Awwwwwwwww,How Cute, I think Steve0 has an Internet Crush on Bev.

Better watchout Steve0,Spanky also has an Internet Crush on Bev also.

Ricky,

No Crush here. I just like to point out Racism and Beverly from Chicago . Is in Fact a Racist..

So true Rick. It is a dream of mine to get dear Bev. to start speaking actual English.

Darn to dream I say.

The "Arab Spring" is a can of worms, and while I would like to see a clearer foreign policy (e.g., Obama Doctrine), so far President Obama has done an excellent job in the when, how, and where of US involvement. In the case of Libya, Qaddafi is second to bin Laden as a terrorist, and as such should be hunted down the same way--there is no random "cherry picking" here. The only reason conservatives are against the President's efforts in Libya is because conservatives are against everything President Obama does.

We all know that Bev from Chicago has to spew on a daily basis or she will beat her children. The way I look at it is, anything for the children. Anger and hatred have to come out some way, so this is the safest, most beneficial way for her to release it... gotta think of her kids...

The day she says something nice... LOOK OUT! Full story at 11.

I was thinking Spank and steve-o were more into maybe a 3-way with that 3wankers guy....

I mean, hell- anyone that would get off on Palin would get off on a bush if they thought there was a snake in it.

You're correct True Patriot. Conservatives are against everything Obama does. But that does not define the reason why. It only states the outcome, not the underlying meaning.

To the liberal, they think conservatives are against Obama because he won the election. They will stand on their laurels and call conservative racists and a whole host of other names because we are against Obama. I would venture to say that the common liberal has no clue as to why conservatives are against Obama. I'll leave it to the liberals to give their reasons why Obama is not our kind of president. No hints, no help. I'll even bet, no answers either.

TRUEPATRIOT

Qaddafi is second to bin Laden as a terrorist,

Really? Did you know Libya was assisting us with the "war on terrror" and was reponsible for busting up a nuclear smuggling ring? This was only a year ago, perhaps you need to stay more current on events

"Darn" to dream I say.

What?

.

Barack H. Obama - Warmonger.

JoAnnaSmith1

Barack H. Obama - Warmonger.

JoAnnaSmith1 -the hysterical progangandist

Beverly in Chicago The Hysterical Racist...

I like what Obama is doing with his random wars in the Middle East. Pick a country, and attack. And after a couple of weeks, let someone else clean up the rest of the mess. Great process. We'll get those people in line.

JoAnnaSmith1

Barack H. Obama - Warmonger
..........................................................

I almost wasn't going to reply to this but it is so outrageously stupid that I had to.

Who unilaterally started the war in Iraq based on lies and deception?

Who started a war in Afghanistan and then abandoned the mission and our troops?

Who inherited these 2 wars started by Bush?

Now..who based on a United Nations resolution entered into a limited role in Libya and then pulled our troops out of a combat role when the mission was completed?

Warmonger? JS1, you really outdid yourself with what has to be the dumbest post of the day.

Amen

GM: Who unilaterally started the war in Iraq based on lies and deception?

There were 17 UN resolutions against Iraq:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_War

There were dozens of countries in the coalition:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_Force_%E2%80%93_Iraq#List_of_nations_in_the_coalition

There were Congressional votes on the Iraq war:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

There were Congressional Democrats that insisted Iraq be brought in line:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1051684/posts

GM: Now..who based on a United Nations resolution entered into a limited role in Libya . .

Point out the part in that resolution that says we can kill the leader of Libya.

GM, you're a typical brainless Lib who couldn't be critical of Obama even if your life depended on it.

@Groucho

I loved Duck Soup.

However, on your point Bush and Obama have followed almost the same process in getting involved in Iraq and Libya. Bush got his UN Resolution, with false testimony from Colin Powell, and he also got authorization from Congress. You can argue that he jumped the gun, and I'll agree with you, but when congress gives you a blank check they are pretty dumb not to think you will use it. In Obama's case he got his UN Resolution but where in that resolution do the words "regime change" appear, as this is now the stated objective of the administration. Add to this the fact that Obama did not get authorization from congress for this action and Bush in legal terms is on stronger ground.

