Obama has promised to remove all troops within 16 months.

[electronicmaji]

And McCain continues to attack him. I think this shows me where the two really stand on the war.

[ItsTime]

did he pinky swear?

[MRoCkEd]

And McCain continues to attack him. I think this shows me where the two really stand on the war.
I think this shows the public being tricked into thinking there is an actual difference between the two candidates.

[electronicmaji]

I think this shows the public being tricked into thinking there is an actual difference between the two candidates.

There is a difference.

[ItsTime]

There is a difference.

one is white and the other is kinda not

[lasenorita]

...and they both want to increase troops in Afghanistan.

There's no real difference in philosophy between the two -- to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Both Senators are interventionists. They just don't agree on how to go about intervening.

[ItsTime]

...and they both want to increase troops in Afghanistan.

There's no real difference in philosophy between the two -- to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Both Senators are interventionists. They just don't agree on how to go about intervening.

I was thinking that today. Didnt obama say something about increasing troops in afganistan by 15,000 or more?

[electronicmaji]

...and they both want to increase troops in Afghanistan.

There's no real difference in philosophy between the two -- to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Both Senators are interventionists. They just don't agree on how to go about intervening.

I agree on increasing troops in afghanistan. The Taliban is returning to power there.


I really doubt any of us were against the Aghanistan war. Not even Ron Paul was against it.

[newyearsrevolution08]

did he pinky swear?

I would love to see the youtube of that if he did lol..

[CUnknown]

electronicmaji, do you have a link for this? I can't believe he would advocate removing all US troops. That's big news.

[MRoCkEd]

Obama is only against the war in Iraq now (after voting to fund it) because he wants to take it elsewhere in the region. The simple fact that he believes there is such thing as a "war on terror" proves he is no better than the neocons. Move those troops around all you want, as long as the war profiteers keep profiting, and nobody mentions our hundreds of bases around the rest of the world.

and Ron voted for going after those who were responsible for the 9/11 attacks, not turning Afghanistan into another block for nationbuilding.

[Kludge]

He was probably just pandering to the anti-war people in the crowd like when he pandered to the Jews at AIPAC.... Right, EMI?

Gotta get those votes by whatever means necessary!

[yongrel]

And Herbert Walker Bush promised no new taxes...

[Theocrat]

And McCain continues to attack him. I think this shows me where the two really stand on the war.

What's Obama's Constitutional reasoning (if any) for removing all troops from Iraq, and where does he want to put them next?

[MRoCkEd]

What's Obama's Constitutional reasoning (if any) for removing all troops from Iraq, and where does he want to put them next?
The constitution doesn't motivate him.
It's just the democrats' turn to pose as the "opposition party."
He wants to put them in Afghanistan, perhaps Iran, and perhaps Pakistan

[CUnknown]

From Obama's website:

Under the Obama plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel.

So, Obama's Iraq position has not changed -- he's not ending the occupation, and will continue military operations there with US troops. He's going to continue to employ Blackwater. He will not remove all US troops.

[torchbearer]

From Obama's website:


So, Obama's Iraq position has not changed -- he's not ending the occupation, and will continue military operations there with US troops. He's going to continue to employ Blackwater. He will not remove all US troops.

Ask him, will he continue to build/support a Vatican sized embassy in Iraq?
How many troops would he leave, and where would they be stationed?
Will we have permanent bases in Iraq?

[electronicmaji]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/21/obama.mideast/index.html

Thats not exactly what I saw on TV.

Anyways Obama was always against the War in Iraq; plenty of people are against the war in Iraq and vote to fund it because they beleive that the troops will be in "harms way" or something if they don't fund them or some bullshit like that.

[electronicmaji]

Ask him, will he continue to build/support a Vatican sized embassy in Iraq?
How many troops would he leave, and where would they be stationed?
Will we have permanent bases in Iraq?

Sure he will. But unlike McCain we will not have the same troop levels we have now in Iraq for the next 100 years.

There is a difference.

[yongrel]

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/jesse_jackson_duke.jpg

[torchbearer]

Sure he will. But unlike McCain we will not have the same troop levels we have now in Iraq for the next 100 years.

There is a difference.

