DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
The Forum
HTML https://thewiforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Worldwide topics
*****************************************************
#Post#: 18831--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 29, 2015, 6:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]We have to send a lot of troops in, round up the
extremists, then occupy their homelands to keep them from coming
back. That is the ONLY thing that works.
But that is expensive and costs lives, the public has no more
patience for it. Even Republicans are smart enough not to push
for it, they want to win an election..
[/quote]
Your statement isn't totally true. We shouldn't have to send
more troops in. We should have never pulled them out. We are
leaving a force of less than 10,000 in Afghanistan. I don't
hear the public outcry you say is happening. We should have
done this in Iraq. This is what the Keane's, the Flynn's the
Petreaus's and many other " backwards-looking Shoulda's"
Generals said at the time. You know, the ones with no plans.
Republicans are fine with this stragedy as well and they kicked
butt in the last election. What you don't realize is this. Not
sending troops in to round up the extremist and occupying their
homeland is expensive and cost even more lives. How's that air
war going you think? Saving any lives? Are bombs, planes,
drones and missiles cheap? Almost 250,000 people have died in
Syria alone, the breeding ground for ISIS and the entire world
stands by and watches it happen. This week marks 70 years since
the close of Auschwitz and we again stand by and watch all over
again. 13 million plus are refugees. You think Obama's plan is
sound? Look at his polling numbers on foreign policy next time
you're at Gallup and see how that's working out for him. While
you're there look up the poll they did about who they think will
keep us safer, Republicans or Democrats
#Post#: 18832--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 29, 2015, 7:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Your first two links reference the same right-leaning PEW
poll.
The ABC link references no polling data at all.
The CNN poll shows people believe an attack is more likely to
occur on 9.11 than on other days, it does not ask how they
prioritize terrorism overall.
And your NBC poll similarly does not ask about priority of
concerns[/quote]
The "right leaning" PEW polls still shows numbers much higher,
78% than that 2% you cite. But again it's this game of
semantics you like to play. 2% say it's the most important, as
if having it 2nd or 3rd on their list of priorities isn't going
to make a difference and won't influence an election. If this
is the thought of liberals going into '16 I think you'll find
you're in for another drubbing.
[quote]Don't get fooled again[/quote]
Me? LOL If I remember right Hillary was the shoe in for the
nomination in '08. You should be telling yourself this.
#Post#: 18834--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 29, 2015, 2:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]why does Hillary continue to clean the clock of every
Republican she's matched against, despite the purported growth
of terrorism under her watch and despite her failures in
Benghazi, Russia, The State department and everywhere else?
Must be some sort of mistake, huh? Surely she can't actually
win, people really care about that stuff, way more than things
that affect them personally. [/quote]
Funny thing is, you keep saying that the campaigns haven't
started yet but are already declaring Hillary the winner.
I'm not sure that I would be bragging that the democratic gene
pool is that shallow and that incestuous. ;D
#Post#: 18842--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: rapids_60 Date: January 29, 2015, 9:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1369.msg18831#msg18831
date=1422535863]
I don't hear the public outcry you say is happening.
[/quote]
Send 50K ground troops into Iraq again and see what happens.
[quote] While you're there look up the poll they did about who
they think will keep us safer, Republicans or Democrats[/quote]
Republicans have a whopper of a lead in that polling question-
25 point advantage or so.
But you know what? It isn't enough. Not a single one of them
can come within 20 points of Hillary, advantage on keeping us
safe or not. That's where the public's feelings on Terrorism
are. They want the focus on domestic problems for a change and
do not want to spend any more American money or lives in the
middle east. Polling numbers, since we're doing those today,
support air strikes. Nothing else.
[quote]Almost 250,000 people have died in Syria alone, the
breeding ground for ISIS and the entire world stands by and
watches it happen. [/quote]
And Boko Harum or whatever they are is still killing children
in Africa. The world is an ugly place. Either we are going to
be the world's policeman, or not. If we are, prepare to spend a
lot of money we don't have and lose a lot of American lives.
Personally I think that's the UN's job and they need to start
doing it.
#Post#: 18843--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: rapids_60 Date: January 29, 2015, 9:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1369.msg18834#msg18834
date=1422563967]
I'm not sure that I would be bragging that the democratic gene
pool is that shallow and that incestuous. ;D
[/quote]
Says the party running it's third Bush. :D
#Post#: 18849--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 30, 2015, 6:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1369.msg18843#msg18843
date=1422589773]
Says the party running it's third Bush. :D
[/quote]
The party isn't "running" anybody. There are about 20
republicans actively seeking a bid for president. Meanwhile the
Democrats have pinned their hopes on the '90s.
#Post#: 18861--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: rapids_60 Date: January 30, 2015, 4:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1369.msg18849#msg18849
date=1422621366]
The party isn't "running" anybody. There are about 20
republicans actively seeking a bid for president. Meanwhile the
Democrats have pinned their hopes on the '90s.
[/quote]
Ah, so now you are worried about literal translations.
I assume you have genealogy and DNA evidence to support this?
[quote] the democratic gene pool is that shallow and that
incestuous.[/quote]
#Post#: 18876--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 31, 2015, 3:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Another beheading. How many more does there have to be before
somebody kicks it up another notch? What's being done now, well
it just ain't workin'.
#Post#: 18877--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: Linda Lou Date: January 31, 2015, 4:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
And what can be done, Trolly? Obama sends troops in there, he's
chastised for putting more boots on the ground.
This is up to Japan. This guy was a citizen of their country.
#Post#: 18879--------------------------------------------------
Re: Obama "paralyzed" on terrorism
By: trollslayer Date: January 31, 2015, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Linda Lou link=topic=1369.msg18877#msg18877
date=1422741805]
And what can be done, Trolly? Obama sends troops in there, he's
chastised for putting more boots on the ground.
This is up to Japan. This guy was a citizen of their country.
[/quote]
We have "boots on the ground" Linda. Over a thousand pair as
"advisors". The administration like to brag that they've
dropped "over a thousand bombs since August". A couple of
things about this claim. Dropping this few bombs over a total
of six months over two countries is paltry. It averages out to
less than five bombs per day. Does this sound like any kind of
"war" we've seen in the past? What they also aren't telling you
is are these bombs hitting anything?
The Kurds, who want to be our boots on the ground are begging
for military equipment. They have been our ally for decades yet
they've received next to nothing from us. The US gives military
assistance to the government of Iraq and it just can't seem to
find it's way to the Kurds. The first step would be to arm the
Kurds. It was the Kurds that drove ISIS out of Kobani. The
next step is to put more boots on the ground. The fact that
Obama may be chastised for doing this isn't a good reason. A
good leader leads without keeping his eyes on the polls.
Besides, he's already being chastised for not doing it. Not
only that, he doesn't have to run again. He keeps reminding us
of this so what's the big deal?
Let me know how those eggs work out for ya! ;D
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page