Obama's foreign policy: New wars, unprecedented level of terror threats & nuclear proliferation

[dyna mo]

And the co-architect of this, Hillary Clinton, is embracing this record while asking for a promotion to commander in chief.

?Because the Obama administration is refusing to do anything to oust Bashar Assad, the Saudis are getting together with the Turks and Qataris to back some of the more fundamentalist Islamist fighters working against the Assad regime?including, it is rumored, the Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate.? He continues:

This is what happens when the Gulf states lose confidence in America: they start taking matters into their own hands and that means they will increasingly forge a pact with extreme Islamists, possibly even with ISIS, because they see the extremists as the only reliable barrier to the spread of Iranian influence.

This is a catastrophic if wholly predictable development, and it is only the beginning of the fallout from Obama?s decision to align so closely with Tehran. The next step in the Sunni pushback is, as the Saudi leadership has loudly and long signaled, for them to acquire their own nuclear weapon.

This did not suddenly come to a head. Liberal pundits and conservative foreign policy experts alike realize that the refusal of four of six Gulf heads of state to meet with President Obama was a public slap at a president who is seen as naive and unhelpful. Danielle Pletka at the American Enterprise Institute observes: ?On the one hand, the notion of any Arab leader snubbing any president of the United States is offensive. On the other, it?s hard not to see their point of view: the United States has deliberately withdrawn from the region, and insofar as it remains, the interests of our erstwhile allies ? from Israel to Saudi Arabia ? are not first and foremost in the mind of this White House.

Worse yet, Gulf countries, now engaged in what they see as a pitched battle for the future of the region, see Washington doing Iran?s bidding: helping Bashar al Assad stay in power; playing middleman to Iran as it hopes to take over Yemen via proxies; providing air cover for Iranian led militias in Iraq, and more. And while some of the suspicions of the Sunni leaders in the region are overblown, sadly, many are not.?

Being weak leaves us friendless - The Washington Post


that's what the USA gets in return for Obama forging the way for iran to get nuke capability.

thanks Obama

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

And the co-architect of this, Hillary Clinton, is embracing this record while asking for a promotion to commander in chief.


Being weak leaves us friendless - The Washington Post


that's what the USA gets in return for Obama forging the way for iran to get nuke capability.

thanks Obama

it's gotta be worse than we even suspect, because the press is actually saying negative stuff about black jesus...

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

it's gotta be worse than we even suspect, because the press is actually saying negative stuff about black jesus...

and this article is from the Washington Post, very liberal.

[_Richard_]

is.. the underlying message for this article suggesting the US should support the ISIS in order to appease saudi interests?

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

is.. the underlying message for this article suggesting the US should support the ISIS in order to appease saudi interests?

In order to answer your question, I'll need to know which part(s) of the article made you think this.

[Barry-xlovecam]

US Imperialism and Aggression = Fuck the USA
No USA assistance in our ''national crisis'' = Fuck the USA
Send aid money = Fuck the USA Send More!

You cannot win it seems today.

That said, would it be a better world if China and India told the world what to do? They represent 2.6+- billion of the world's 7 billion people? Truth is, half of them have to shit in a bucket.

Obama has no foreign policy and only reacts to the latest crisis.
John Kerry is just a tool.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

In order to answer your question, I'll need to know which part(s) of the article made you think this.

well, there is a lot of very peculiar parts of this article, but:

'see Washington doing Iran?s bidding: helping Bashar al Assad stay in power; playing middleman to Iran as it hopes to take over Yemen via proxies; providing air cover for Iranian led militias in Iraq, and more.'

the air cover being provided is the air strikes on the ISIS.. ISIS/ISIL that has been created directly in relation to supporting 'rebels' that were attempting to remove Assad from power.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

well, there is a lot of very peculiar parts of this article, but:

'see Washington doing Iran?s bidding: helping Bashar al Assad stay in power; playing middleman to Iran as it hopes to take over Yemen via proxies; providing air cover for Iranian led militias in Iraq, and more.'

the air cover being provided is the air strikes on the ISIS.. ISIS/ISIL that has been created directly in relation to supporting 'rebels' that were attempting to remove Assad from power.

based on that, i don't see the underlying message here being that USA should support ISIS to appease SA.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

based on that, i don't see the underlying message here being that USA should support ISIS to appease SA.

so you feel the US stopping its bombing campaign of the ISIS is a good thing? cause that would appease the saudis..

