• 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's Empty Words

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Aug 21, 2013

With the images of slaughter coming out of Syria and fresh evidence that the Assad regime may be using chemical weapons on its own citizens, it’s worth revisiting the case for intervention in Libya that Barack Obama made on March 28, 2011. At the time he spoke, Amnesty International reported that “hundreds and hundreds” had been killed in Libya. Others put the death toll at nearly 1,000. The United Nations—always more effective at counting deaths than at preventing them—puts the death toll in Syria above 100,000.

The scale of the slaughter in Libya, Obama argued, required the United States to intervene. “To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and—more profoundly—our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are,” Obama declared. “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

The president decried the “false choice” put forward during the debate on intervention in Washington. “On the one hand, some question why America should intervene at all—even in limited ways—in this distant land,” he said. “They argue that there are many places in the world where innocent civilians face brutal violence at the hands of their government, and America should not be expected to police the world, particularly when we have so many pressing needs here at home.”

[Excerpt]

Read more:
Obama's Empty Words | The Weekly Standard

A man should know his limitations. Even a president.
 

iacardsfan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 17, 2011
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
806
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I feel bad for the Libyan people, but I also feel bad for the homeless Americans, I feel bad for the slaughtered people in cities from gang wars, I feel bad for the people who went to college and worked hard only to be unemployed. While I truly wish we could help every oppressed person in the world, with American tax dollars we need to look after of interests at home first. Once we have those down then we can look abroad.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
7,757
Reaction score
4,722
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't even want to listen to the President talk anymore. Every President is the same. You invest time in listening to them only to realize upon closer examination that you wasted your time on a load of horse ****.

If people are really allowing themselves to be spoonfed this garbage about humanitarian reasons for us invading the upteenth country, then we truly are lost as a nation. We don't go anywhere that doesn't benefit us, always remember that. Calling it an "intervention" is just candy-coated parlance that serves as a prelude for the load of aforementioned horse **** propaganda that is about to be fed to you.
 

Ryan5

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
2,191
Reaction score
483
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
The man is in charge of an empire. I don't see the big deal.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,653
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Aug 21, 2013

With the images of slaughter coming out of Syria and fresh evidence that the Assad regime may be using chemical weapons on its own citizens, it’s worth revisiting the case for intervention in Libya that Barack Obama made on March 28, 2011. At the time he spoke, Amnesty International reported that “hundreds and hundreds” had been killed in Libya. Others put the death toll at nearly 1,000. The United Nations—always more effective at counting deaths than at preventing them—puts the death toll in Syria above 100,000.

The scale of the slaughter in Libya, Obama argued, required the United States to intervene. “To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and—more profoundly—our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are,” Obama declared. “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

The president decried the “false choice” put forward during the debate on intervention in Washington. “On the one hand, some question why America should intervene at all—even in limited ways—in this distant land,” he said. “They argue that there are many places in the world where innocent civilians face brutal violence at the hands of their government, and America should not be expected to police the world, particularly when we have so many pressing needs here at home.”

[Excerpt]

Read more:
Obama's Empty Words | The Weekly Standard

A man should know his limitations. Even a president.



On the other hand, do you really want to make it ours and to pay for the solution of this problem? The direct neighbors are Europe, Arabia and Africa. They have money and men. Sure, they do not have the logistics and equipment. But if they pay? That we could supply. That, I think, should be the message laud and clear.
 

Medusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
39,861
Reaction score
7,852
Location
Turkey
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
I don't even want to listen to the President talk anymore. Every President is the same. You invest time in listening to them only to realize upon closer examination that you wasted your time on a load of horse ****.

If people are really allowing themselves to be spoonfed this garbage about humanitarian reasons for us invading the upteenth country, then we truly are lost as a nation. We don't go anywhere that doesn't benefit us, always remember that. Calling it an "intervention" is just candy-coated parlance that serves as a prelude for the load of aforementioned horse **** propaganda that is about to be fed to you.

they have to be teh same whether they like or not

teh foreign politics of USA never changes from president to president because all presidents have to obey teh rules determined by the deep state .

but of course some presidents are below average intelligence.:mrgreen:
 
Last edited:

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
but of course some presidents are below average intelligence.:mrgreen:

True, but few were as narcissistic as this one.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
would you like to see junior moron as narcissistic ?

l dont think so :mrgreen:

If you are referring to Bush43, he at least had the good sense to pick capable advisers and he did not have Obama's messiah complex.
 

Medusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
39,861
Reaction score
7,852
Location
Turkey
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
If you are referring to Bush43, he at least had the good sense to pick capable advisers and he did not have Obama's messiah complex.

he was a messiah,junior messiah
 
Top Bottom