Obama: Went on a three day bus tour and came back with Qaddafi's corpse

[Hutzpa]

I can see GOP throwing temper tantrums.

This dude is bada**


:evilgrin:

[msongs]

1. Obama has many corpses, and they are not all "bad guys" nt

[ClarkUSA]

2. Are you going to make the same claim about FDR? George Washington? Abe Lincoln? Truman?

LBJ? Eisenhower? Please do!

[AngkorWot]

3. They're different though.

I mean, just look at them.

[ClarkUSA]

7. You got it. Melissa Harris-Perry was so-o-o right, wasn't she?

[MNBrewer]

21. Slick rhetorical trick, Clark

None of them are President.

[GSLevel9]

4. lol...

[FrenchieCat]

6. Name the many corpses.....

and perhaps it could be made into a lively commercial
produced and paid for by the GOP and United Citizen.

Go ahead.....
Let's hear your gripe against this one man....some more.

[kestrel91316]

5. He's goin': Hmmmm, Osama bin Ladin - CHECK. Qaddafi - CHECK.

Just workin' his way down his Do List.

[Vattel]

8. Creepy

[CakeGrrl]

9. It's OK.

The President didn't ACTUALLY do that.

:eyes:

[Vattel]

12. phew, that's a relief

[Ikonoklast]

10. Not a man to be trifled with.

[Vattel]

13. really creepy

[Ikonoklast]

14. Tears for Qaddafi. Creepy.

[frylock]

17. there's this grey area somewhere between jacking off to stuff like this..

and shedding "Tears for Qaddafi."

[Vattel]

23. Your reply is off base.

My post did not reflect sympathy for Qadaffi.

[BlueIris]

11. Yeah, killing really impresses me.

Oh, how I love the killing.

:sarcasm:

[ClarkUSA]

15. Then you must really have been turned on by Gaddafi's threats of genocide against rebels this year.

FACT: http://www.euractiv.com/global-europe/eu-prepares-worst-gaddafi-genocide-threats-news-502424

[whatchamacallit]

16. What's the difference between

threats of genocide and actual collateral genocide? Oh wait I know, one is a threat and the other is happening regularly in our wars of opportunity.

[ClarkUSA]

18. lol! Your tortured rhetoric is as fact-free as it is senseless.

[whatchamacallit]

19. Really?

I'll give you a chance to point out the flaw in my thinking before I start posting body count links.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MNBrewer]

22. Says the expert on tortured rhetoric

[ClarkUSA]

25. Says the expert on nothing.

I'm rooting for the St. Louis Cardinals right now.

[Enrique]

24. you make it sound like a safari

maybe he'll mount Qaddafi's head in the Oval Office.

[ClarkUSA]

26. Nah, Hillary has dibs.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hutzpa]

28. The only person that thinks that is you

nt.

[Divernan]

29. Wrong again

[Hutzpa]

30. Wrong again on what?

you think the same as that poster too?

[Divernan]

35. Yes, I agree with Blue Iris, Vattel, frylock & Eridani - not you

I stubbornly believe in the rule of law, and the principles embodied in the bill of rights and the US Constitution - not torture, cold-blooded murder and assassination. It was wrong for Gadaffi & his henchmen, and it's wrong for we "civilized" nations as well.

First Obama supporters insisted Obama had not gone to war with Libya. In fact, our military was not involved there of late. But then when Gadaffi is captured and executed without benefit of criminal trial, you jump in and give Obama the "credit".

I hope one day you mature enough to realize that brutal, primitive vengeance and the celebration thereof is not the mark of an advanced civilization. It is the mark of a pampered generation raised on dumbed down violent films and video games.

[Hutzpa]

37. That is where you're wrong

no one is celebrating Qaddafi's death, I certainly is not, but I am excited
that Obama's foreign policy prowess has been proven to be astute once again, you
on the other hand along with others have been so disgusted with Obama that simple
comprehension is disregarded just so you can have the chance to piss on him on
every opportunity you get that which is then used to your advantage towards the less
inclined amongs us.

It is obvious that you are not an Obama supporter, few of you on this site use the loop
hole well to channel anti-Obama rhetoric, fair enough, but I remember posters with the
same ideology as you are saying that Obama should not have sent our troops to Libya,
there were no evidence of him sending troops, yet there were numerous threads/posts
suggesting that and lambasting him for even negotiating with NATO even though he did
everything by the book, furthermore he was accused of leading from behind.

Now that Qaddafi is gone instead of giving him credit for working with France and
Britain on getting rid of a tyrant and a dictator who was willing to slaughter his
own people to stay in power, you conveniently ignore the facts and use this theory
that people are celebrating the death of Qaddafi, how dishonest can you get?