Of course, one made the mistake of saying 100 years if necessary.
The other didn't make the mistake of saying anything like that...
There is your difference. One is better at lying than the other.

[Kludge]

He was probably just pandering to the anti-war people in the crowd like when he pandered to the Jews at AIPAC.... Right, EMI?

Gotta get those votes by whatever means necessary!

:)

[UnReconstructed]

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/jesse_jackson_duke.jpg

http://aggrosiv.ag.funpic.de/home/sb/images/smiley/rofl.gif

[CoreyBowen999]

just like Mccain says, I will balance the budget!

[brandon]

I agree on increasing troops in afghanistan. The Taliban is returning to power there.


What do you have against the Taliban? What do you think we have to gain as a nation by fighting the Taliban? How long are we going to have to stay in Afghanistan to defeat them? How much money are we going to have to spend? Don't you think the "terrorists" will just move from Afghanistan to Iraq as we move our troops from Iraq to Afghanistan?





I really doubt any of us were against the Aghanistan war.

I was, and I still am.

[electronicmaji]

Of course, one made the mistake of saying 100 years if necessary.
The other didn't make the mistake of saying anything like that...
There is your difference. One is better at lying than the other.

one of them continues to back up that 100 year figure. And not just maintaining small troop levels to continue the "War on Terror." Keeping the same exact number as are there now for the next 100 years.

[Kludge]

I was, and I still am.

+1.

[torchbearer]

one of them continues to back up that 100 year figure. And not just maintaining small troop levels to continue the "War on Terror." Keeping the same exact number as are there now for the next 100 years.

Semantics.
Its still the same foreign policy either way.
Interventionist. Make the world safe for democracy. blah, blah, blah.
More world-wide police actions by our military.

[Paulitician]

And Bush promised a humble foreign policy... means squat.

[electronicmaji]

What do you have against the Taliban? What do you think we have to gain as a nation by fighting the Taliban? How long are we going to have to stay in Afghanistan to defeat them? How much money are we going to have to spend? Don't you think the "terrorists" will just move from Afghanistan to Iraq as we move our troops from Iraq to Afghanistan?



I was, and I still am.

The Taliban supported and defended Osama Bin Laden. They are the state form of Al Qaeda.

[Paulitician]

one of them continues to back up that 100 year figure. And not just maintaining small troop levels to continue the "War on Terror." Keeping the same exact number as are there now for the next 100 years.
Because it's possible for McCain to be president for 100 years :rolleyes:

[brandon]

And Bush promised a humble foreign policy... means squat.

Exactly. OBama's record speaks more then his recent pandering. He has voted "aye" for every war appropriations bill to come through the senate

[electronicmaji]

Semantics.
Its still the same foreign policy either way.
Interventionist. Make the world safe for democracy. blah, blah, blah.
More world-wide police actions by our military.

Internationalism != Interventionism

Theres a difference. One is a war mongerer who makes war just to makes wars without any reason or probably direction.

The other is someone who feels that we have the moral superiority to force reform on other nations through diplomacy; the UN; and finally war.

[brandon]

I must say, maji is good at starting epic threads. His threads seem to get more replies then almost any other thread on the forum.

[Kludge]

Internationalism != Interventionism

Theres a difference. One is a war mongerer who makes war just to makes wars without any reason or probably direction.

The other is someone who feels that we have the moral superiority to force reform on other nations through diplomacy; the UN; and finally war.


Democracy For Islam!


FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

[Indy4Chng]

Obama is only against the war in Iraq now (after voting to fund it) because he wants to take it elsewhere in the region. The simple fact that he believes there is such thing as a "war on terror" proves he is no better than the neocons. Move those troops around all you want, as long as the war profiteers keep profiting, and nobody mentions our hundreds of bases around the rest of the world.

and Ron voted for going after those who were responsible for the 9/11 attacks, not turning Afghanistan into another block for nationbuilding.

I can't stand the war in Iraq, and Obama, but do you really think we should not provide funding for our troops??? There are other ways to oppose a war rather than sacrificing american troops by not funding the war. That is pretty messed up (IMHO).

[torchbearer]

Internationalism != Interventionism

Theres a difference. One is a war mongerer who makes war just to makes wars without any reason or probably direction.

