolleyes: I am not making assumptions.
You are making assumptions. You dont have all the facts therefore must assume things.

Riot 01-02-2010 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Perhaps it isnt highlighted because it simply isnt true? That is what logical people might assume.
Seriously - are you saying, all those press reports, in August, about specific, named AQ killed in Somalia, Pakistan, etc, and not just from our country - are a lie?

And that's what "logical" people might assume?

:zz:

Google those names. Let's see what comes up in the general press. Post it here.

Cannon Shell 01-02-2010 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot

My point is that the characterization of Obama as inactive or ineffective against terrorism is most obviously not true, based upon what has been accomplished to date. He's doing fine. He deserves credit for what he's done so far.
But we arent debating the job Obama has done. We are debating your statement. And you have yet to make a post that would convince anyone that your statement was accurate.

hoovesupsideyourhead 01-02-2010 08:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
:rolleyes: I am not making assumptions. I am saying that, only according to the AQ listed as killed during Obama's year so far, and what and where Bush pursued AQ, Obama is doing a good job, and in places Bush never went to.

If you recall, there was great discussion and debate by all candidates about how and where to continue to pursue AQ. Iraq - Iran - everywhere else.

Bush-Cheney was never shy about claiming credit for military success, most certainly not success against AQ. "Mission Accomplished" ;) Nor should they be. Every AQ kill is a credit to America against the scum of the world. We're not the only nation that suffers at AQ hands.

Do you really think the last administration hid any vast secret success against AQ? Secretly killed major AQ operatives and didn't publicize it?

My point is that the characterization of Obama as inactive or ineffective against terrorism is most obviously not true, based upon what has been accomplished to date. He's doing fine. He deserves credit for what he's done so far.
they missed one that has same middle name..

Riot 01-02-2010 08:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63
Riot FYI
a guy who was at a pay-cash only Dr.'s office today heard the poor Nigerian was just trying to get to Boston to see an Obama cougar w/free digs. And he brought fire in his pants as he heard global warming hasn't hit beantown yet.
And to think, that in my misguided yet fun youth, I used to have to use 'outside influences' to obtain the same mindset you have now ;)

Riot 01-02-2010 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
they missed one that has same middle name..
The guy with the American Michael name, also has Islam as an alias ....

Cannon Shell 01-02-2010 08:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Seriously - are you saying, all those press reports, in August, about specific, named AQ killed in Somalia, Pakistan, etc, and not just from our country - are a lie?

And that's what "logical" people might assume?

:zz:

Google those names. Let's see what comes up in the general press. Post it here.
No one said the news reports werent true. What isnt true is that Obama has done some bangup job against Al Queda or has made some giant breakthroughs that you are saying he has.

It is like posting a couple of boxscores and saying that is evidence of why one team is doing well or not.

It is all relative to the big picture and obviously the media doesnt believe that what they know constitutes some big achievement.

Riot 01-02-2010 08:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Ah they old "They didnt use the race card" theory. Actually they played it perfectly by accusing anyone who criticized him, of possibly having racial motives.
Seriously - show me where his campaign ever discussed that in response to opposition. Even his campaign PR people.

There were plenty of accusations of racial motives, but they weren't from the Obama campaign. If you have one, post it, because they were notoriously mute on this.

hoovesupsideyourhead 01-02-2010 08:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
I completely agree. What we should have done to bin Laden back when we had the chance. Blow the hell out of all of them.
your boy clinton missed that chance..

Cannon Shell 01-02-2010 08:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Seriously - show me where his campaign ever discussed that in response to opposition. Even his campaign PR people.

There were plenty of accusations of racial motives, but they weren't from the Obama campaign. If you have one, post it, because they were notoriously mute on this.
:wf

Danzig 01-02-2010 08:22 PM
i have a hard time believing that a president who goes against what his general in charge asked for troop wise is somehow more serious than the previous president about afganistan. obama has no military background at all, but he's supposed to think he knows better than a west point grad with years of experience about what's needed in a war? then there's the supposed expiration date for the war as well. it's hilarious. obama too busy trying to keep everyone content-he will end with making no one content. the libs wanted us out, the pentagon wanted it fought right, so he took the middle ground. what a way to fight a 'war'.