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

so you feel the US stopping its bombing campaign of the ISIS is a good thing? cause that would appease the saudis..

why are you concerned about my view on an arcane tangent that has nothing to do with this topic?

and that's after i respectfully tried to answer your question.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

And the co-architect of this, Hillary Clinton, is embracing this record while asking for a promotion to commander in chief.


Being weak leaves us friendless - The Washington Post


that's what the USA gets in return for Obama forging the way for iran to get nuke capability.

thanks Obama

Think about what toppling the Assad regime would mean, specially right now. The country is already in ruins and torn apart in war. The rebels alone can not stand up to ISIL or what ever they are called this week.

Lets say Assad is taken down.. then what? A race to fill the power vacuum by the Rebels & ISIL? Even at best case if the Rebels managed to get control of most of what is left of the Assad regime how long do you think they could continue on against ISIL while taking full brunt of their attacks?

Look how hard it was for the US to deal with the insurgency in Iraq and Afghan with all our military weight to throw around. Even Iraq has not been able to hold their own since we left and they had many years to get prepared.

As screwed up as it is for the people there, I think military strategist have likely decided it's best to let groups like ISIL get tied up in a drawn out fighting so they are at least distracted until they start wearing down.

either way the mess will still be there in 5 years or 10. That area of the world never seems to stop fighting and doesn't seem to ever progress. As long as they are ruled by Religious law all of those countries will be doomed to failure..

Anyway you can thank Obama all you want but Bush did no better there.. He left Afghan back in the hands of the Taliban and was paying off what is now ISIL to not attack. So why blame Obama for shit he didn't start and had to try to clean up?

[dyna mo]

i'm also not seeing anywhere in the article or my comments about appeasing Saudi Arabia. the article doesn't hide its' thesis- BO's failed foreign policy as exampled by his forging the way for Iran to get nuclear capable and how that is disrupting the entire region.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

Think about what toppling the Assad regime would mean, specially right now. The country is already in ruins and torn apart in war. The rebels alone can not stand up to ISIL or what ever they are called this week.

Lets say Assad is taken down.. then what? A race to fill the power vacuum by the Rebels & ISIL? Even at best case if the Rebels managed to get control of most of what is left of the Assad regime how long do you think they could continue on against ISIL while taking full brunt of their attacks?

Look how hard it was for the US to deal with the insurgency in Iraq and Afghan with all our military weight to throw around. Even Iraq has not been able to hold their own since we left and they had many years to get prepared.

As screwed up as it is for the people there, I think military strategist have likely decided it's best to let groups like ISIL get tied up in a drawn out fighting so they are at least distracted until they start wearing down.

either way the mess will still be there in 5 years or 10. That area of the world never seems to stop fighting and doesn't seem to ever progress. As long as they are ruled by Religious law all of those countries will be doomed to failure..

look at everything you just pointed out and ask yourself if BO's focusing on forging the path for IRan having nuclear capability makes sense while ignoring allies in the region and consequential disruptions and promises by other countries to get nukes if the iran deal is finalized. and do you really want the next president to be the primary backer of this failed policy?

[Robbie]

You forgot something else.

When President Obama took office he had the most unique opportunity in history to ease any racial strife.

Now, the country is more racially divided than I can remember since the 1960's/early 1970's

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

why are you concerned about my view on an arcane tangent that has nothing to do with this topic?

and that's after i respectfully tried to answer your question.

arcane tangent that is directly quoted in the article and what we're currently discussing? might be why i am 'concerned'

[arock10]

Thanks Obama. And to think if he just started even more wars AND cut taxes for billionaires how much better we would be doing

[crockett]

.

Originally Posted by Robbie

You forgot something else.

When President Obama took office he had the most unique opportunity in history to ease any racial strife.

Now, the country is more racially divided than I can remember since the 1960's/early 1970's

Wait..you are blaming Obama for racism? Tell me more about the Tea Party and how accepting they are?

Tell me more about how willing the right has been with their open arms to work with Obama..

