Would republicans support Syria intervention if Obama were white?

[AtlantaAdonis]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

 

[The Man]

Obama is white. Or, as much white as he is black.

 

[trfjr]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

its the difference between a leader and an amateur
Bush was able to get the backing of 30 other nations Obama cant even get the backing of his own nation

 

[Fruityfact]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

They didn't mindlessly support it...just supported it off bad info and heightened emotions-we "all" did.
I think there was a generational gap that hadn't seen what "war" was really about. Now that this generation has seen war and its cost(lives/money/relations) they want no more of it-In other words our "Mission Accomplished" is still on our minds

 

[AtlantaAdonis]

They didn't mindlessly support it...just supported it off bad info and heightened emotions-we "all" did.
I think there was a generational gap that hadn't seen what "war" was really about. Now that this generation has seen war and its cost(lives/money/relations) they want no more of it-In other words our "Mission Accomplished" is still on our minds

Air strikes versus boots on the ground for 8 years. Clinton bombed Milosevic in Bosnia and not many republicans opposed it. What's different now?

 

[Fruityfact]

its the difference between a leader and an amateur
Bush was able to get the backing of 30 other nations Obama cant even get the backing of his own nation

Obama is a far superior leader to Bush--reality

Air strikes versus boots on the ground for 8 years. Clinton bombed Milosevic in Bosnia and not many republicans opposed it. What's different now?

The hawks in this country are becoming less hawkish

 

[spud_meister]

I can't think

We can tell.

 

[The Man]

Obama is a far superior leader to Bush--reality

How so? They seem about the same to me, even eerily identical in a lot of ways.

 

[AtlantaAdonis]

How so? They seem about the same to me, even eerily identical in a lot of ways.

One has a background as a community organizer, the other was an incompetent oil Baron.
One got into Harvard by his own merit, the other was a legacy admit.
One has an administration with connections to Halliburton and other defense contractors, the other doesn't.
One is an imperialist, the other an internationalist.
One has a Nobel Peace Prize, the other is reviled around the world.
One cares about ensuring all Americans have health care, the other doesn't.

I could go on and on and on and on. Change your lean to "Very Conservative" please.

 

[trfjr]

Obama is a far superior leader to Bush--reality



The hawks in this country are becoming less hawkish

reality
Bush 30 nations including his own > Obama 1 nation not his own

what is your definition of a leader?

 

[Brooks]

I think there was a generational gap that hadn't seen what "war" was really about. Now that this generation has seen war and its cost(lives/money/relations) they want no more of it-In other words our "Mission Accomplished" is still on our minds

That's either borderline brilliant or brilliant.

 

[Penderyn]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

They are/were, like Republicanism, stinking ideas, and of course racists are racists. Next question?

 

[The Man]

One has a background as a community organizer, the other was an incompetent oil Baron.
One got into Harvard by his own merit, the other was a legacy admit.
One has an administration with connections to Halliburton and other defense contractors, the other doesn't.
One is an imperialist, the other an internationalist.
One has a Nobel Peace Prize, the other is reviled around the world.
One cares about ensuring all Americans have health care, the other doesn't.

I could go on and on and on and on. Change your lean to "Very Conservative" please.

You didn't name one reason why Obama is a superior leader to Bush. You named a bunch of reasons why he SHOULD BE a superior leader to Bush. In the real world, they're about the same, even eerily identical in a lot of ways. Their backgrounds don't matter one bit.

 

[trfjr]

One has a background as a community organizer, the other was an incompetent oil Baron.
One got into Harvard by his own merit, the other was a legacy admit.
One has an administration with connections to Halliburton and other defense contractors, the other doesn't.
One is an imperialist, the other an internationalist.
One has a Nobel Peace Prize, the other is reviled around the world.
One cares about ensuring all Americans have health care, the other doesn't.

I could go on and on and on and on. Change your lean to "Very Conservative" please.

and that idiot was able to get the backing of 30 nations and that smart Nobel Peace Prize winner that is reviled around the world cant even get the backing of his own

what a joke

 

[Carleen]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

They just can't get past the fact that he was elected in the first place and when he won a second time it put them over the edge!
They try at every turn to make him look bad. It's all they've got going for them.

 

[ocean515]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

Thanks for adding to the evidence of the liberal/progressive mind.

 

[VanceMack]

Stupidest ****ing question asked to date.

How about the democrats that oppose the attacks? Just a bunch of angry hate filled racists, correct?

 

[Fruityfact]

reality
Bush 30 nations including his own > Obama 1 nation not his own
what is your definition of a leader?

Not this

That's either borderline brilliant or brilliant.

Sorry, I can't tell if that is genuine or sarcasm? :3oops:

 

[Drake McHugh]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

Would you support this if Romney were potus. I know the answer to that one.

 

[Fisher]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

The House GOP leadership supports strikes, and per CNN, the democrats are the ones that are giving the President the biggest problem. So you readily admit now that democrats hate black people?

 

[bubbabgone]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war?

The answer...they hate black people more than they love war.

That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea?

I can't think of a sane reason

.

It shows.

 

[Penderyn]

Stupidest ****ing question asked to date.

How about the democrats that oppose the attacks? Just a bunch of angry hate filled racists, correct?

People in the government party tend to support it. The Guardian claimed recently that only twenty of the two-hundred-plus tory MPs who voted to meddle in Syria believed in it.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

One has a background as a community organizer, the other was an incompetent oil Baron.
One got into Harvard by his own merit, the other was a legacy admit.
One has an administration with connections to Halliburton and other defense contractors, the other doesn't.
One is an imperialist, the other an internationalist.
One has a Nobel Peace Prize, the other is reviled around the world.
One cares about ensuring all Americans have health care, the other doesn't.

I could go on and on and on and on. Change your lean to "Very Conservative" please.

Hey...you forgot "black." Racist troll threads always need to include skin color.

 

[phattonez]

Why did republicans mindlessly support a war that lasted 8 years and costs trillions of dollars and leaves hundreds of thousands dead while pulling out all of the stops to stop strikes against a dictator who actually has chemical weapons that will be far cheaper and faster than the Iraq war? The answer...they hate black people more than they love war. That's really the only conclusion I can come to. I mean is there really any real reason Syria is a bad idea whereas Iraq was a good idea? I can't think of a sane reason.

Come up with absurd claim.

Provide no proof for absurd claim.

Therefore claim is proved.

Your logic is flawless.

 

[phattonez]

Besides, you're ignoring a far more obvious answer.

Obama is a Democrat and Republicans are not.