• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Cancels Meeting with Russia's Putin over Snowden Decision.....

I understand you will stand by a government that violates it's citizens rights. That's your prerogative. I see that as part of the problem.

I understand that you are free to leave this country anytime you and the other Snowden supporting traitors want to leave since you feel sooooo violated. In fact, you should follow Snowden's idea and start leaking classified information so you can join your hero.

Your comments show nothing but ignorance since the NSA program didn't start with Obama but has been decades under your presidential GOP heroes. The feigned outrage from the right is ridiculous since their hero Bush I and Bush II never stopped these programs. Only with a Dem president are they outraged. I'll add the people on the left that have no problem with this but had a problem with GOP members doing it.

I take classified documents VERY seriously and hopefully will live to see the traitor Snowden locked up being bars rotting.
 
Remember that Obama / Medvedev meeting?
The Bubbabgone microphone picked up some interesting parts of the conversation the MSM missed ...

Don't quit your day job and do cartoon work. Any asshole with photoshop can do it. Usually see most of it from junior high school kids though. Most people outgrow it when they become an adult. Maybe when you graduate high school you'll outgrow it too.
 
I understand that you are free to leave this country anytime you and the other Snowden supporting traitors want to leave since you feel sooooo violated. In fact, you should follow Snowden's idea and start leaking classified information so you can join your hero.

Lame....

Your comments show nothing but ignorance since the NSA program didn't start with Obama but has been decades under your presidential GOP heroes. The feigned outrage from the right is ridiculous since their hero Bush I and Bush II never stopped these programs. Only with a Dem president are they outraged. I'll add the people on the left that have no problem with this but had a problem with GOP members doing it.

I know very well how long it's been going on. That it's been going on so long doesn't make any of it right. Man, you make lot of assumptions, you really should end that, it makes you look foolish.

I take classified documents VERY seriously and hopefully will live to see the traitor Snowden locked up being bars rotting.


BAAAAAAAAAAAAAA said the sheep.
 

The truth. This has been going on and you haven't said a word about it until Obama. Prove me wrong.

I know very well how long it's been going on. That it's been going on so long doesn't make any of it right. Man, you make lot of assumptions, you really should end that, it makes you look foolish.

Well then, show us where you criticized Bush or any others for it. In fact you have defended Bush multiple times on this board.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAA said the sheep.

Said the person who supports a traitor and a person who willingly admitted he took the job to gather and leak the information. Snowden and his supporters are no better than Al-Qaeda. At least Al-Qaeda let's you know where they stand.
 
I don't blame Obama for his decision. I actually approve of it.

Snowden isn't the only issue over the past few months where Russia has deliberately poked the US in the eye. There's the matter of making it illegal for Americans (and only Americans) to adopt Russian orphans, the Russians violating certain arms treaties and its decision to send high grade weaponry to Syria's Assad over the US (and others) objections, and don't forget what will turn out to be a biggie, the law making it illegal to be a homosexual or to be "pro-homosexual" in Russia, including visitors and foreigners. Expect this last one to gain considerable traction as the world eyes the 2014 winter olympics in Moscow.

Yeah, Putin has been trying to discredit Obama as weak and irrelevant since the "you forbid 18 of our guys by name from entering America, we make a law forbidding 18 of your guys by name from entering Russia" slapfest late last year. It's time Obama said basically, "**** you, asshole. I've got better things to do than waste time with a self-aggrandizing megalomaniac with a Cold War mindset."

Moscow in general and Putin in particular deserved to be bitchslapped. Obama obliged. :shrug:
 
Yeah, Obama is a whiner and a cry baby when he doesn't get his way. What else is new?

nothing else is new ... he's still president and you're still whining ... same-o, same-o ...
 
Remember the following idiocy from our Miss Amerika Candidate back in 2007? Now... if Obama is true to his word, if he is so wise and had such tremendous judgment, he should be following his own advice and sit down with Putin. But... what we have here is Ms. Amerika's foreign policy meeting reality. Reality kicks Ms. Amerika where the sun don't shine... just as he's been doing to Americans for the past 4.5 years.

QUESTION: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since.

In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?

COOPER: I should also point out that Stephen is in the crowd tonight.

Senator Obama?

OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.

And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/us/politics/24transcript.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
 
Don't quit your day job and do cartoon work.
Any asshole with photoshop can do it. Usually see most of it from junior high school kids though.
Most people outgrow it when they become an adult.
Maybe when you graduate high school you'll outgrow it too
.

You might want to cut back on that unhealthy fascination with Junior High School kids ... I can only lead to problems.
I'll have you know Mr. Kotter said he's proud to have me in his class.
 
Only one reason come to mind....
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    14.1 KB · Views: 29
You might want to cut back on that unhealthy fascination with Junior High School kids ... I can only lead to problems.
I'll have you know Mr. Kotter said he's proud to have me in his class.

Maybe you can also learn how to "quote" properly as well. All in due time when you grow up.
 
Only one reason come to mind....

Well there could be others. :lol:

wonders-of-egg-art-07.jpg
 
The truth. This has been going on and you haven't said a word about it until Obama. Prove me wrong.

Well then, show us where you criticized Bush or any others for it. In fact you have defended Bush multiple times on this board.