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

arcane tangent that is directly quoted in the article and what we're currently discussing? might be why i am 'concerned'

so you're 'concern' is if i think the US stopping its bombing campaign of the ISIS is a good thing? cause that would appease the saudis..

again, this thread isn't about me and my foreign policy. I'm not the president. I didn't run for president. i didn't and don't claim to have a better foreign policy than any president. I never claimed ME foreign policy is not complex and that doing one thing can fuck up another.

an arcane tangent can most certainly be a phrase from a sentence culled and taken out of context and spun around to ask me about appeasing SA by having the US stop fighting ISIS.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by arock10

Thanks Obama. And to think if he just started even more wars AND cut taxes for billionaires how much better we would be doing

My taxes were cut during the Bush years too. As they should have been...before he decided to ramp up the military and start invading other countries.

It wasn't just "billionaires" who got their taxes lowered. It was everybody.

The problem was in Bush invading other countries. These aren't "wars". Iraq never declared war on the U.S.

Neither did Afghanistan.

And in the Obama years: Libya never declared war on us. Matter of fact Gaddafi had voluntarily given up his nuclear program and chemical weapons during the Bush years and "sided" with us. In fact, they were even removed from the "State Sponsor Of Terrorism" list in 2006 because of their cooperation. And yet, Pres. Obama used our airforce to bomb the hell out his country, his military, his homes, and even his motorcade which led to him being slaughtered in the streets by the rebels.

We currently fly drones over several countries in the mideast and bomb them and kill people (spending tons of money doing so).
Even now "ISIS" is baiting and trolling us to get deeper and deeper into their fight.

Letting people keep more of their money isn't the problem. The govt. finding ways to continue to overspend it is the problem.
And all of this military adventurism is the top of the list of things we should NOT be doing.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Robbie

You forgot something else.

When President Obama took office he had the most unique opportunity in history to ease any racial strife.

Now, the country is more racially divided than I can remember since the 1960's/early 1970's

was thinking that very same thing recently. in fact, race issues have never been a part of his agenda, other than his race-baiting comments such as if he had a son he'd look like a thug kind of comments.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

so you're 'concern' is if i think the US stopping its bombing campaign of the ISIS is a good thing? cause that would appease the saudis..

again, this thread isn't about me and my foreign policy. I'm not the president. I didn't run for president. i didn't and don't claim to have a better foreign policy than any president. I never claimed ME foreign policy is not complex and that doing one thing can fuck up another.

an arcane tangent can most certainly be a phrase from a sentence culled and taken out of context and spun around to ask me about appeasing SA by having the US stop fighting ISIS.

alright.

for the record, an article stating the US shouldn't fight the ISIS, aka 'supporting iranian lead militias', because it may anger the Saudis, is hilarious.

convenient that the saudis would have so little concern with an armed group fanatics taking over huge swathes of countries right on her doorstep

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

alright.

for the record, an article stating the US shouldn't fight the ISIS, aka 'supporting iranian lead militias', because it may anger the Saudis, is hilarious.

convenient that the saudis would have so little concern with an armed group fanatics taking over huge swathes of countries right on her doorstep

I'm not defending the article. and i'm certainly not looking for underlying messages in it because i got THE message in it. the simple fact is anyone with 2 brain cells should have considered the vast repercussions resulting from forcing through Iran's nuclear capabilities and more importantly, the next potential president being a central figure in a very failed foreign policy.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by crockett

.

Wait..you are blaming Obama for racism? Tell me more about the Tea Party and how accepting they are?

Tell me more about how willing the right has been with their open arms to work with Obama..

The TEA Party? What does the TEA Party have to do with racism?

Dude, you watch too much MSNBC and too many liberal blogs. The TEA Party stands for "Taxed Enough Already"

And no, The TEA PARTY has no ability to polarize the nation OR help heal the nation.
President Obama can do both from his bully pulpit.

He hasn't raised a finger to actually HELP the black population.
BUT...he has certainly jumped in with both feet on every controversial black issue with statements that have further fueled the fire and rioting and making black people more "angry".

And the Democrat Party and Pres. Obama have spent a long time playing "race" politics.
The party line is that Republicans hate blacks, hate clean air & water, want everybody to die.

If you're black and NOT a Democrat...then you are labeled an Uncle Tom and attacked viciously.
Just look at how they tore Herman Cain apart in the election. The very second he was shown leading the polls for the Republican nomination...every liberal organization in the world went after him and his "womanizing". And it pretty much destroyed him.

Didn't see them do that to Jesse Jackson back when he ran for the Democrat nomination.

