Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
15. Doesn't seem to be working. It *might* work better if it were true.
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 04:01 PM
Oct 2012

but even then, I just don't get the point. George Bush went 7 years and never caught Osama bin Laden. Romney is arguing about 10 days?

Here's what I know. If I am one of those guys who attacked the embassy, I'd better be getting my affairs in order, because this administration is going to nail them eventually -- unlike what Bush/Cheney did.

We can rightly criticize Obama for being quick on the trigger with drone missiles -- and indeed, that is the sort of discussion that SHOULD be happening in a foreign policy debate. But arguing about the exact adjectives used during the first couple of days after the attack? That's ridiculous and really lame.

Romney should be explaining if he intends to jump right into a war in Iran. He should explain how he would do a better job with Libya. He should explain his solution for moving Israel towards peace in the region. But he argues about foolishness.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»GOP MEATHEAD Peter King U...»Reply #15