Uh, you are really full of it. Just make it up as you go, lie, lie, lie. Pretty pathetic dude.
 
Uh, you are really full of it. Just make it up as you go, lie, lie, lie. Pretty pathetic dude.

Then prove me wrong, show me where you have criticized Bush. Oh yeah, you can't. Show me that I'm lying with PROOF.

You're comments are what's pathetic.
 
Using that twisted logic, so did Manning. However, the right calls Manning a traitor and praises Snowden. Both should be behind bars.

No twist to it at all. What Manning did was clearly illegal. His ass belongs behind bars for a very long time.

With Snowden, what he did may be illegal. But then, what the US Government headed by Obama may have been illegal. Some say it is, some say it is not. Personally, I'm glad Snowden did what he did because I don't think Obama has the authority or the right to track every phone call or email in the US, period. But just about the only way to sort through all that is for Snowden to stand trial and it looks like that ain't happening anytime soon. So in the mean time, I'll just sit back and enjoy the phony show the liberals put on in trying to excuse away Obamas actions on both Snowden and his expanded invasion of privacy policies.
 
Then prove me wrong, show me where you have criticized Bush. Oh yeah, you can't. Show me that I'm lying with PROOF.

You're comments are what's pathetic.

No, yours are. How about you simply pay attention to when I joined the forum, and tell me if Bush was in office. Oh, yeah, now you are looking even more silly. Keep it up.
 
Remember the following idiocy from our Miss Amerika Candidate back in 2007? Now... if Obama is true to his word, if he is so wise and had such tremendous judgment, he should be following his own advice and sit down with Putin. But... what we have here is Ms. Amerika's foreign policy meeting reality. Reality kicks Ms. Amerika where the sun don't shine... just as he's been doing to Americans for the past 4.5 years.

In my view, the problem isn't so much a willingness to meet without preconditions. The problem is meeting in the absence of concrete goals and objectives. Summits should not be held merely for atmospherics/feeling good so to speak. They are serious endeavors and should only be held to finalize concrete substance that is in the mutual interests of both parties.

Take Iran, for instance. If Iran were serious about negotiating a nuclear agreement, then a meeting would be feasible to finalize that agreement. Much preparation would be required before any such meeting would be feasible. Lower-level diplomats would need to hash out an agreement that greatly reduces the risks of Iran's pursuing a nuclear weapons program with robust verification (U.S. interest) and allows Iran to have a civilian nuclear industry (Iran's interest). Only when such an agreement has been reached or the remaining differences are minor should a summit of Presidents be held. Going to Iran or inviting Iran's President to Washington when the differences are enormous and trust is minimal would be naïve.

Some might ask about the President Sadat's trip to Jerusalem. What is often overlooked is that Sadat and the Israelis were building trust and evolving toward an accommodation years before Sadat's visit to Israel. Thanks to the herculean efforts of Secretary of State Kissinger following the 1973 Arab-Israeli war to broker a series of agreements, the two parties gained experience in reaching modest agreements, honoring them, and even making trade-offs to meet one another's needs. The ground was laid for a breakthrough and President Sadat had gained insight from that earlier experience that Israel was psychologically prepared to return the Sinai Peninsula for peace with one of its bitterest foes. He also knew that Israel could trust his sincerity from his having maintained his agreed commitments. On his part, he decided to put Egypt's interests ahead of the supposed interests of a unified Arab world, e.g., Egypt's agreement would not be conditioned on Israel's accommodating all the other Arab state and non-state actors, a situation that would only give the most extreme party a veto over a peace agreement. He didn't just go to Israel with the blind hope of a miracle. Those elements are lacking with regard to Iran. If anything, the gulf between the U.S. and Iran has widened.
 
No twist to it at all. What Manning did was clearly illegal. His ass belongs behind bars for a very long time.

With Snowden, what he did may be illegal. But then, what the US Government headed by Obama may have been illegal. Some say it is, some say it is not. Personally, I'm glad Snowden did what he did because I don't think Obama has the authority or the right to track every phone call or email in the US, period. But just about the only way to sort through all that is for Snowden to stand trial and it looks like that ain't happening anytime soon. So in the mean time, I'll just sit back and enjoy the phony show the liberals put on in trying to excuse away Obamas actions on both Snowden and his expanded invasion of privacy policies.

You don't leak classified information on what MAY be illegal. Snowden belongs in jail since he admitted to doing it. As for a pony show, I'm quite enjoying it actually. To see the right decry a program that THEIR guy they voted for used is hillarious. Yet they now decry Obama doing it.

It's amazing the justification the right is trying to use for leaking classified information. "May" be illegal? Gimme a break.
 
No, yours are. How about you simply pay attention to when I joined the forum, and tell me if Bush was in office. Oh, yeah, now you are looking even more silly. Keep it up.

And since that time you haven't mentioned ANYTHING about Bush? Sorry, don't buy it. There was PLENTY of time to make comments about this program. Sorry you lose again. You're display of partisan hackery is hilarious.
 
And since that time you haven't mentioned ANYTHING about Bush?

Search for your damn self. Good lord are you really that lazy?

If you paid even a tiny bit of attention you would know I have been critical of both 'sides', both 'parties'. They are both full of crap, and are more similar in the stuff they do than different.

So yet again, your attempted assumptions are a failure.
 
Back
Top Bottom