And now, they are all over this guy Ben Carson. He's considered another "uppity" one who isn't a Democrat.

Now if he WERE a Democrat...he would be the darling of the party. But since he's a Republican...he is EVIL.

I'm not saying I would have voted for Cain or Carson. Both of them are far too socially conservative for my taste.

But I make my decisions based on the man and his policies for a candidate.

The 2 RULING parties simply expect their sheep to follow.

Back to racial tensions and Pres. Obama:
He came to office with "YES HE CAN" and "HOPE AND CHANGE"

Now either he is a complete FAILURE and incompetent.
Or he didn't have the skills to stop those GENIUSES like McConell and Boehner from spreading "racism".

I say it's NEITHER of those.

Quite simply Pres. Obama could have done what NO other President has ever been able to do. By his very presence in the White House he could have given the black community hope for the future & his words to them could have lifted them with inspiration.

Instead...between himself and Eric Holder, I see that they did nothing that was positive to help with racial tension.

And by opening their mouths and saying things that caused the black community to get even more angry in a tense situation...they actually caused more tension.

Go ahead and make excuses. It doesn't matter.
I'm not even sure WHY the Pres. Of The United States seems to feel the need to comment on local crime before any of the facts have been gathered or any real info is out there.

Can you even imagine Bush commenting on a black cop killing a white guy in some town?

The cops ARE out of control. They have WAY too much power and apparently every local police dept. is actually TRAINING cops to shoot to kill under every situation.

Maybe instead of making incendiary comments, or having Eric Holder make them...maybe the President should have DONE something.
Maybe call on Congress to enact a federal law that would make it illegal for local police dept.'s to be shooting unarmed citizens (of course it would be more complex than that).

Or call on the Supreme Court to take a look at the constitutionality of police dept.'s having policy of "shoot to kill"

But we will never know.

What I DO know is...when Pres. Obama leaves office, the country will be more racially divided than I have ever seen it in my adult lifetime.

[Joshua G]

whole thread is bullshit. USA does not control what foreign countries do. shit, even the countries we support do whatever they want.

& we tried not to meddle when afghanistan went taliban, did nothing even with al quedas bombing our warship USS cole. We tried to leave them alone. What happened next is well known.

no matter what the USA does, we are wrong. Obama will catch shit either way. if we invaded syria, or ukraine, you think the US public would be OK with that? LOL!!!

clownthread.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Joshua G

whole thread is bullshit. USA does not control what foreign countries do. shit, even the countries we support do whatever they want.

& we tried not to meddle when afghanistan went taliban, did nothing even with al quedas bombing our warship USS cole. We tried to leave them alone. What happened next is well known.

no matter what the USA does, we are wrong. Obama will catch shit either way. if we invaded syria, or ukraine, you think the US public would be OK with that? LOL!!!

clownthread.

if you think the USA does not control what [some] foreign countries do this is a clown post.

the simple fact is there is a framework agreement in negotians between the USA and Iran that would allow Iran to manufacture nuclear.

that's textbook control.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Robbie

My taxes were cut during the Bush years too. As they should have been...before he decided to ramp up the military and start invading other countries.

It wasn't just "billionaires" who got their taxes lowered. It was everybody.

The problem was in Bush invading other countries. These aren't "wars". Iraq never declared war on the U.S.

Neither did Afghanistan.

And in the Obama years: Libya never declared war on us. Matter of fact Gaddafi had voluntarily given up his nuclear program and chemical weapons during the Bush years and "sided" with us. In fact, they were even removed from the "State Sponsor Of Terrorism" list in 2006 because of their cooperation. And yet, Pres. Obama used our airforce to bomb the hell out his country, his military, his homes, and even his motorcade which led to him being slaughtered in the streets by the rebels.

We currently fly drones over several countries in the mideast and bomb them and kill people (spending tons of money doing so).
Even now "ISIS" is baiting and trolling us to get deeper and deeper into their fight.

Letting people keep more of their money isn't the problem. The govt. finding ways to continue to overspend it is the problem.
And all of this military adventurism is the top of the list of things we should NOT be doing.

can't argue with you ....

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by Robbie

The cops ARE out of control. They have WAY too much power and apparently every local police dept. is actually TRAINING cops to shoot to kill under every situation.