BTW My opinion is that both missions are wrong and wish would would leave both countries and Afghanistan.

And GM, just what is the end goal of Obama's war with Libya? "Qaddafi must go"? So if/when Qaddafi is gone, what then? Got a favorite of yours you want brought to power in Libya big guy? Same thing with this "Mubarak must go" in Egypt. See the problems since that time? Yeah, not good. It would have been nice to have had a plan before Obama went and started shooting his mouth, and guns, off.

Warmongers - they shoot first, and let someone else clean of their mess.

At least Obama has his ducks in a row on what Israel should do. They don't seem to agree, but so what.

JoAnna,

Groucho's gut knew better than to challenge you ..... but that little liberal voice .....

Great job.

Alan, NJ..

Obama may have said he wants Gaddafi to go but did not pursue that goal. It was limited mission and we pulled out. NATO, primarily Britain and France are targeting Gaddafi and NOT us. Iraq was invaded based on lies and deception with the intention of ousting Hussein. The UN resolutions on Iraq were based upon falsehoods presented by Powell. If the truth were known, no one would have voted for it. Bush wanted Hussein out and lied and deceived the American people to achieve that goal. The war powers act allows for intervention for a limited period of time. Bush asked for and received several extensions of the act which allowed him to continue the war.

Vast differences in circumstances and results.

Night at the Opera is my favorite.

JAS1 - you so funny.

Most of those resolutions were fueled by false information promulgated upon the UN by the US (e.g. Colin Powell).

"Collation of the willing" - make me laugh. You mean those 7 guys from Poland, for instance?

And yes, many Dems were either Blue Dogs (pseudo Republicans) or folded to vote in favor, so as to avoid the "weak on terrorism" label. Bad on them.

And bandying-about labels like "brainless lib" does nothing to enhance your line of thought.

GM: Obama may have said he wants Gaddafi to go but did not pursue that goal. It was limited mission and we pulled out. NATO, primarily Britain and France are targeting Gaddafi and NOT us.

Do you expect anyone to believe this nonsense of yours? We, the USofA, fired how many Tomahawk missiles into Libya? We, the USofA, are targetting Qaddafi, that is simple truth that cannot be denied, except by the likes of you.

Viktor,

Of course the False information yuou are speaking of is all the Democrats that Claimed that Iraq had WMDs before Bush even became President . You know like Bill Clinton. and Hillary..

Steve,

No, actually I was referring to Nigerian yellowcake and tractor-trailers "north-south-east-west" of Baghdad. But thanks for asking, just the same, and for not assuming.

It was limited mission and we pulled out. NATO, primarily Britain and France are targeting Gaddafi and NOT us.

I think you'll find that it's our smart bombs and predators that are doing the work as Britain and France can't really buy more ordnance. Make no mistake we are targeting Gaddafi, and we killed a couple of his grand kids in the process. I agree there are differences in circumstances and results, and do not think I am ever going to defend the Iraq decision, but from where I sit it looks more of the same. Can you honestly say it still a humanitarian mission to protect innocent civilians? Or do the civilians we kill in Tripoli not count as innocents? It seems to me we are taking sides in a fully fledged civil war based on tribal loyalties and that is never a good thing.

"What's That?"

"That's the Sanity Clause"

"I no believe in Sanity Clause"

And yes, many Dems were either Blue Dogs (pseudo Republicans) or folded to vote in favor, so as to avoid the "weak on terrorism" label. Bad on them.

Former President Bill Clinton, Former SoS Madeline Albright, Rep. Nancy Pelsoi, Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, Senators Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Former VP Al Gore, Senator Jay Rockerfeller, Rep. Henry Waxman, Senator Dianne Feinstein, all "pseudo Republicans", all "Blue Dogs" as it were.