[Divernan]

41. I find you to be incredibly politically naive & woefully uninformed about Libya

The twin engines driving Obama's foreign policy are Big Oil and the CIA. I don't find that "prowess" worth celebrating.

http://news.yahoo.com/libyas-oil-rich-east-bids-power-

The "demonstrators" in Libya were led by a CIA agent named Khalifa Hifter, who “had recently returned from exile in America to lend the rebel ground forces some tactical coherence.” (Daily Mail)
Are Libyan rebels being led by a CIA plant?
http://theweek.com/article/index/213706/are-libyan-rebels-being-led-by-a-cia-plant
Until recently, Khalifa Hifter — who's leading the anti-Gadhafi forces — lived five miles from CIA headquarters in Virginia. Coincidence?

Now leading Libya's ragtag army of rebels, Khalifa Hifter has a mysterious past that's raising provocative questions. Once a top commander in Moammar Gadhafi's own army, he left its ranks after a disastrous campaign in Chad, then moved to a home five miles from CIA headquarters in northern Virginia, where he lived from the early 1990s until mid-March, 2011. What happened during those 20 years in the U.S.? Hifter's lifelong friend Abdel Salam Badr reports only that Hifter somehow supported a large family. With the CIA mingling among the rebels, some commentators are wondering: Is Hifter a CIA plant?

Hifter is pretty clearly CIA: So a former top chief in Gadhafi's army is allowed to settle in the U.S., soon after the Lockerbie bombing, says Patrick Martin in Axis of Logic, then spends 20 years "about five miles from CIA headquarters in Langley," with no apparent job? "To those who can read between the lines," that's enough to conclude that Hifter is a CIA operative. Need more proof? "Even a cursory Internet search" ties Hifter to the CIA as far back as 1987.
"A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels"

We shouldn't be using covert operatives: There's no need for the U.S. to play games, says John Gizzi in Human Events. As Paul Wolfowitz told me, the CIA shouldn't be involved, simply because "we should be right out in the open" in our dealings with the rebels. Let's not "reinforce the notion in the Middle East that the CIA is behind everything the Americans do."
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Quoting DUer Danse from another thread:
The article cites witnesses to the rebellion who report that “its leader is Col. Khalifa Haftar, of a contra-style group based in the United States called the Libyan National Army.”

The phrase "Contra-Style" should not be lost on students of the Cold War. This was not a "non-violent people powered revolution" but a violent insurgency funded, trained and armed by a foreign power, namely the United States.

They attacked government buildings, and the Libyan government responded as virtually any government would, with violence. Reports of "Gadaffi bombing his own people" and "planning a genocide" were entirely bogus.

When Gadaffi took power, Libya was the fourth poorest country in the world; when he was murdered it had the highest standing of living in Africa. Like Castro, Gadaffi was a quasi-socialist who provided his citizens with free education and health care. Libya had a lower incarceration rate than many Northern European nations. The literacy rate was far higher than America itself. American leaders, whose prison system was described in a BBC documentary as "Torture Inc.", whose system of "democracy" is completely farcical, and who are committing genocide both via war and massive institutional violence, are not in any position to be dictating the affairs of other nations, let alone declaring their leaders tyrants.

Personally I found the murder of Gadaffi barbaric, and the response by many liberals grotesque, but I'm far less concerned with a dead tin-pot dictator than the fate of Libyans. The "freedom fighters" aka "protesters" have reportedly been engaging in the ethnic cleansing of blacks, amongst other atrocities. Many are Islamist, meaning that Gadaffi's socialist policies will likely be reduced if not eliminated. The rights of women will probably be curtailed. Standards of living will plummet with the introduction of neo-liberal reforms.

Much as the hanging of Saddam Hussein did not end the violence in Iraq, it is unlikely that the Green resistance in Libya will suddenly disappear. More violence is inevitable.

What is so frightening about this affair is not the killing of Gadaffi but the embrace of militarism by the "left" and the ease with which the psywarriors were able to fool so many people about their actual intentions in the region. Suffice it to say that humanitarianism is not high on their agenda. Oil, water, currency, geostrategy and the other usual motivations are probably of a tad more concern.

[Hutzpa]

43. And I find you moving the goal post yet again

how did we go from this

I stubbornly believe in the rule of law, and the principles embodied in the bill of rights and the US Constitution - not torture, cold-blooded murder and assassination. It was wrong for Gadaffi & his henchmen, and it's wrong for we "civilized" nations as well.

to this;

Hifter is pretty clearly CIA: So a former top chief in Gadhafi's army is allowed to settle in the U.S., soon after the Lockerbie bombing, says Patrick Martin in Axis of Logic, then spends 20 years "about five miles from CIA headquarters in Langley," with no apparent job? "To those who can read between the lines," that's enough to conclude that Hifter is a CIA operative. Need more proof? "Even a cursory Internet search" ties Hifter to the CIA as far back as 1987.
"A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels"

Your talking point has gone from whining about celebrating the death of Qaddafi to CIA involvement in his
death, and your proof are they used someone who lived 5 miles from CIA headquarters in Langley.