Maybe instead of making incendiary comments, or having Eric Holder make them...maybe the President should have DONE something.
Maybe call on Congress to enact a federal law that would make it illegal for local police dept.'s to be shooting unarmed citizens (of course it would be more complex than that).

Or call on the Supreme Court to take a look at the constitutionality of police dept.'s having policy of "shoot to kill"

WTF. your libertarian. but you suggest obama/congress should, or can, fix race relations by neutering cops? you should reconsider how libertarian you really are.

race relations are simply screwed. we live in a time that saying blacks should study more makes you racist. & if you flirt with a woman & she thinks your ugly, your sexually harrassing her.

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

if you think the USA does not control what [some] foreign countries do this is a clown post.

the simple fact is there is a framework agreement in negotians between the USA and Iran that would allow Iran to manufacture nuclear.

that's textbook control.

thats not control. thats an agreement, which is easily ignored, which is what your worried about. that iran will break the deal. so no, not textbook control in any way, at all.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Joshua G

thats not control. thats an agreement, which is easily ignored, which is what your worried about. that iran will break the deal. so no, not textbook control in any way, at all.

you are completely negating why the iranians are negotiating. do you think the USA would negotiate with iran for us to manufacture nuclear? of course not, that's because iran does not control the USA re: nuclear, we control them and that's why they are negotiating and consequently, the rest of the ME is in disruption, because we are losing control of the situation and the potential accord clearly reveals that.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Robbie

The TEA Party? What does the TEA Party have to do with racism?

Dude, you watch too much MSNBC and too many liberal blogs. The TEA Party stands for "Taxed Enough Already"

And no, The TEA PARTY has no ability to polarize the nation OR help heal the nation.
President Obama can do both from his bully pulpit.

He hasn't raised a finger to actually HELP the black population.
BUT...he has certainly jumped in with both feet on every controversial black issue with statements that have further fueled the fire and rioting and making black people more "angry".

And the Democrat Party and Pres. Obama have spent a long time playing "race" politics.
The party line is that Republicans hate blacks, hate clean air & water, want everybody to die.

If you're black and NOT a Democrat...then you are labeled an Uncle Tom and attacked viciously.
Just look at how they tore Herman Cain apart in the election. The very second he was shown leading the polls for the Republican nomination...every liberal organization in the world went after him and his "womanizing". And it pretty much destroyed him.

Didn't see them do that to Jesse Jackson back when he ran for the Democrat nomination.

And now, they are all over this guy Ben Carson. He's considered another "uppity" one who isn't a Democrat.

Now if he WERE a Democrat...he would be the darling of the party. But since he's a Republican...he is EVIL.

I'm not saying I would have voted for Cain or Carson. Both of them are far too socially conservative for my taste.

But I make my decisions based on the man and his policies for a candidate.

The 2 RULING parties simply expect their sheep to follow.

Back to racial tensions and Pres. Obama:
He came to office with "YES HE CAN" and "HOPE AND CHANGE"

Now either he is a complete FAILURE and incompetent.
Or he didn't have the skills to stop those GENIUSES like McConell and Boehner from spreading "racism".

I say it's NEITHER of those.

Quite simply Pres. Obama could have done what NO other President has ever been able to do. By his very presence in the White House he could have given the black community hope for the future & his words to them could have lifted them with inspiration.

Instead...between himself and Eric Holder, I see that they did nothing that was positive to help with racial tension.

And by opening their mouths and saying things that caused the black community to get even more angry in a tense situation...they actually caused more tension.

Go ahead and make excuses. It doesn't matter.
I'm not even sure WHY the Pres. Of The United States seems to feel the need to comment on local crime before any of the facts have been gathered or any real info is out there.

Can you even imagine Bush commenting on a black cop killing a white guy in some town?

The cops ARE out of control. They have WAY too much power and apparently every local police dept. is actually TRAINING cops to shoot to kill under every situation.

Maybe instead of making incendiary comments, or having Eric Holder make them...maybe the President should have DONE something.
Maybe call on Congress to enact a federal law that would make it illegal for local police dept.'s to be shooting unarmed citizens (of course it would be more complex than that).

Or call on the Supreme Court to take a look at the constitutionality of police dept.'s having policy of "shoot to kill"

But we will never know.

What I DO know is...when Pres. Obama leaves office, the country will be more racially divided than I have ever seen it in my adult lifetime.