Isn't it amazing? Obama starts a war, and all the Liberals want to do is talk about Bush.

JoAnnaSmith1

When Kaddafy goes, will you give President Obama the credit? Hmmmmm?

so Viktor,

You Excuse all the Democrats that Lied about WMDS in iraq? You know like John Kerry . and many others. Or is it you just wish not to concentrate on those Lies? I mean realy what is it. As for me i just think Both Democrats and Republicans got it wrong. but that in the end Getting "Rid of Saddam was a Good thing for the World.............

JAS1: You conveniently ignored the second part of my reference to the Dems: "...or folded to vote in favor, so as to avoid the "weak on terrorism" label. Bad on them." Thought I'd bring that back around for your reference as you seem to have missed it in your initial reading. As it were.

Groucho,

This is were you're wrong. The UN resolutions were set in place since the 90s on Iraq. Congress gave the green light to go into Iraq. Afghanistan wasn't abandoned as you say. Do you think WE started the war in Afghanistan? I think Obama is bitting off more than he can chew. He half assed Libya, either you go in full force or not go in at all. He never asked Congress and now 60 days has passed. It wasn't the GOP that wants Obama to wash our hands of Libya. Either way I don't care, go in full blown or just walk away.

If you launch over 100 guided missiles into a country, you're going after somebody.

Steve - No, I said no such thing. Way to try to put words into my mouth; thanks much. But the primary push to go into Iraq came from Bush & the GOP, enabled by quote-unquote Dems and by those Dems who sold their principles to avoid the weakness label. The Dems did not lead the charge.

Getting rid of Saddam is not the issue - those ends do not justify those means (lying our way into Iraq via the various rationales from either side).

When Kaddafy goes, will you give President Obama the credit? Hmmmmm?

Looks like Congress has put Obama on notice Obama better define a mission for Libya, and soon:

Crossing party lines to deliver a stunning rebuke to the commander in chief, the vast majority of the House voted Friday for resolutions telling President Obama he has broken the constitutional chain of authority by committing U.S. troops to the international military mission in Libya.

In two votes — on competing resolutions that amounted to legislative lectures of Mr. Obama — Congress escalated the brewing constitutional clash over whether he ignored the founding document’s grant of war powers by sending U.S. troops to aid in enforcing a no-fly zone and naval blockade of Libya.

The resolutions were non-binding, and only one of them passed, but taken together, roughly three-quarters of the House voted to put Mr. Obama on notice that he must explain himself or else face future consequences, possibly including having funds for the war cut off.

“He has a chance to get this right. If he doesn’t, Congress will exercise its constitutional authority and make it right,” said House Speaker John A. Boehner . . . .

Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/3/bipartisan-congress-rebuffs-obama-libya-mission/

Congress is pretty po-ed at President Obama. In a bi-partisan way.

Alan, NJ..

We may have manufactured the missiles but we are NOT shooting them at anyone. We also sell armaments to countries who's political and human rights policies make me cringe like Saudi Arabia.
What they do with them is beyond our control short of not selling the weapons to them in the first place.

BTW, I also think we should pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan and stop spending multi billions on those wars. The draw downs can't come fast enough.

You know, in my neighborhood they're building a viaduct.

Why a duck? Why not a bridge?

So you can ford the river.

Why not a Chevy?

Have a great weekend.

I

JoAnnaSmith1

awwwww ...........you calling Obama a warmonger? your so disillusioned. i suggest you get a megaphone and stand on your car so you could be heard.

any war is no good war. bring back our troops and save us from economic ruin.

It's so cute to see both silly sides dancing as fast as they can to assign blame (to the other side of course) for our national pastime (You know, invading other countries.) while completely missing the real issues at hand in the so-called "Arab Spring" Yes, there are issues...

