"Obama has now fired more cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined."

[LogGrad98]

So what's wrong with stopping the mass genocide of some ruthless dictator?

I just wish repubs could at least be consistent. If Saddam was such a bad guy, then what makes Gaddafi so good?

Convenient of you to ignore the massive democrat flip-flop. Obama the Hero eliminating the world of Ghadaffi, who has killed 10's of thousands of people in his own and neighboring countries. But Bush the Spawn of Hitler and Satan himself for taking out the 3rd worse mass murderer in history, with in the neighborhood of 2 million dead at his hand. Both are horrific atrocities of humanity that need to be put down, but it is telling how split and jaded America is that one side lauds one act and demonizes the other, then the whole thing flip-flops when the different party is in command.

United we stand...

Personally I will be glad when both are gone, and I don't really care who does it.

 

[PearlWatson]

Convenient of you to ignore the massive democrat flip-flop. Obama the Hero eliminating the world of Ghadaffi, who has killed 10's of thousands of people in his own and neighboring countries. But Bush the Spawn of Hitler and Satan himself for taking out the 3rd worse mass murderer in history, with in the neighborhood of 2 million dead at his hand. Both are horrific atrocities of humanity that need to be put down, but it is telling how split and jaded America is that one side lauds one act and demonizes the other, then the whole thing flip-flops when the different party is in command.

United we stand...

Personally I will be glad when both are gone, and I don't really care who does it.

I don't have a problem with destroying dictators but Obama and his media buddies are being complete hypocrites on this and it is pretty despicable after the way they treated Bush.

Obama: "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." There was not an actual or imminent threat to our nation from Libya.

 

[DutchJazzer]

seriously what did obama do to receive his nobel rpize. he did nothing.

 

[Gameface]

seriously what did obama do to receive his nobel rpize. he did nothing.

It made people feel good about themselves to give it to him.

 

[VINYLONE]

Nobel Committee asked to strip Obama of Peace Prize.

https://www.digitaljournal.com/article/304909#ixzz1HMVzKYjg

I wonder if they asked the same thing of Henry Kissinger.

 

[UB]

I wonder if they asked the same thing of Henry Kissinger.

Oof.

 

[franklin]

Simple 2 questions...

How the hell do we have money to wage 3 wars and to give MILLIONS in foreign aid to Egypt and Libya, for them to "accomplish their dreams" while Americans are currently struggling to accomplish their own?

What kind of logic do we have when we allow our government to throw away trillions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya, and yet these same politicians bitch about a few thousand that teachers in our own society are given?

So what's wrong with stopping the mass genocide of some ruthless dictator?

I just wish repubs could at least be consistent. If Saddam was such a bad guy, then what makes Gaddafi so good?

A walking contradiction complaining about consistency.

I don't have a problem with destroying dictators but Obama and his media buddies are being complete hypocrites on this and it is pretty despicable after the way they treated Bush.

Obama: "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." There was not an actual or imminent threat to our nation from Libya.

Pay attention to the key word. This went through NATO. Either way, it's kind of dumb IMO that a president has power under NATO but not unilaterally. That's an argument for and against sovereignty all in one.

 

[PearlWatson]

A walking contradiction complaining about consistency.



Pay attention to the key word. This went through NATO. Either way, it's kind of dumb IMO that a president has power under NATO but not unilaterally. That's an argument for and against sovereignty all in one.

In this case unilaterally means without congressional approval.

 

[VINYLONE]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

 

[jimmyjazz]

seriously what did obama do to receive his nobel rpize. he did nothing.

The prize committee was probably just so excited to be rid of that moron Bush.

 

[babe]

I agree that the Nobel Prize for Obama was unwarranted, and with Millsapa's observation that the current military action is outside the authority of the Constitutional powers of the Presidency. I am a little concerned about the people who have taken up their cause for relief from their government. We have been told virtually nothing about them. It seems they have no actual "leader" and that this is a purely popular mass uprising. I am concerned with Obama's lack of decisive and effective actions too. If somebody does not go in there and actually take physical custody of the key clique personnel who are slaughtering the mobs. . . . it'll go on being a massive slaughter of the dissidents.

I think our claims about setting up representative government in Iraq look just credible enough some poor folks elsewhere have assumed we are genuinely interested in helping people.

I have massive doubts about our abilities as nation-builders, and I fully recognize it's out of the range of authorized powers granted by our Constitution, but if Obama could just secure the dictator in some prison quarters somehow, and stop this bloodshed, and arrange for a government and constitution that could be chosen by these people under peaceful elections, I think he would deserve the Nobel Prize.

 

[Deleted member 365]

A walking contradiction complaining about consistency.



Pay attention to the key word. This went through NATO. Either way, it's kind of dumb IMO that a president has power under NATO but not unilaterally. That's an argument for and against sovereignty all in one.

I was merely playing Devil's Advocate.

I am against Imperialism. I am against intervening in other countries. If they want to kill themselves off then that's their choice. As a dictator of a sovereign nation, Gaddafhi has the power to kill off his country's population. If people want change, REAL CHANGE, then it needs to come within itself. No country has won freedom or independence or unity because of an imperial power intervening. If Libyans want to rid themselves of Gaddafhi, then they need to do it themselves. They can start by their military refusing to carry out his orders for killing off their own population.

If obama decided to kill off all lawyers in California who wear Fess jerseys, should we expect Libya to intervene? What sort of result could we expect if Americans just stand by and allow this to happen? What will stop him from choosing other victims?

However, i just find it hilarious how hypocritical the right is acting...

They blast Obama for not doing enough... Now they blast him for intervening.... Chuckie Krauthammer 2 weeks ago wrote a scathing article on how Obama wasn't doing enough to help the Libyans... And just this Sunday wrote on article on how our country is broke.

So which is it repubs?

One last point, isn't it funny how repubs rip Obama and label him people like Nero and Stalin when in reality, Obama has been nothing less than a 3rd Bush term? He hasn't stopped any of the wars (began a 3rd), hasn't fixed the tax code, hasn't done anything to enhance regulations on banks or wall street, extended the tax cuts for the rich, has made little progress in advancing the green agenda, hasn't axed the Patriot Act, hasn't constructed abortion and marijuana clinics across the nation, hasn't passed amnesty, hasn't done anything to protect unions, hasn't made any cuts to defense, and the health care reform that was passed was exactly what repubs were suggesting just a decade before.

Truly, the only "liberal" thing Obama has done was do away with DADT. Which, honestly, was probably coming anyway.

If anything, McCain would have been more liberal than Obama. Repubs should be enjoying this... Which probably, they really are inside. They get their tax cuts, defense, and wars, continued agenda, yet the Demos take all the blame.