You live in a completely diffrence world than the rest of us. Considering some of the most extreme right tea party guys come from AZ, perhaps it just seems normal to you..


Seriously Robbie if you think there is no racism involved with the Tea 0arty, perhaps you should spend 5 mins Googlen tea party signs...

[Robbie]

Perhaps you should realize that fringe lunatics showing up at rally's to lower taxes do NOT mean that is what the TEA Party stands for.

Wanting smaller govt. and lower taxes hasn't a damn thing to do with racism.

And the crazies showing up with signs doesn't make it so, no matter how you want to see it or the fake-liberal press wants to portray it.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Joshua G

WTF. your libertarian. but you suggest obama/congress should, or can, fix race relations by neutering cops? you should reconsider how libertarian you really are.

Damn straight I'm libertarian. And you're damn straight the cops are out of control BECAUSE of the Federal Govt.'s failed "War On Drugs"

The Govt. is using "terrorism" to give all law enforcement the ability to take away our privacy and our personal freedoms...and of course in between doing "sting operations" where the govt. agents actually concocts plans for terrorism and then arrests the idiots who agree to do it with them...they spend most of that new "power" going after drug arrests to fill up the prison industry. That's not freedom.

"Neutering" the cops? That's a dumb thing to say.

And don't worry about me "reconsidering" my ideas of personal FREEDOM. I know what I believe and what I have seen happen with changes to police & govt. power over my lifetime.

[DTK]

The 5th POTUS in a row with a NeoCon foreign policy. What a non-shocker. Feeding the Military-Industrial Complex beast is bipartisan.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by DTK

The 5th POTUS in a row with a NeoCon foreign policy. What a non-shocker. Feeding the Military-Industrial Complex beast is bipartisan.

Yep, Baby Jesus Obama turns out to be no different than The Devil Bush when it comes to killing people around the world with an overbloated giant military.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Robbie

You forgot something else.

When President Obama took office he had the most unique opportunity in history to ease any racial strife.

Now, the country is more racially divided than I can remember since the 1960's/early 1970's

Obama is definitely a fucktard

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

Obama is definitely a fucktard

I don't think so. I think he's incredibly intelligent.
I also think things are happening just as he wanted them to.

Racial division is big business...and BIG politics. His political party would have no chance in an election if there were no racial tension and blacks actually voted for the candidates as opposed to straight party lines as Democrats.

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

US Imperialism and Aggression = Fuck the USA
No USA assistance in our ''national crisis'' = Fuck the USA
Send aid money = Fuck the USA Send More!

You cannot win it seems today..

well US imperialism and aggression created the clusterfuck, and then you guys strategically move out when things are too peaceful and stoke more violence...you have a loooooong history of perpetuating conflict: korea/vietnam/avghanistan/iran/iraq/balkans/south america...you name it, the US has bombed it...

and you never give aid...your media may report that it is "aid" but this money goes to bribe the next generation of local politicians in to submission and put the population in debt slavery repaying your "aid" and "loans" and "rebuilding"....it is what the USA does...

quit pretending that the US corporate government is some sort of altruistic organization that is misunderstood and just trying to help the world...

the communists do not trust you for a reason
the muslims do not trust you for a reason
the 3rd world does not trust you for a reason
the USA spends money on war like the rest of humanity combined for a reason
the Arabs are turning to ISIS instead of the USA for a reason (they are better than the USA LOL)

war inc. is too big to fail in the USA...after war profits and exploitation are too big to fail also...

wanna hear a good joke?: "US aid"

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Robbie

The TEA Party? What does the TEA Party have to do with racism?

Dude, you watch too much MSNBC and too many liberal blogs. The TEA Party stands for "Taxed Enough Already"

And no, The TEA PARTY has no ability to polarize the nation OR help heal the nation.
President Obama can do both from his bully pulpit.

He hasn't raised a finger to actually HELP the black population.
BUT...he has certainly jumped in with both feet on every controversial black issue with statements that have further fueled the fire and rioting and making black people more "angry".

And the Democrat Party and Pres. Obama have spent a long time playing "race" politics.
The party line is that Republicans hate blacks, hate clean air & water, want everybody to die.

If you're black and NOT a Democrat...then you are labeled an Uncle Tom and attacked viciously.
Just look at how they tore Herman Cain apart in the election. The very second he was shown leading the polls for the Republican nomination...every liberal organization in the world went after him and his "womanizing". And it pretty much destroyed him.