Name a President who DIDN'T feel compelled to send American troops SOMEWHERE? It's the whole "commander in-chief" thing; all that POWER makes even the biggest professed pacifist eventually itch to use a little of it...

Groucho,

I almost never agree with what you write - but I do agree that A Night at the Opera is their best and one of may all time favorites...

Aww- everyone's just upset because they can't holler 'cut-and-run' at Obama. Always something with these people, isn'tit?

GM: We may have manufactured the missiles but we are NOT shooting them at anyone

Wow. Just, wow.

Have you heard of the USS Mount Whitney (command and control), the USS Barry, the USS Stout, the USS Providence, the USS Scranton, the USS Florida (all the naval vessels that fired the Tomahawks).

Do you know what "USS" stands for? Hint: They are the "we" you talk about.

JoAnnaSmith1..

Do you know what "USS" stands for?

.............................................................

I really don't need to share this with you but after reading your posts I felt a compunction to address your posts.

First, I joined the USMC in 1967 and retired in 1998, that's 31 years of continuous service. I've seen and been on more USS ships that you can list from Wikipedia. I've been in 3 wars and seen more horror than I will ever talk about. I never questioned the missions I was on even if I though them wrong. Marines obey orders, ethical orders. I know what a limited engagement is. I know the difference between a limited engagement and a full scale war. I know what a warmonger is. I know what command and control is. These are just words to you that you picked up from TV or a movie or the internet.

Many good men and women died in Iraq because George W. Bush lied about WMD's and threats against the US. Untruths that caused the deaths of over 4,500 people and tens of thousands wounded. He lied...that's made it up...so he could execute a regime change in Iraq. No other reason. He didn't like Saddam Hussein.

Obama inherited the Bush wars and is trying to end them. Troops in Iraq are on a training and support mission. Their numbers are being drawn down. In Afghanistan, there is a deadline established for troop withdrawal there.

You dare compare Libya to Iraq and Afghanistan. US troops are not deployed in a combat role in Libya. No US casualties. None. They are in a support role for NATO. Do you know what support means in military terms? You keep saying we're actively participating in a combat role and the US is trying to kill Gaddafi. Funny, no reports from any source are reporting any US involvement in any operations in Libya. You just made that up.

As to the rest of the crap you wrote....well...Moving on!

Groucho,

Just because the Libyan war is sanctioned by the UN does not make it right and the USA needs to make it's own decisions instead of just following any UN sanction no matter how stupid it is. BTW NO UN RESOLUTION SHOULD EVER TRUMP THE CONTITUTION. Also we HAVE targeted Gadaffy in this war, to deny it at this point is ridiculous. Anyone who still beleives the war in Libya is about "protecting civilians" at this point is just plain stupid or in denial. We have surpassed the estimate of 750 MILLION for the Libyan war a month ago and we are still involved in this mess we can't afford.

96ws6..

Yeah, let's become isolationists. Worked well just before World War II broke out. Any lessons learned from that experience?

GM: You dare compare Libya to Iraq and Afghanistan

I didn't compare Libya to anything. You did. I judged Obama's war against Libya on its merits. You brought up Iraq. You think we, the USofA, are not shooting Tomahawk missiles into Libya. We are. I called you on it. Now you disseminate.

GM: You keep saying we're actively participating in a combat role and the US is trying to kill Gaddafi. Funny, no reports from any source are reporting any US involvement in any operations in Libya.

That's going to be stunning news for Congress, seeing they're demanding to know from Obama what the mission objectives are for the US in Libya.

JoAnnaSmith1

What the mission objectives are. How is that a combat role of any kind?

Really, really, really????

Yeah, stunning news. Stunningly and galactially stupid.

You have my respect again Groucho.

JoAnnaSmith1:

Here...from today, Saturday..June 4th. Tel me again who is conducting the ops. Yeah....galactictically stupid, here you go:

TRIPOLI — British Apache and French attack helicopters struck targets for the first time in NATO's campaign in Libya, hitting Moammar Gadhafi's troops early Saturday near a key coastal oil city, the alliance said.