The other is someone who feels that we have the moral superiority to force reform on other nations through diplomacy; the UN; and finally war.

All wars have a reason, whether you know those reasons or not.
It's two bands of collectivist regimes, each has power hungry people driving them to the ultimate seat of power in our solar system.
Both will use military force overseas... for whatever reason they think the public will get behind.
Both will continue the same foreign policy.

Your inability to see this, proves how well Obama is at not saying the truth of his intent. He is a careful wordsmith.

[brandon]

I can't stand the war in Iraq, and Obama, but do you really think we should not provide funding for our troops??? There are other ways to oppose a war rather than sacrificing american troops by not funding the war. That is pretty messed up (IMHO).

If the congress voted not to fund a war that they never even voted to declare, and Bush insists on forcing unfunded troops to perform police actions in a foreign country, that is hardly the fault of the congress. That is Bush's fault.

[Paulitician]

Internationalism != Interventionism

Theres a difference. One is a war mongerer who makes war just to makes wars without any reason or probably direction.

The other is someone who feels that we have the moral superiority to force reform on other nations through diplomacy; the UN; and finally war.
Like Bill Clinton's internationalism which killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, but hey at least it wasn't "war."

[electronicmaji]

All wars have a reason, whether you know those reasons or not.
It's two bands of collectivist regimes, each has power hungry people driving them to the ultimate seat of power in our solar system.
Both will use military force overseas... for whatever reason they think the public will get behind.
Both will continue the same foreign policy.

Your inability to see this, proves how well Obama is at not saying the truth of his intent. He is a careful wordsmith.

Actually the Republicans jump into wars without rhym or reason. And this will increase under McCain. Mark my words.

[torchbearer]

I can't stand the war in Iraq, and Obama, but do you really think we should not provide funding for our troops??? There are other ways to oppose a war rather than sacrificing american troops by not funding the war. That is pretty messed up (IMHO).

If the congress didn't fund it, it would be up to the president to withdraw them with the remaining budget, or he would be the one leaving them in harms way.
That is why wars are suppose to be declared by the congress... not the president.

[brandon]

Actually the Republicans jump into wars without rhym or reason. And this will increase under McCain. Mark my words.

So do the democrats. Historically, the dems have done this even more then the reps

[Kludge]

Actually the Republicans jump into wars without rhym or reason. And this will increase under McCain. Mark my words.

Damned people like Ron Paul! Ugh - What a tyrant!

[electronicmaji]

Like Bill Clinton's internationalism which killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, but hey at least it wasn't "war."

I'm not defending it. But if were talking lesser of two evils. There is a lesser evil. Clinton was far less Evil then Bush.

FAR LESS EVIL.

[torchbearer]

Actually the Republicans jump into wars without rhym or reason. And this will increase under McCain. Mark my words.

You don't know the reason. There is one... if for nothing else, to pump money into their favored contractor.
You are living in a fantasy land if your think Reps and Dems are any different in their intents when it comes to the federal level.
The people who are our true money masters dictate the direction of this country. They own the parties. They own your knight in shining armor.
They will fund both sides of a war, regardless who is at the helm.

"There are two problems in Washington, the democrats and the republicans" - Ron Paul, July 11th @ Mr. Smith's in Washington.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVqg-HkbBD0

Perhaps you should listen to Ron a little more, and Obama a lil' less.

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Originally Posted by electronicmaji
Hes a internationalist moderate.

There is a major difference between a internationalist and a warmongerer the sooner you and more people realize that the sooner the shroud of ignorance on this forum will be lifted.


Hi,

In all seriousness, how does one differentiate between a warmonger who is pretending to be an internationalist moderate and a genuine warmonger? What we need here are some definitions.

Sincerely,
Omphfullas Zamboni

[electronicmaji]

So do the democrats. Historically, the dems have done this even more then the reps

No they tend to have excuses like Moral Responsibility. With Republicans anyone who pisses them off is fair game.

[Kludge]

No they tend to have excuses like Moral Responsibility. With Republicans anyone who pisses them off is fair game.

America must save those who do not have our way of life!

Purge Earth of Socialists, of Fascists, of Communists, of Muslims, of Jews!

They do not share our ways!

Convert or Die!

Democracy or War!

RAWR!