Didn't see them do that to Jesse Jackson back when he ran for the Democrat nomination.

And now, they are all over this guy Ben Carson. He's considered another "uppity" one who isn't a Democrat.

Now if he WERE a Democrat...he would be the darling of the party. But since he's a Republican...he is EVIL.

I'm not saying I would have voted for Cain or Carson. Both of them are far too socially conservative for my taste.

But I make my decisions based on the man and his policies for a candidate.

The 2 RULING parties simply expect their sheep to follow.

Back to racial tensions and Pres. Obama:
He came to office with "YES HE CAN" and "HOPE AND CHANGE"

Now either he is a complete FAILURE and incompetent.
Or he didn't have the skills to stop those GENIUSES like McConell and Boehner from spreading "racism".

I say it's NEITHER of those.

Quite simply Pres. Obama could have done what NO other President has ever been able to do. By his very presence in the White House he could have given the black community hope for the future & his words to them could have lifted them with inspiration.

Instead...between himself and Eric Holder, I see that they did nothing that was positive to help with racial tension.

And by opening their mouths and saying things that caused the black community to get even more angry in a tense situation...they actually caused more tension.

Go ahead and make excuses. It doesn't matter.
I'm not even sure WHY the Pres. Of The United States seems to feel the need to comment on local crime before any of the facts have been gathered or any real info is out there.

Can you even imagine Bush commenting on a black cop killing a white guy in some town?

The cops ARE out of control. They have WAY too much power and apparently every local police dept. is actually TRAINING cops to shoot to kill under every situation.

Maybe instead of making incendiary comments, or having Eric Holder make them...maybe the President should have DONE something.
Maybe call on Congress to enact a federal law that would make it illegal for local police dept.'s to be shooting unarmed citizens (of course it would be more complex than that).

Or call on the Supreme Court to take a look at the constitutionality of police dept.'s having policy of "shoot to kill"

But we will never know.

What I DO know is...when Pres. Obama leaves office, the country will be more racially divided than I have ever seen it in my adult lifetime.

good points Robbie ... right now the 4 cities IN THE WORLD with the highest murder rate are black controlled democratic cites... and that include war areas...

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Robbie

I don't think so. I think he's incredibly intelligent.
I also think things are happening just as he wanted them to.

Racial division is big business...and BIG politics. His political party would have no chance in an election if there were no racial tension and blacks actually voted for the candidates as opposed to straight party lines as Democrats.

that's is sad really

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by Robbie

The TEA Party? What does the TEA Party have to do with racism? .

Maybe the Tea Party itself isn't racist, but...

[nico-t]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

And the co-architect of this, Hillary Clinton, is embracing this record while asking for a promotion to commander in chief.


Being weak leaves us friendless - The Washington Post


that's what the USA gets in return for Obama forging the way for iran to get nuke capability.

thanks Obama

'being weak'? And now not going to war for a change = new wars? So the US should go to war with Iran to.... not go to war? WTF kind of logic is that And the people reading shit media all eat it up.

"We don't want more war and to do that we should go to war with Iran"

Fucking brilliant marketing there from the government & media. No matter what side you're on now, the end result is another war. Brilliant! And dumb voters all eat it up. "oh we have no choice we gotta go to war to prevent war"
Yeah, just like Iraq right. Seems like peoples memories keep getting shorter by the second.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by nico-t

'being weak'? And now not going to war for a change = new wars? So the US should go to war with Iran to.... not go to war? WTF kind of logic is that And the people reading shit media all eat it up.

"We don't want more war and to do that we should go to war with Iran"

Fucking brilliant marketing there from the government & media. No matter what side you're on now, the end result is another war. Brilliant! And dumb voters all eat it up. "oh we have no choice we gotta go to war to prevent war"
Yeah, just like Iraq right. Seems like peoples memories keep getting shorter by the second.

who are you quoting about no war/war with iran? because it's not in the article this thread is about.

[nico-t]

US gov. were prepping for a war with iran, they started indoctrinating the people again via mainstream media with scary stories about nukes, which always gets you the back of your people. Constantly demonize a clear cut 'enemy' country via media and scare your people, and the people will believe the fairy tales.
The Iran business plan was eventually thrown out because the ROI was probably not good enough.

