aberrant85
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 594
- Reaction score
- 209
- Location
- SF Bay Area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Obama's stupidity has created this environment where Putin can come on stage and look like a statesman. Obama is a clown. OF COURSE it is a propoganda victory for Putin...one he didnt even have to work for. You think we are HAPPY about that? We are disgusted by the moronic actions of your boy. But then...with Obama and that clown Kerry on the stage, ANYONE can look good.I'm wondering how many Russian newspapers would be allowed to give Obama full access to write an op-ed. Just wow.
How many Russian politicians would be trashing Putin as ours are doing to Obama? And let's not forget the Obama bashers on radio and TV.
America should be proud of its freedom and how it is undercutting its President. Many in the GOP laugh with glee at what they feel is a Pootin victory and openly cheer for him. They need to move to Mother Russia.
Obama's stupidity has created this environment where Putin can come on stage and look like a statesman. Obama is a clown. OF COURSE it is a propoganda victory for Putin...one he didnt even have to work for. You think we are HAPPY about that? We are disgusted by the moronic actions of your boy. But then...with Obama and that clown Kerry on the stage, ANYONE can look good.
Putin is winning because Obama is a moron. Plain and simple. Obama jumped the shark, threatened to 'punish' Syria, then lost what he expected as the sure support of the UK and then SUDDENLY he found the need to go to congress, to backtrack, to find others trying to support his attacks. He flopped, he floundered, he embarrassed both himself and the country. He made it easy for Putin to step in. Putin is playing chess...Obama is playing checkers. The ONLY reason Putin looks good is because your boy looks so pathetic.Your "boy" Pootin, as you called Obama a "boy" is winning because of the enemy within, the GOP. Own it.
Do you have a link so others can read Putin's statements firsthand?
Putin is winning because Obama is a moron. Plain and simple. Obama jumped the shark, threatened to 'punish' Syria, then lost what he expected as the sure support of the UK and then SUDDENLY he found the need to go to congress, to backtrack, to find others trying to support his attacks. He flopped, he floundered, he embarrassed both himself and the country. He made it easy for Putin to step in. Putin is playing chess...Obama is playing checkers. The ONLY reason Putin looks good is because your boy looks so pathetic.
US Newspapers - US Newspaper List
New York
New York Times
So easy, even a con should know.
How you enjoy your President Putin, who has ZERO criticism at home.
I agree, it does seem odd that as Obama flails about cluelessly, Putin has suddenly become the "Go to" guy for American newspapers.
Its laughable that you think anyone 'threw' Obama under the bus and thathe didnt take a running dive and do it to himself. You think people are HAPPY that he has done it. That just shows how completely up his ass you are. Pathetic.You have all the talking points down. Enjoy your President thrown under the tank while Pootin gets a free ride from his Country or they die. I bet you forgot they were commies and are still supplying Syria and Iran with high-tech weapons. You arm-chair generals make Putin's job easier one treachorous post at a time.
I agree, it does seem odd that as Obama flails about cluelessly, Putin has suddenly become the "Go to" guy for American newspapers.
In an Op-Ed in the New York Times, Putin bypassed diplomatic channels and spoke directly to the American people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html
Having just read it, I find it to be compelling. Regardless of intention, it is one helluva move...
That Putin is a douchebag?
Seriously, I couldn't even make it all the way to the end. Putin's essay is 15 lbs of bull**** in a 6oz snackpack ziplock.
He writes that the threat of terrorists gaining skills in Syria applies to everyone, and thus we should do nothing and let them get even more hardened and more skilled. I don't even see that level of retarded logic here. The dumbest users here use better logic than Putin. EMBARRASSING.
So you suggest we aid Assad in ridding him of the terrorists?
Sorta of. In the process of bombing Assad, we lob a few missiles towards AQ related fighter cells. They're already afraid we're going to bomb them as well. We should make sure their fears are realized.
In an Op-Ed in the New York Times, Putin bypassed diplomatic channels and spoke directly to the American people.
Among his arguments:
-The UN must be allowed to work.
-Attacking Syria will destabilize the region
-The opposition used chemical weapons, not Assad
-Diplomacy must be used instead of force
-America is not exceptional
How much of his argument holds some water, and how much is BS?
So you want Hezbollah to have their own country?
In an Op-Ed in the New York Times, Putin bypassed diplomatic channels and spoke directly to the American people.
Among his arguments:
-The UN must be allowed to work.
-Attacking Syria will destabilize the region
-The opposition used chemical weapons, not Assad
-Diplomacy must be used instead of force
-America is not exceptional
How much of his argument holds some water, and how much is BS?
Among his arguments:
-The UN must be allowed to work.
-Attacking Syria will destabilize the region
-The opposition used chemical weapons, not Assad
-Diplomacy must be used instead of force
-America is not exceptional
How much of his argument holds some water, and how much is BS?
And that came from where exactly? Do you regularly rely on out of left field arguments?
Without Assad, Hezbollah will wither away. So how does it logically flow that removing Assad strengthens Hezbollah to the point they could rule a country?
Left field? It's front and center. You just said bomb both the rebels, who are Al Qaeda why you're seemingly supporting them,
I do not know, and Assad. You bomb them both you have a power vacuum and whose the only group organized and has the muscle to fill in? Hezbollah.
Second. who do you think rules Lebanon? Hezbollah.
Further Hezbollah has a relationship, albeit strained with Hamas. You don't think they'd work something out temporarily or divide the nation amongst them?
I mean seriously, all your talk about logic and you haven't walked this one through?
Did you even read what I wrote? How is bombing Al Qaeda supporting them? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It's like saying the cops are supporting criminals by shooting and killing them.
And how is Hezbollah going to do that? Without Syrian support, they have very little actual power. No resupply, poor training, no money. Without Assad Hezbollah withers away.
This is not accurate. Hezbollah has a political wing, but it is hardly what you claim it to be.
Hamas is limited to the Gaza strip. Where are you even coming from with this?
Have you? You don't seem to get that Hezbollah is dependent on Syria. And you don't seem to know where Hamas operates form. And at the same time you think that by wanting to bomb and kill AQ, I'm supporting them.
Nothing you've said makes any sense whatsoever.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?