- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 14,803
- Reaction score
- 11,542
- Location
- Red Colorado
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Talk about slithering snakes...“I didn’t set a red line, the world set a red line,” Obama said. “My credibility’s not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’s credibility’s on the line."
Source
And no one has the integrity or principle to call him out on it.Yes I saw that.
Jeesh.. this is a President with no character, no integrity and no principle.
No. Not a smidgen. He even blamed history - all the signatories to the Geneva Conventions from 1925 to the present. He, Obama, remains above it all. He alone has the moral authority and clarity to act.And no one has the integrity or principle to call him out on it.
He just stepped out of his own vomit and is blaming it on the world, the international community, on America, and on congress.
Has this charlatan no shame?
Yes I saw that.
Jeesh.. this is a President with no character, no integrity and no principle.
Oh pleaseeeee, now it is going to be our (people) fault.
Oh pleaseeeee, now it is going to be our (people) fault.
Nah, they'll pin this on Bush somehow. :lol:
We told the Left that in 2008.
It will be, actually. The President's
reputation is on the line (to disagree with him), the Congress's reputation is on the line, the American public's reputation is on the line, and the international community's reputation is on the line.
He disconnected himself completly, from his Nation and his supporters by basically blaming everyone but him for his own remarks.
We have a child running our Country.
He's attempting to put pressure on the
Congress to do its job in legitimizing his action. By losing the UK, having a skeptical public, and without UN support, the President is more or less trying to put the ball in their court. Yes, it's a political calculation, and some things could have been handled better, but this was the right political calculation and it needed to be one.
Yes I saw that.
Jeesh.. this is a President with no character, no integrity and no principle.
We told the Left that in 2008.
:dohHe's attempting to put pressure on the Congress to do its job in legitimizing his action. By losing the UK, having a skeptical public, and without UN support, the President is more or less trying to put the ball in their court. Yes, it's a political calculation, and some things could have been handled better, but this was the right political calculation and it needed to be one. We expect the President of the United States to take a tough stand on issues of grave foreign policy interest, be it a nuclear Iran, genocide, or chemical weapon use on civilian populations. He gives one, which was what we expected, and the coalition around him evaporated. This simply makes sense.
LOL !!
No he's NOT.
Honestly, the only way he could put pressure on Congress is to blame everyone but himself for his own statement ? Why are you defending this man-child ?
And whats stopping him anyway. He wen't into Lybia ( Now its a lawless hotbed for Islamo-terrorist..thanks Captain dumbs***..)
It's not about defending him. The use of chemical weapons is an international "red-line"....and supposedly the international community has decided that certain actions require a consequence.
You also criticize him for Libya...and criticize him for taking more deliberation before going into Syria and getting Congressional support? The only thing confusing and nebulous is the conservative thought process.
He's attempting to put pressure on the Congress to do its job in legitimizing his action. By losing the UK, having a skeptical public, and without UN support, the President is more or less trying to put the ball in their court. Yes, it's a political calculation, and some things could have been handled better, but this was the right political calculation and it needed to be one. We expect the President of the United States to take a tough stand on issues of grave foreign policy interest, be it a nuclear Iran, genocide, or chemical weapon use on civilian populations. He gives one, which was what we expected, and the coalition around him evaporated. This simply makes sense.
There are worse atrocities happening all around the world. Obama isn't launching the warships. Oh those are Christians being slaughtered. /yawn
Just stop it already. We have no business in Syria. This is obviously a blatant. Obama is on video setting a red line. At this point we need to start asking ourselves how mentally and emotionally stable our President is. Clearly he is hallucinating and making things up.
He's literally become the teflon Don. Nothing sticks to him. Truth, reason, common sense... they all slither off his scales like water.I mean really, whats stopping him ?
Any surgical strike will be reported as a success, no matter how much of a waste of a good T-Hawk missle it is, with photo's soon following showing Obama sitting in the Situation Room looking intently at the Flat screens.
I agree...which is why I'm glad he's going to Congress rather than making the decision to pull the trigger and strike Syria on his own.
As for atrocities happening all over the world...sure...but chemical attacks by a regime are supposedly something the vast majority of countries have signed on to saying it's unacceptable. It's an issue to be debated....is the international community willing to take action on the use of chemical weapons? Does the US see it as their duty to respond? Thank God it's going to Congress so that this is actually debated.
It's not about defending him. The use of chemical weapons is an international "red-line"....and supposedly the international community has decided that certain actions require a consequence.
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?