The action was a significant step-up in NATO's operations and a major boost to Libyan rebels on the ground, just a day after rebel fighters forced government troops from three western towns and broke the siege of a fourth in yet another erosion of Gadhafi's power since the eruption in mid-February of the uprising to end his 42-year rule.

NATO said the helicopters struck Gadhafi troops attempting to hide in populated areas, military vehicles and equipment. Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, commander of the Libya operation, said the engagement "demonstrates the unique capabilities brought to bear by attack helicopters."

The Apaches hit two targets near the coastal city of Brega, according to a statement from the Ministry of Defense in London. It said they took off from HMS Ocean, stationed off the Libyan coast and returned safely after completing their mission in the early morning hours.

Well spoken Groucho,,,JoAnna is in way over her head,,,actually were lucky for that.

Groucho,

So we should join in a war we know is going to be a mess so we do not become"isolationists" So Germany is an Isolationist country because they chose not to get involved? I don't think so....I believe time will tell they were the smart ones and once again we made the wrong choice. Now I understand why we still pursue the same FAILED foreign policies, there are too many people like you that still just don't get it and are happy to support our government and military making the same mistakes over and over. Eventually our aggression WILL make us isolationists!  Also good to know that at least YOU are aware of our mission in Libya since congress still isn't, and hey never mind that we KNOW Al Qaida is involved with the rebels, give them all the weapons they want it worked out so well in Afghanistan when we did the SAME THING!

Oh, don't leave Grimey. You make me laugh. The absurdity of it all is beyond sad really. I am afraid we are in for some odd couplings this campaign season.

I'll have some of that popcorn Fiesty hands out around here. There sure is a whopper of a dog fight shapin' up and the opposition seems to have gotten their powder all wet. They haven't a leg to stand on. He!! they don't even know who to stand WITH! The GOP/TP voting with Kucinich? Really! Grabbing at straws simply to make OBAMA look weak is a loosers attack.

I guess it's back to the drawing board as to WHAT the GOP/TP stand FOR. Unified? No so much there.

Oh my God. Does that mean that Michele is anti-American? Please say it isn't so.

she supports obama's war for oil? say it aint so lib!

Smitty, there shouldn't be a sign. You basically just said, "The fight is not over, but did you learn your lesson anyway?" That's the problem with Liberals, you're too soft. Do you really think those people are reasonable?

Wow! Your stupidity is showing! It's called the "War Powers Act", you should look it up. And while your looking, be sure to Google the "Downing Street Memo", the memo the stated bushthejunior was preparing a "FALSE FLAG OPERATION" to justify invading Iraq. You see a FALSE FLAG OPERATION, is nothing more then a lie where one PRETENDS to be attacked by another country, but it's actually your country shooting down your own stuff.

Bottom line this crap will you. Rethuglicans have DECIMATED our country and economy, they have NO CREDIBILTY. All of this racist garbage is nothing more then a distraction to keep you morons pissed off at anyone but the actual culperates. Looks as if it's working.

And the GOP want to take away more rights,

I never thought some of these points you brought up was fair, but also I believe when they started it was the turmoil of that time.

No, they should NOT bar whites if they want to go. we should all be able to be proud of who we are.

I think what most people feel is racist is when the call "monkey" in the white house, Kool'aid, etc. But I have never seen you post anything like that.

The multinational forces conducting operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq consisted of much more numerous and broad coalitions than the limited NATO forces fighting in the Libyan civil war. Please get your facts straight.

Saint Elsewhere..

Thanks for the post. I just saw it. bob-1805084 is on my ignore list so I don't waste my time reading his garbage.

As for JS1, a smart man once told me you can sometimes argue with a fool but not a damned fool. Bob numbers is a damned fool. Not sure about JSI yet but I won't be answering any of her posts either.