Riot 01-02-2010 08:22 PM
Quote:
No one said the news reports werent true. What isnt true is that Obama has done some bangup job against Al Queda or has made some giant breakthroughs that you are saying he has.
I posted seven important AQ people and domestic terrorists killed or arrested during Obama's first year. The AQ kills were very notable in my book. Especially getting "the most feared AQ terrorist in Somalia" guy.

You dismiss these accomplishments - well, that's your opinion. Not mine.

Quote:
It is like posting a couple of boxscores and saying that is evidence of why one team is doing well or not. It is all relative to the big picture and obviously the media doesnt believe that what they know constitutes some big achievement.
I think so far, Obama's "big picture" against AQ terrorism is just fine :tro:

Riot 01-02-2010 08:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
your boy clinton missed that chance..
Didn't vote for Clinton, didn't support him.

Don't tell Dell ;) I already have, but he can't deal with anything other than black-white.

Danzig 01-02-2010 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Seriously - show me where his campaign ever discussed that in response to opposition. Even his campaign PR people.

There were plenty of accusations of racial motives, but they weren't from the Obama campaign. If you have one, post it, because they were notoriously mute on this.

when bill clinton referred to obama's campaign as a fairy tale, the obama campaign attempted to turn that into a racial issue.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...n_n_81205.html

Riot 01-02-2010 08:26 PM
Quote:
i have a hard time believing that a president who goes against what his general in charge asked for troop wise is somehow more serious than the previous president about afganistan. obama has no military background at all, but he's supposed to think he knows better than a west point grad with years of experience about what's needed in a war?
Must be why he and all his generals and advisers completely (notoriously slowly) reviewed American Afghan policy for three months before agreeing and committing 30,000 American lives over there.

Quote:
then there's the supposed expiration date for the war as well. it's hilarious. obama too busy trying to keep everyone content-he will end with making no one content. the libs wanted us out, the pentagon wanted it fought right, so he took the middle ground. what a way to fight a 'war'.
He's not fighting a "war" in Afghanistan. That's where his policy differs from Bush.

Agree, the "go both ways" on the "we'll start to withdraw on this date" was silly.

Riot 01-02-2010 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
when bill clinton referred to obama's campaign as a fairy tale, the obama campaign attempted to turn that into a racial issue.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...n_n_81205.html
The Obama campaign did not publically turn that into a racial issue, according to what that article says. It talks about an internal memo that later came to light. The Obama campaign never confronted Clinton publically saying, "that's a racial issue Clinton is bringing up".

Did I miss something?

Riot 01-02-2010 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
:wf
I always knew you were really smart :tro:


Okay, I owe you one in the future.

Danzig 01-02-2010 08:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Must be why he and all his generals and advisers completely (notoriously slowly) reviewed American Afghan policy for three months before agreeing and committing 30,000 American lives over there.



He's not fighting a "war" in Afghanistan. That's where his policy differs from Bush.

Agree, the "go both ways" on the "we'll start to withdraw on this date" was silly.

Thirty thousand more troops is 10,000 fewer than Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, requested, reports CBS News correspondent David Martin. The president hopes to make up at least some of the difference with contributions from NATO allies.

"I think NATO will come through with a couple thousand and so I think we'll still be somewhat short of what Gen. McChrystal proposed," Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution told CBS News.

Danzig 01-02-2010 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
The Obama campaign did not publically turn that into a racial issue, according to what that article says. It talks about an internal memo that later came to light. The Obama campaign never confronted Clinton publically saying, "that's a racial issue Clinton is bringing up".

Did I miss something?


when reading the thread above, it jarred my memory on the obama campaign getting angry with the clintons and it turning into a racial thing. now, i haven't done a lot of searching, but if i remember it being mentioned, it had to have gone public somewhere-right? that's why i started a search with the huffington blog being the first thing that came up.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:33 AM.
Page 6 of 10 « First < 45 6 78 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.