Obama one....... NOOOO!!!

[Fin12]

Edit: Obama "ONE"... .....oh god I need some sleep!

Well he did it, any of the reds out here willing to give an insight into exactly what is going to happen when the secret liberal agenda gets put in place?

Any predictions on when and how the USA is going to fall apart?

I want confirmation so a couple of years from now we can all look back at you, and ask.. ..."Why hasn't society crumbled?"

PLACE YOUR BETS

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Well he did it, any of the reds out here willing to give an insight into exactly what is going to happen when the secret liberal agenda gets put in place?

Any predictions on when and how the USA is going to fall apart?

I want confirmation so a couple of years from now we can all look back at you, and ask.. ..."Why hasn't society crumbled?"

PLACE YOUR BETS

He moved so far to the right to delude er, I mean, capture the hearts of Americans, that we'll all be fine.

I see the gays are not rejoicing on the Left Coast. Thier messiah didn't grant their wishes.

 

[Anglian]

Who knows, he may even bring the country two wars and an economic collapse - sorry, that's the current incumbent voted for by those who think Mr. O. is a disaster. Well, his predecessor has set the hurdle high for what spells 'disaster'. Let's hope his secret liberal agenda is more successful than the socialisation of the US banking system put in place by the current incumbent.

Give the chap a chance, he's not even in the Oval Office yet.

Anglian

 

[Gremlins]

Well, I was thinking we could begin with a starter of farm collectivisation, move on to a delightful main course of nationalising the commanding heights of industry, then ban church and guns for dessert. Then back to Barry O's for some gay sex. Obviously.

 

[Anglian]

Well, he could always start a war in a place no one has ever won one, another in a country where removing the dictator would allow an even more dangerous nest of Islamic fanatics the chance to develop the Bomb, whilst destabilising another nuclear power next door. He might then continue with an economic policy which nationalised the banking system, a policy on military prisons which produced a situation where people were held indefinitely without trial and were tortured. Then the Republicans would have the right to say Obama was a disaster.

But, doggone it, that Bush guy's stolen his thunder? Any Republican like to just 'fess up and say sorry for inflicting Bush on the world for the last eight years?

Anglian

 

[Chesterton]

Any Republican like to just 'fess up and say sorry for inflicting Bush on the world for the last eight years?

The first paragraph of our Constitution calls for our government to "provide for the common defense". We haven't been attacked since 9-11-01. So I'll say "you're welcome" to my fellow Amercians for inflicting Bush on us by my voting for him twice.

Our Constitution doesn't mention "making Europe or anyone else like us".

 

[Anglian]

The first paragraph of our Constitution calls for our government to "provide for the common defense". We haven't been attacked since 9-11-01. So I'll say "you're welcome" to my fellow Amercians for inflicting Bush on us by my voting for him twice.

Our Constitution doesn't mention "making Europe or anyone else like us".

Well, that was certainly a success for Bush. Mind you, if the Chinese take to disliking you and stop buying your country, you'll end up like the UK

Anglian

 

[The Nihilist]

The first paragraph of our Constitution calls for our government to "provide for the common defense". We haven't been attacked since 9-11-01. So I'll say "you're welcome" to my fellow Amercians for inflicting Bush on us by my voting for him twice.

Our Constitution doesn't mention "making Europe or anyone else like us".

Except that Saddam Hussein had no ties to Al Qaeda. What am I saying, you're clearly an extremely well-informed person, so you knew that. I'm sure you knew that.

 

[Anglian]

Not only did Saddam have no ties with bin Laden, his Baathist ideology was secularist, unlike the Islamic regime next door which, with Saddam gone, became the regional superpower able to help destabilise Pakistan and tie down the US in Iraq, with help from the remaining Baathist regime in Syria.

Meantime, the ancient Christian community in Iraq, dating back to the fifth century has been all but exterminated by death or flight, and Christians in Egypt and Palestine suffer more persecution than they have done in the last fifty years.

None of this may matter, as long as the USA is safe, but, as the isolationists discovered in 1941 and again in the late 1940s, you can't stay isolated from the problems of the world. You can, however, add to them.

peace,

Anglian

 

[razzelflabben]

here's a prediction for you. The economy will continue to worsen (the economic cycle predicts it)

Gas prices will rise again

Soon, the nation will tire of the problems that come with the current administration and will be clamoring for a republican president and congress.

Oh, I forgot, more inflation.

I would also go so far as to say that I would expect more terrorist attacks, my fear is that they would be on American soil, but it's a good bet we will see more attacks throughout the world.

How's that for predictions? What you had in mind? Oh, one more thing, the predictions would be almost identical if McCain had been elected with only minor changes

 

[Chesterton]

Well, that was certainly a success for Bush.

Yes it was, and a success in his primary obligation.

Mind you, if the Chinese take to disliking you and stop buying your country, you'll end up like the UK

I'm sure we'll end up like something, but what does that have to do with Bush?