[electronicmaji]

Hi,

In all seriousness, how does one differentiate between a warmonger who is pretending to be an internationalist moderate and a genuine warmonger? What we need here are some definitions.

Sincerely,
Omphfullas Zamboni

They jump into wars with no idea of what it entails and no retrospect responsibility.

[CUnknown]

just like Mccain says, I will balance the budget!

+1

[electronicmaji]

America must save those who do not have our way of life!

Purge Earth of Socialists, of Fascists, of Communists, of Muslims, of Jews!

They do not share our ways!

Convert or Die!

Democracy or War!

RAWR!

at least they have a goal, Republicans just want to make money.

[CUnknown]

I don't believe Obama is a warmonger. It's just that he won't stand up to the military-industrial powers that are. He's a deceitful wuss, not a warmonger.

[Kludge]

at least they have a goal, Republicans just want to make money.

Oh my God.

[hypnagogue]

My faith in Obama's campaign promises is precisely zero. I have a very strong feeling that this nation will be stunned to see just how status quo an Obama presidency would be. One could only hope they turn that shock into action instead of more apathy than ever before.

[lucius]

at least they have a goal, Republicans just want to make money.

Two sides of the same coin.

[electronicmaji]

My faith in Obama's campaign promises is precisely zero. I have a very strong feeling that this nation will be stunned to see just how status quo an Obama presidency would be. One could only hope they turn that shock into action instead of more apathy than ever before.

I have more faith then Obama than in McCain.

[electronicmaji]

Two sides of the same coin.

Not really.

[Kludge]

I have more faith then Obama than in McCain.

I didn't know Obama was that God-fearing of a person.

[brandon]

Not really.

Yes really. :p

[Kludge]

Yes really. :p

Really really.

[constituent]

I really doubt any of us were against the Aghanistan war.

you are such a f*n dolt.

p.s. there is an "other presidential candidates" subforum for your relentless obama shilling.

put this shit where it belongs (actually, keep it out of there... the thought alone made me throw up a little).

[constituent]

The Taliban supported and defended Osama Bin Laden. They are the state form of Al Qaeda.

http://www.forumammo.com/cpg/albums/userpics/10062/normal_Transformerdisgust.jpg

[Cinderella]

The Taliban supported and defended Osama Bin Laden. They are the state form of Al Qaeda.


yea and the AMERICAN CIA FUNDED AND TRAINED OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

ur crazy if u think that by killing people it will erase their ideas....as the famous black panther Fred hampton once said “You can kill a revolutionary, but you can’t kill a revolution!”


ideas dont die with a person or a group

[Kotin]

Electronicmaji


you are an idiot.

[MRoCkEd]

ideas dont die with a person or a group
true - they die when they lose their influence
continually meddling within these regions stirs up the passion of these groups

[electronicmaji]

yea and the AMERICAN CIA FUNDED AND TRAINED OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

ur crazy if u think that by killing people it will erase their ideas....as the famous black panther Fred hampton once said “You can kill a revolutionary, but you can’t kill a revolution!”


ideas dont die with a person or a group

Of course not; and of course the American CIA funded and train Bin Laden. It doesn't make the reason we went into Afghanistan; to destroy the Taliban who was hiding Osama; and catch Osama; any less relevant.

I think what Obama is aiming for here is too renew the actual search for Bin Laden. He's also attempting to gain votes; Beleive it or not; he is seen as week on terrorism. And wanting to pull out of Iraq loses him more votes than it gains him votes. We already know what the Republican party thinks of Ron Paul and we know what the Democrat Party thinks of Kucinich. You can add their vote together and get less than 25% of the voting public. That is essentially the percentage of the public that is non interventionist.

[electronicmaji]

Electronicmaji


you are an idiot.


No you are a idiot.


I disagree in meddling with the politics in the region. But I agree that Osama Bin Laden should be caught and that Al Qaeda should be hunted down. Hopefully with Special Operations tactical forces; and not the military. But Obama just takes a different approach to reaching the end product.

[constituent]

No you are a idiot.


indeed, and i are weasel.

[AmericaFyeah92]

No you are a idiot.


