Obama 'Mirrors' Bush on Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya

oh, bomb now, explain later.

that has been Obama's approach for the duration of his time in office thus far.

Nobel Peace Prize recipient, President Obama, is calling for military action in Syria. This is the same former senator who voted against the war in Iraq. Now .
Obama is set to attack Syria over chemical weapons being used on civilians, but we wonder why this is such a priority for the administration and if the US is .
Obama's speech on ISIS and military action in Iraq and Syria has been drawing comparisons to the Bush administrations jump to war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

they (his puppet masters) might as well instruct him to just watch bush tapes and memorize the script!

a reply to: Sovan

Nobel Peace Prize recipient, President Obama

You mean the one that made it a joke around the world?

This is the same former senator who voted against the war in Iraq.

Only because it was unpopular with his base. Again a farce. When he made all the promises , 7 years later has anything really changed ? You know ,hope and change ( I hope I have enough change left to buy food)

Obama is set to attack Syria over chemical weapons being used on civilians

That sounds awfully familiar . Now , where have I heard that before ?

a reply to: Sovan

Nothing new really considering just about any president post WW2 has preached peace but practised war.

Simple answer is that the military industrial complex aka TPTB require conflicts to exist.

Wew Kremlin must be paying overtime to the Russian trolls today. I love how every single one has used RT for sourcing, because that's not biased at all.

originally posted by: Vector99
Wew Kremlin must be paying overtime to the Russian trolls today. I love how every single one has used RT for sourcing, because that's not biased at all.

That's because Putin is trying to defend his position on supporting Asaad. You know the guy that just killed 100 women and children shopping in a market. Or the bombing of the hospital as part of his continued attacks on civilians. It's becoming an issue because millions are now trying to escape asaad. And Russia has backed the genocidal maniac.

a reply to: Vector99

And CNN, ABC etc is not biased?

Bahaha, pot stop calling kettle black, watch both sides of the story, think for yourself and discover the actual truth.

a reply to: dragonridr

Why does medicins sans frontiers stop short of blaming Assad for the barrel bombings on the hospitals? They condemn it, describe what happened, but stop short of saying who did it.

Maybe, it's because a helicopter dropping bombs could be any side......

www.msf.org...

We're being told it's Assad because it supports Obama's agenda. The man was trying to bring on reform, but the country caught Arab spring fever. Look at everywhere else the revolution swept through. Every single country is worse off.

Maybe if Assad was helped to crush ISIS and restore safety he could actually reform his political system in a controlled manner like he was starting to do.

originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: Vector99

And CNN, ABC etc is not biased?

I said that where? Oh, you assumed, good for you.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: Vector99

And CNN, ABC etc is not biased?

I said that where? Oh, you assumed, good for you.

Well, you call out RT as biased and untrustworthy. In reality it is no better or worse than the news agencies I named as well as the rest we rely on.

A different or opposing view to what we are told is not always a lie....

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: Vector99

And CNN, ABC etc is not biased?

I said that where? Oh, you assumed, good for you.

Well, you call out RT as biased and untrustworthy. In reality it is no better or worse than the news agencies I named as well as the rest we rely on.

A different or opposing view to what we are told is not always a lie....

RT is a good source of news except for anything regarding the US or west in general. BBC CNN FOX are no better. There ARE alternative sources for media. Putting blind faith in any of them gets you a biased opinion, nothing else.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: Vector99

And CNN, ABC etc is not biased?

I said that where? Oh, you assumed, good for you.

Well, you call out RT as biased and untrustworthy. In reality it is no better or worse than the news agencies I named as well as the rest we rely on.

A different or opposing view to what we are told is not always a lie....

RT is a good source of news except for anything regarding the US or west in general. BBC CNN FOX are no better. There ARE alternative sources for media. Putting blind faith in any of them gets you a biased opinion, nothing else.

And you've just come to agree with my original reply to you

This is why voting is worthless... no matter what used-car salesman gets elected to office, the same crap happens.

a reply to: markosity1973

Read the UN reports. None of which Obama has control over. The current head of the team is from india.