I'll ignore that... but

Why is that when Qaddafi had the chance to turn over power he refused. Instead he challenged his own
people by saying that he will slaughter his own citizens and burn Libya to the ground in the process becoming
a martyr before he turned over power, knowing that, don't you think all this could have been avoided
if he had called an election or maybe hand over power to his military. He had that option but
decided to make a stance, now you are blaming Obama for supporting the people of Libya.

You could find me incredibly naive politically, but I find you to be overzealous in blaming Obama for a crisis
that could have been avoided if only he had taken the right course.

[Divernan]

49. Highlighting multiple aspects of an issue does not move any goalposts.

I note that "moving the goalposts" is a popular meme of the O supporters of late.

[Enrique]

34. what does everyone think?

let me know, so I can think that too.

[Hutzpa]

38. #see post 42 n/t

[donheld]

31. Nice but, where are the jobs?

[Tx4obama]

32. Go ask The GOP, the republicans blocked a jobs bill in the Senate tonight. n/t

[eridani]

33. And a bunch of corpses of civilians in Sirte

I am so thrilled. Not.

[Divernan]

36. US pledges $$$ to Libya - another reason to cut back Medicaid?

For Libya and, unfortunately, the United States, the battle is not over. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was in Libya Tuesday, renewing U.S. pledges of nation rebuilding to the new Libyan authorities, represented by an unelected interim national council. The U.S. commitment involves $135 million, including $40 million to try to retrieve the surface-to-air missiles that the rebels liberated from the Gadhafi military's armories across the country, some of which are probably already for sale in Middle East arms markets.

It is hard to think of the United States committing large amounts of money to rebuild Libya while serious infrastructure needs exist at home, such as Pennsylvania's bridges, according to a new report this week. Continued U.S. involvement in Libya is even harder to accept when President Barack Obama took America into that war without seeking the congressional approval required by the War Powers Resolution.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11294/1183623-192.stm#ixzz1bQBJpwW4

[Hutzpa]

39. Why don't you take up your fight with the republicans

they are the ones blocking the jobs bill.

[Divernan]

47. Obama's the one who put cuts to medicaid on the bargaining table.

You are excited to give Obama credit for Gadaffi's execution? Just wait until Medicaid coverage is delayed for an additional two years and you'll have many, many more deaths to celebrate. Of course, they won't be as quick as Gadaffi's. Americans will be dying from curable, progressive diseases which go untreated.

[Empowerer]

40. And the next day, ended a war.

[Divernan]

42. He & Panetta have been begging the Iraqi Parliament for months to let them stay.

The Iraqis kicked him out!

[Hutzpa]

44. Is that the new line of attack?

:rofl:

[Divernan]

46. Simple facts. Panetta still begging LAST MONDAY. Iraqi parliament turned him down.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20111017/us-us-iraq/

Panetta hopeful of Iraqi deal on US troops

ROBERT BURNS | October 17, 2011 07:34 PM EST | AP


WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta expressed hope Monday that the United States and Iraq can soon reach agreement on a possible U.S. military training role in Iraq beyond Dec. 31, when all American troops are scheduled to depart.

Panetta's remarks contrasted with indications from a senior Obama administration official and a senior U.S. military official on Saturday that the U.S. is abandoning plans to keep any troops in Iraq past the year-end withdrawal deadline – other than about 160 troops who would be attached to the U.S. Embassy.

Panetta and other top U.S. officials have pressed the Iraqis for months to decide whether they want a substantial U.S. military training mission in 2012. During his first visit to Baghdad as Pentagon chief in July, Panetta appeared exasperated by the Iraqis, at one point saying, "Damn it, make a decision."

"At the present time I'm not discouraged because we're still in negotiations with the Iraqis," Panetta said Monday when asked by a reporter whether the talks had hit an impasse. He said James Jeffrey, the U.S. ambassador to Baghdad, and Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the top U.S. commander there, were in "discussions with Iraqi leaders" that could still yield agreement on a post-2011 U.S. military presence.

[Hutzpa]

45. heh

or this

[Union Scribe]

50. So you never bought into that shit other ardent supporters would say

about how the war was already over even though troops were there and dying? I'm impressed.

[opihimoimoi]

48. GOPers Stunned...unable to speak coherently

[Union Scribe]

51. Went on a bus tour, came back with 16 year-old US citizen's corpse.