Except that Saddam Hussein had no ties to Al Qaeda. What am I saying, you're clearly an extremely well-informed person, so you knew that. I'm sure you knew that.

No I didn't know that. What I know is that I haven't been killed in my homeland.

 

[Chesterton]

Not only did Saddam have no ties with bin Laden, his Baathist ideology was secularist,

So what? We're not fighting against Islam.

unlike the Islamic regime next door which, with Saddam gone, became the regional superpower able to help destabilise Pakistan

Iran was already the regional superpower. Iraq was a lesser power, but the more troublesome one - the one which invaded its neighbors twice, and committed genocide against its own people.

Meantime, the ancient Christian community in Iraq, dating back to the fifth century has been all but exterminated by death or flight, and Christians in Egypt and Palestine suffer more persecution than they have done in the last fifty years.

And America's persecuting them...?

None of this may matter, as long as the USA is safe, but, as the isolationists discovered in 1941 and again in the late 1940s, you can't stay isolated from the problems of the world. You can, however, add to them.

As long as the U.S. is safe huh? Let's see, Turkey, Indonesia, Morroco, London, Egypt, Madrid, Russia, Bali...where haven't the bloodthirsty terrorists spilt innocent blood? Do we try something, even if imperfect, or do we do nothing?

 

[Anglian]

Dear Chesterton,

I suspect we are unlikely to agree, but has it occurred to you that one reason Al-Qaeda hasn't needed to attack the US in order to kill US citizens is that your President has kindly exported a large number of Americans to Iraq and Afghanistan in nice uniforms so that the terrorists can kill them closer to their home?

If the objective was to save US lives, it isn't working very well. Fortunately a majority of the American people have now elected an intelligent President who just might be able to pull you out of the mess, economic and military, the last one got you into.

Anglian

 

[Chesterton]

I suspect we are unlikely to agree, but has it occurred to you that one reason Al-Qaeda hasn't needed to attack the US in order to kill US citizens is that your President has kindly exported a large number of Americans to Iraq and Afghanistan in nice uniforms so that the terrorists can kill them closer to their home?

Hasn’t needed to, or hasn’t been able to? It’s both. And that’s the state of affairs we wanted.

I honestly don’t get what point you’re making, unless you’re a pacifist who thinks we were wrong to use force at all. You simply disagree with the geographic location of the fighting?

If the objective was to save US lives, it isn't working very well.

It’s working about 100% well. As I said, no domestic attacks, here and a great reduction in attacks anywhere in the world in the last couple of years. The volunteer U.S. soldiers who’ve lost their lives are nobly doing what soldiers are to do - God bless them.

Fortunately a majority of the American people have now elected an intelligent President who just might be able to pull you out of the mess, economic and military, the last one got you into.

If Obama had been in charge earlier, we’d have lost the war because he’d have pulled us out. He still may do that, and use those troops to invade Pakistan, as he said he’s willing to do.

 

[Anglian]

Hasn’t needed to, or hasn’t been able to? It’s both. And that’s the state of affairs we wanted.

If Al Qaeda wishes to kill US citizens it no longer has to go all the way to the USA since your government kindly provides them with a steady supply of people they can use for target practice. Why bother with the difficult task of attacking the USA at home when the US sends you fresh batches of victims every so often.

I honestly don’t get what point you’re making, unless you’re a pacifist who thinks we were wrong to use force at all. You simply disagree with the geographic location of the fighting?

God told us not to kill. Christ told us to love our enemies. I see no Biblical warrant for killing other people. Is God's way hard? Yes. We can choose to interpret it through man-made restrictions on it: but we do not then follow the word of God. Yes, I am a pacifist. Nor is that an easy option for a Coptic Christian.

It’s working about 100% well. As I said, no domestic attacks, here and a great reduction in attacks anywhere in the world in the last couple of years. The volunteer U.S. soldiers who’ve lost their lives are nobly doing what soldiers are to do - God bless them.

When you say 'God bless them' do you really think He blesses killing other people? Where, in Christ's teaching do you find warrant for such an assumption?

You might also want to redefine that 100% in the light of the US casualty rate. Many US citizens are being killed by Al Qaeda - just not in the USA. Does that make it 100% successful in avoiding American deaths? Not on my math.

If Obama had been in charge earlier, we’d have lost the war because he’d have pulled us out. He still may do that, and use those troops to invade Pakistan, as he said he’s willing to do.

If Obama had been in charge earlier we wouldn't be in Iraq, a country which had no connection with 9/11, and we might then have been able to complete the war in Afghanistan, which might have prevented the destabilisation of Pakistan.

The Iraq war is a disaster. It removed the only power which kept Iran in check, and thus the only barrier to Iran's ambitions. By tying the US and the UK down, it allowed the Syrians to make trouble for Israel and go unpunished. By inflaming the sensibilities of Islam it led to a direct deterioration of conditions for all native Christians in the region. It is costing you (and the UK) millions of dollars very month, and there is no sign that any Iraqi Government can survive without US bayonets. As Napoleon used to say: 'You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.'