This has nothing to do with terrorism and nukes. It's a business, with ISIS being disgruntled former employees who started for themselves.

[Robbie]

@**********

Posting pics of people holding signs at an outdoor TEA Party rally doesn't mean that is what the TEA Party stands for.

Boy...the media and the govt. really don't want anyone to EVER believe that taxes can be lowered.
I've even read that some of those people with those signs are "ringers" sent in by liberal groups to further try to discredit the TEA Party.

It's "TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY". That's what the T.E.A. stands for.

But somehow...you think that fringe people holding signs are what TEA Party people stand for and believe?
That's just fucking stupid.

Why don't you Google up "racist signs at occupy protest" and hit the "images" tag.
Does what you see mean that the "occupy wall street" movement was racist?

Of course not.
And yet you try (along with crockett and the fake liberals) to paint the TEA Party as racist for the exact same shit.
Surely you can see how stupid that is.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by nico-t

US gov. were prepping for a war with iran, they started indoctrinating the people again via mainstream media with scary stories about nukes, which always gets you the back of your people. Constantly demonize a clear cut 'enemy' country via media and scare your people, and the people will believe the fairy tales.
The Iran business plan was eventually thrown out because the ROI was probably not good enough.

This has nothing to do with terrorism and nukes. It's a business, with ISIS being disgruntled former employees who started for themselves.

of course USA has contigency war plans.

of course Americans are raised on fear.

you say that like we don't know that and that this is something new.

from 75 years ago.

[kane]

There is no winning scenario as far as the Middle East is involved. That part of the world has known nothing but unrest and bloodshed since the beginning of recorded history. There is no reason to think it will ever be different.

I say fuck em. We pull out of that part of the world and let them deal with each other how they may.

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by kane

That part of the world has known nothing but unrest and bloodshed since the beginning of recorded history.

[Barry-xlovecam]

Iran's Revolutionary Guard

Guardians' of the Revolution
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was formed by late supreme leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the wake of the 1979 Islamic Revolution that ousted Shah Reza Pahlavi. The IRGC was originally created as a "people's army" similar to the U.S. National Guard; commanders report directly to the supreme leader, Iran's top decision-maker. Iran's president has little influence on their day-to-day operations**(read: supreme commander AKA: the sitting Ayatollah)
Iran's Revolutionary Guards - Council on Foreign Relations

according to CNN

First on CNN: Five Iranian boats fire shots in the Persian Gulf
By Barbara Starr, CNN Pentagon Correspondent
Updated 8:58 AM ET, Thu May 14, 2015
(CNN)Five Iranian boats fired shots across the bow of a Singapore flagged cargo vessel in the Persian Gulf on Thursday in an attempt to potentially stop the ship, a U.S. official told CNN. For the first time, the incident brought another Persian Gulf nation into the recent rising maritime tensions in the region.

Five Iranian boats fire shots in the Persian Gulf - CNNPolitics.com

Iran has fired on another commercial ship in the Persian Gulf. Kerry got sucker punched it looks like as the Revolutionary Guard is the Ayatollah's personal army to command -- they don't take their orders from the President of Iran or his nuclear talks negotiators. Now that any agreement will be debated in the US Senate, the Ayatollah has ''doubled down'' hoping to bust any agreements -- he may have bought his time...

[nico-t]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

of course USA has contigency war plans.

of course Americans are raised on fear.

you say that like we don't know that and that this is something new.

from 75 years ago.

So why did you start this thread if you are aware you are being manipulated by the media? What was the point of posting that bullshit story with that horribly blatant propaganda title, and you actually agreeing with it? To show you are 'in the know' that it's all bullshit and propaganda? Doesn't really look like it to be honest

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Iran's Revolutionary Guard


according to CNN



Iran has fired on another commercial ship in the Persian Gulf. Kerry got sucker punched it looks like as the Revolutionary Guard is the Ayatollah's personal army to command -- they don't take their orders from the President of Iran or his nuclear talks negotiators. Now that any agreement will be debated in the US Senate, the Ayatollah has ''doubled down'' hoping to bust any agreements -- he may have bought his time...

the nuke accord will not ever be signed. combined with the rest of the ME now aligned against USA since BO tried to give iran nuclear capability. and a presidential candidate who was part of creating the quaqmire there and is embracing the current admin's policies.

i hope we get those f-35s working right, we're gonna need them.