I disagree in meddling with the politics in the region. But I agree that Osama Bin Laden should be caught and that Al Qaeda should be hunted down. Hopefully with Special Operations tactical forces; and not the military. But Obama just takes a different approach to reaching the end product.

that's probably the one place i agree with you. I will be very disheartened if Osama bin Laden dies of old age. But i don't think that is why Obama wants to increase troop leves in Afghanistan. He's into the whole"democracy-spreading" thing, not killing our enemies.

If he were serious about Afghanistan, he would know that 15,000 troops won't make a lick of difference. 100,000 maybe. But not 15,000

[Knightskye]

Not even Ron Paul was against it.

He was asked about that. He said he wanted to get the people responsible for 9/11. He introduced a bill to authorize Letters of Marque and Reprisal to go after the specific people who did it - without full-scale war. He wasn't for war; he was for getting Bin Laden. And staying in Afghanistan is only going to cause more terrorism.

I suggest you watch these videos:

"Educating Rudy":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcQQ05XtAQ4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAt6Pf7jZjA

[Kraig]

He was asked about that. He said he wanted to get the people responsible for 9/11. He introduced a bill to authorize Letters of Marque and Reprisal to go after the specific people who did it - without full-scale war. He wasn't for war; he was for getting Bin Laden. And staying in Afghanistan is only going to cause more terrorism.

I suggest you watch these videos:

"Educating Rudy":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcQQ05XtAQ4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAt6Pf7jZjA

*clap*

[Andrew-Austin]

Does anyone care to make a sportly bet, on whether Obama will uphold the thread title's claim?

[AFM]

He meant remove all troops from their homes and US bases
Put those dudes in Iraq

[Knightskye]

Combat forces, and they would be redeployed somewhere else. Electronic, you're not persuading anyone.

[Deborah K]

And McCain continues to attack him. I think this shows me where the two really stand on the war.


You don't actually believe he'll do it, do you? Haven't read the thread, and I'm sure I'm only reiterating what someone else has probably already said but wasn't the democratically controlled congress voted in to end the war?

[muh_roads]

electronicmaji proves there is no difference between the majority of neocon and liberal voters. He's just as much for interventionism so long as his team is playing.

[4RP08inKCMO]

In honor of electronicmaji's banishment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwnqqj5Q1BU.

I'll miss you.

[MRoCkEd]

let's just get obama elected already so maybe america can see that it isn't a republican problem, but a politician problem

[The_Orlonater]

In honor of electronicmaji's banishment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwnqqj5Q1BU.

I'll miss you.

:)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/White_lighter_with_flame.JPG

[NH4RonPaul]

And McCain continues to attack him. I think this shows me where the two really stand on the war.

Well this is a red herring because:

All the clueless Obamatons have NO IDEA what that man is about, read this:

The Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433) is coming up for a Senate vote..

You want to send $850 Billion to foreign countries so they can build palaces while their people starve?

Forgettaboutit!

[NH4RonPaul]

There is a difference.


There is NO difference.

How soon you forget, public funds, FISA, etc etc etc.

The man is a flaming racist and hates Americans.

In his book he said that when things got tough, he'd 'stand with the Muslims'.

NO THANKS!

[NH4RonPaul]

What's Obama's Constitutional reasoning (if any) for removing all troops from Iraq, and where does he want to put them next?

He wants to put them in DARFUR.

He also panders to LaRAZA the largest racist group in America.

[NH4RonPaul]

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/jesse_jackson_duke.jpg

I think I just threw up my dinner!

Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, the Rev Wright, OH MY.

Can you imagine having these bozos as advisors?

[NH4RonPaul]

So do the democrats. Historically, the dems have done this even more then the reps

So what does Electro want us to do? Vote for Obama?

NO WAY!

[NH4RonPaul]

No you are a idiot.


I disagree in meddling with the politics in the region. But I agree that Osama Bin Laden should be caught and that Al Qaeda should be hunted down. Hopefully with Special Operations tactical forces; and not the military. But Obama just takes a different approach to reaching the end product.


STOP SHILLING FOR AN OPEN COMMUNIST on a forum where we are patriots that want to uphold the constitution.

It is blasphemous!

[Axolotl]

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/jesse_jackson_duke.jpg

This guy has my vote.

Oh, that's Jesse Jackson, not James Earl Jones.