Seems that everyone, including US soldiers, is paying a high price here, and for what? What shred of evidence is there that Iraq was a danger to the US? Bin Laden probably couldn't believe his luck when Bush took the pressure off him by attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. And you think Obama is dangerous? He's got a long way to go before he commits a blunder of this enormity.

Anglian

 

[Chesterton]

Yes, I am a pacifist.

I didn't know I was arguing with a pacifist. I think we're already off-topic (although the OP was a bit sloppy - I'm not exactly sure what the original topic was). I think it'd be useless continuing arguing overall war strategy with someone who doesn't feel the U.S. should be at war at all. (Thus far, you are sort of like one who believes all gambling is immoral offering criticism of a roulette player's strategy. You could have just stopped at saying "Don't play roulette".)

We'd have to start at the start - should (or can) a Christian be a pacifist? That would at least require a separate thread. I'll leave it up to you if you're in the mood to argue this through somewhere.

I can't let the following two outrageous comments of yours pass though:

By tying the US and the UK down, it allowed the Syrians to make trouble for Israel and go unpunished.

Right. No one made trouble for Israel before 2003. (Unless you count all the wars of attempted annihilation in 50 years and countless acts of civilian slaughter.)

By inflaming the sensibilities of Islam it led to a direct deterioration of conditions for all native Christians in the region.

September 11 inflamed the sensibilities of Christianity, yet it's led to no deterioration of conditions for native Muslims in Christian regions. In fact, since then Muslims are pushing for and recieving more rights and privileges. So the fault again lies with Islam.

 

[Fin12]

I didn't know I was arguing with a pacifist. I think we're already off-topic (although the OP was a bit sloppy - I'm not exactly sure what the original topic was). I think it'd be useless continuing arguing overall war strategy with someone who doesn't feel the U.S. should be at war at all. (Thus far, you are sort of like one who believes all gambling is immoral offering criticism of a roulette player's strategy. You could have just stopped at saying "Don't play roulette".)

We'd have to start at the start - should (or can) a Christian be a pacifist? That would at least require a separate thread. I'll leave it up to you if you're in the mood to argue this through somewhere.

I can't let the following two outrageous comments of yours pass though:



Right. No one made trouble for Israel before 2003. (Unless you count all the wars of attempted annihilation in 50 years and countless acts of civilian slaughter.)



September 11 inflamed the sensibilities of Christianity, yet it's led to no deterioration of conditions for native Muslims in Christian regions. In fact, since then Muslims are pushing for and recieving more rights and privileges. So the fault again lies with Islam.

O.P was asking what are the suppossed effects that are going to happen to the USA and the world, becuase the USA have elected such a "terrible" president.

1. Wow, thats a good idea, "Israel is so volatile and constantly under threat, we shouldn't even bother to keep the peace...."

2. What are these muslim rights? Equal rights? The right to practise their religion peacefully?

We have a small mosque here, and others all over the UK. They are frequently attacked by the BNP and other thugs, vandalised and it's members were and in some places still are physically and verbally abused.

How have the Islamic population benefitted from being branded terrorists and fanatical fundamentalists?

 

[Anglian]

One does not need to be an actor to be a theatre critic, or an artist to be an art critics; or indeed, to be a fool to recognise a foolish action. It is perfectly possible to be a pacifist and to recognise a really stupid foreign policy decision when one sees it.

Just what danger did Iraq pose to the USA; do remind us?

No one said there were no problems for Israel before 2002, just that Syria has been much freer to cause trouble with the US and UK tied down; another example of why the invasion was a really stupid move - one opposed by Obama.

I see you have no answer to my point that the actions of your Government and my own have materially damaged the lives of millions of native Christians in the Middle East. There has been a Christian community in Iraq for more than 1500 years; it is almost no longer there. Thank you USA for protecting it; thank you USA and UK for so inflaming the situation that Christians in the Middle East are now living in fear.

And, what is so ironic is that far from saving US lives, the decision to invade Iraq has simply provided a conveyor belt of Americans for Al Qaeda to shoot at.

The OP feared that Obama would be a disaster - he need not worry - the disaster has already happened.

Anglian

 

[Fin12]

I was being ironic Anglian, no need to worry

 

[jcook922]

Edit: Obama "ONE"... .....oh god I need some sleep!

Well he did it, any of the reds out here willing to give an insight into exactly what is going to happen when the secret liberal agenda gets put in place?

Any predictions on when and how the USA is going to fall apart?

I want confirmation so a couple of years from now we can all look back at you, and ask.. ..."Why hasn't society crumbled?"

PLACE YOUR BETS

It's not going to fall apart regardless of who gets elected. We're a resillient people when the cowpie hits the fan, regardless of what the world throws at us.

To be honest, we NEED a good old fashioned disaster to wake our apathetic nation up.