enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Page 1 of 2 (18 items)   1 2 Next >
A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by TheAntiFascist
-2 Reply

Howdy

barack obama proposes to end a political career which was launched in the home of a terrorist by winning the US presidency.

Seriously. How on Earth can barack obama ask US servicemen and women to go to foreign lands and fight, suffer wounds, and suffer to their deaths, combating terrorists, when he is comfortable breaking bread, when he is a political partner, with terrorists himself?

Short answer:

He won't.

He can't, impossible, a president who is partners with a terrorist is NOT going to make war on terrorists, period.

barack obama will reward terrorists with their very own Iraqi nation to murder and pilliage and milk for petrodollars to fund their jihad, and destroy the US military by using their budget to fund socilialist spending programs, returning the war on terror to battallions of trial lawyers instead if battallions of Army soldiers.

barack obama agrees with terrorists that you are too free.

barack obama proposes to resolve internaional terrorism by fixing the problem, once you are a slave in a socialist workers paradise and we can no longer afford a military to defend ourselves with, our enemies will stop their campaign of mass murder.

Partners with international terrorism are the wrong choice to lead the fight, folks.

Elect a winner, reformer, maverick and American hero, John McCain, and send a message to bloodthirsty pirates, America will defend liberty, not make common cause with fascist butchers, not make peace by enslaving the free, but by freeing the enslaved.

Where do you GET this crap from???
by Qtec90
.... NewsMax???.... (You know.... The "Swiftboat Rag")
American hero? Really?
by Seedy

Col. David. H. Hackworth on John McCain. <link>

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by jammer
Not to worry, we won't let Sarah and her seccessionist husband anywhere near the White House. Wasn't "Maverick" a TV show about con men? Sorry we don't need a con man in the White House, so McCain is out. Maybe he can be ranking repug on the finance committee next term? LMAO!
Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by stallrocket

Howdy.

Looks like we have a post from another mindless "what's the distraction today" imbecile. Its hilarious to listen to the various right-wing nutjob talk show hosts talk at the same time about the items they have been handed to spew.

Its time to ask John McCain why he shares the values of a convicted felon who plotted several murders of US officials and openly advocated and gave advice on killing federal law enforcement officers. Maybe someone should ask McCain if he believes in "witchcraft". Let the fun begin.

Not that anyone cares about this crap as evidenced by McCain's continuing rocket ride to oblivion. Americans aren't generally as stupid as posters like this. They care about actual problems.

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by TheAntiFascist

Howdy

All obama needed to do was repudiate a terrorist.

He did not.

You seriously expect obama to send soldiers to their death fighting against terrorists when he can't even bring himself to cut his personal, political ties to a terrorist?

You claim the concern is imbecilic, but this would appear the observation of an imbecile, as you have no perspective on how a friend to terrorists can presume to make war on terrorism.

Nothing responsive whatsoever.

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by LIBREACTION

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. It all depends on which side of the issue you are on.

The British post WWII thought the Irgun and Hagganh were terrorists while the Israelis thought they were freedom fighters.

The NAZIs in WWII thought the Russian Partisans were terrorists and the Soviets thought they were freedom fighters

We thought the Viet Cong were terrorists but the Vietnamese thought they were freedom fighters.

It's all a matter of perspective. And if you HONESTLY believe that Obama will support or encourage terrorists of any type then you are seriously brainwashed by the same criminals who engineered the current economic crisis and I really feel sorry for you

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by stallrocket

I was wrong, you aren't an imbecile, you have not even worked your way up the ladder to imbecile. I apologize to all imbeciles for my insult to them.

I assume we can expect murder, mayhem and felonies from John McCain given that his self-described "good friend" has the values Mr. McCain "shares".

I don't think you know much about fighting terrorism. Maybe you get your information from coffee cups too.

....BULLSHIT!!!
by Qtec90
.... And anyone with google, that reads any of the news or watches ANY "Broadcast News" on TX (Other then FOX) know your full of it on that point..... (Not the first time by any means, either)
Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by TheAntiFascist

Howdy

Friends of terrorists are no friends of mine.

And you are revoltingly wrong.

People who deliberately butcher innocent civilians in order to advance their politics are always terrorists, and never freedom fighters.

People who accidentally kill innocent women and children while trying to kill or capture an enemy may be incompetent, they may be criminals, they may be terrorists, and they may be victims of circumstance.

But people who deliberately do politics with mass murders on civilians are always terrorists, invariably enemies of humanity, and always our moral imperative to hunt down and bring to justice.

barack obama, as a friend, confidant, and political partner of a terrorist, is the wrong man to lead the fight against terrorism.

Period.

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by ctcadguy
What an Asshole!
Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by raddad

I give you our President, gulty of the same thing. That being "But people who deliberately do politics with mass murders on civilians are always terrorists, invariably enemies of humanity..." and if as you say its "always our moral imperative to hunt down and bring [them?] to justice." Then shouldnt you be doing the same thing to President Bush? President Bush who launched a war on Terror and invaded a country that had NO reason to be attacked? There are plenty of despots and cruel societies and countries that the US lists as friends and allies, who we continue to do business with and look the other way when they do something bad, and yet, teh President, in his infinite wisdom, decided we HAD to attack THAT country becuase that was the home of terror. Or maybe.. there was some other underlying reason we went there. Hmmm... could it be... Oil? =O NO WAY! The US would NEVER storm into another country because they had something we might need! NO WAY!!!

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by TomFitz

No, not really.

This is bullshit, althouth I don't know if you're actually smart enought to know that.

Re: A terrorist-in-chief? Really?
by raddad
Its not BS, thats the sad part. Over our 225+ years as a nation, we have time and again stolen or moved into territories that belonged to other nations and became the defacto controllers of that area, while at the same time allowing other nations we regard as "allies" to persecute their own people, or the citizens of other nations. What was it about Iraq that moved President Bush to act? And don't give me the WMD statement. We all know those claims to now be false.
Re: American hero? Really?
by RANGER 82
You apparently know little about Hackworth or why he stayed away so long from the USA. Hackworth had NO integrity.
Page 1 of 2 (18 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML