Write Review
1,982,190 Total Reviews 3,907 New Reviews
9,121 Users Online

Politics and Religion

off subject, but I have recently followed your posts
Madison_Ohare See my TER Reviews 973 reads
posted

because what you say about the New World Order resonates true to my spirit and with the research I have done.  Can you please tell me your thoughts on Agenda 21?  My friends are so distracted with the Charlie Sheen and Lindsey Lohan stories while popping their Prozac.  I am seeking the truth and wish to awake.  Thanks, Madison

dumba_boy4277 reads

"No boots on the ground" he said...

http://www.wcti12.com/news/27257042/detail.html

And what is "Biteme" going to do?.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA

This country is heading for a disaster at the hands of the Liberal, left traitors.

Maybe the Marines need to be deployed to Washington DC instead of Libya to protect the innocent civilians.

ReplyQuoteReport
dumba_boy2115 reads

the NATO coalition is falling apart.

Which means guess who will be left holding the bag?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368693/Libya-war-Germans-pull-forces-NATO-Libyan-coalition-falls-apart.html

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u2689 reads

Perhaps you can explain this one.

ReplyQuoteReport
mattradd2228 reads

Explain it? You see, he can't or won't!

I'll explain it!

It's just a gutless alias racheting up the rhetoric we heard during the eight years of the Bush administration, against those who criticized then President Bush. Then, when one criticized President Bush, his administration, or his policies, they were called "unpatriotic," because we were a country at war. Well, things seem to have changed under President Obama's administration, though we are still at war, and those who called critics of President Bush "unpatriotic" feel free to call liberals traitors.

Ya see! It's really quite simple! ;)

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky461436 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Priapus531674 reads

is several of the people who voted for BHO have condemned him---see my thread below.

But, how about our previous POTUS ? Think he did a better job than BHO ?!-------LMFAO ! And you don't think folks voted for him because he was a GOP White Christian" ?!----Of course, these folks got more than they bargained for------



-- Modified on 3/23/2011 10:04:41 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
GaGambler1275 reads

The left has certainly turned on the annoited one, but there are still diehards who will support him no matter what. I am happy that you are not one of them, but that doesn't change the fact that there are still lemmings out there who will never admit that they were wrong about Obama.

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky461189 reads

Yes, there are 400 Marines but they're on amphibious assault ships off the Libyan coast and have been there for weeks.  The DoD positioned lots of assets off Libya to be sure they could quickly respond to whatever the President ordered. The only Marine boots on the ground have been the guys who landed an Osprey to rescue a downed pilot.  Search and rescue are always part of a no-fly plan and this was always foreseen.  Again today Obama re-iterated that no American troops would be landing in Libya.  
As for the other poster's link about friction among the allies, you're making much too big a deal out of it.  It's being ironed out and I doubt very much if we'll be heavily involved for a very long time.  Of course, we'll have to wait and see.  There is a legitimate reason  for  concern with a rather fuzzy mission and a very unclear situation on the ground in Libya.  But intervention of any kind isn't pretty.  Sitting by and watching Ghaddafi slaughter his people would have been worse.  So far, the complications have been far fewer than those in Iraq.
PS:  dumba_boy should win a prize  for "most appropriate alias."

-- Modified on 3/23/2011 3:00:31 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
mattradd2102 reads

Dubya_boy! Dubya! Dubya! Is that yooouuuuuuu!?! ;)

ReplyQuoteReport
Timbow925 reads

Posted By: inicky46
Yes, there are 400 Marines but they're on amphibious assault ships off the Libyan coast and have been there for weeks.  The DoD positioned lots of assets off Libya to be sure they could quickly respond to whatever the President ordered. The only Marine boots on the ground have been the guys who landed an Osprey to rescue a downed pilot.  Search and rescue are always part of a no-fly plan and this was always foreseen.  Again today Obama re-iterated that no American troops would be landing in Libya.  
As for the other poster's link about friction among the allies, you're making much too big a deal out of it.  It's being ironed out and I doubt very much if we'll be heavily involved for a very long time.  Of course, we'll have to wait and see.  There is a legitimate reason  for  concern with a rather fuzzy mission and a very unclear situation on the ground in Libya.  But intervention of any kind isn't pretty.  Sitting by and watching Ghaddafi slaughter his people would have been worse.  So far, the complications have been far fewer than those in Iraq.
PS:  dumba_boy should win a prize  for "most appropriate alias."

-- Modified on 3/23/2011 3:00:31 PM



-- Modified on 3/23/2011 2:41:26 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
allthebetter1587 reads

OH......slaughter...

As in the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan citizens who after hearing of Patrich Henry said "sure no problem".

It's easy to rationize aggression when your on the higher moral ground, yes?

Just the facts son just the facts.....LOL

ReplyQuoteReport
allthebetter2083 reads

On the morning news after the first strike I heard/saw reported on the BooB Tube B2 bombers drop (40) 2000LB bombs on military base and that over 100 cruise missles strikes had been made from sea.

Subsequently Pentagon officials were stated as reporting: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CIVILIAN casualties. Now that's what I call SMART munitions.

In just about any recent war (past century) civilian to combant deaths are around 10 to 1.

And the beat goes on.....

Help me Mr. Wizard.

-- Modified on 3/24/2011 8:29:08 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!