What is the GOP to do?

Originally posted by Realms
reply to post by Misoir

 

Not only has Obama caught and killed Bin Laden

Sorry to break it to you, but if you really believe that, then you are very naive. Ask yourself this, we on ATS always want viable evidence to support a persons claim. Where are the concrete facts of OBL death. Someones claim that he's dead? We have seen no factual pictures/video. We haven't seen conclusive evidence of BL alleged death. NOTHING!

The Navy Seals killed him. The conspiratorial theorey that it occured earlier or that he still lives is contradicted by our soldiers, our government, Al-Qaeda, the townspeople of Abbotobad and even his wife and child who witnessed it etc. etc. Pictures are the least convincing of the evidence available.

Originally posted by Realms
You are correct in your statements that the GOP are champions of national security.

There is a fundemental differeance between being interested in National Security and being interested in supporting the Military/Industrial Complex.

Being interested in national security...finding and killing OBL..
Being interested in the Military/Inustrial Complex...Invading Iraq and paying Haliburton and Blackwater Billions.

Originally posted by Realms
He has done nothing for national security, except perhaps, expanding on Bush Jr.'s infringing policies. Case in point, look at our southern borders. Any " terrorist" could waltz right in through the southern border.

What about our northern border? That is dramatically less populated and monitored than our southern border.
I have gone on wilderness expeditions repeatedly up there crossing from the US into Canada and back...finding the border check-point is an adventure in itself. I could have spent a week doing nothing else but going back and forth across the border and no one would have noticed.

Getting into any country is not difficult for someone with the will to. Building walls is a distracting political argument....we need to address the issue of people wishing this country ill and find ways to improve our standing in the world...and for those for whom that is not enough? We need to track them down and deal with it.

Again....Actual National Security vs. Military-Industrial complex.

Originally posted by JerryB08
He is currently ranked as the worse President in US History.

Bush's approval rating was 27% in 9/08 - Obama's has never sunk below 42% - source Gallup (Do you have a source?)

He Let the Us Military go get Osoma Bin Ladin. Big deal. If he had not he would have been Impeached.

What would he be impeached for? Have you heard any discussion in Congress of impeachment - I haven't

Your gonna need it just to get your own parties nomination.

Really? Have you heard of any other Democratic contenders? I haven't.

Oh and every promise he made to his voters he failed to even try to accomplish and we are now in three wars instead of the zero that he said we'd be in if he was president.

Apparently not www.politifact.com...

The entire world hates us.

Apparently less tham before. news.bbc.co.uk...

Other than you. do you personally know of anyone planning on voting for him?

Again, there are these things called opinion polls. Generally, those who feel the president is doing a decent job, will vote for him again. As of today according to Gallup - that's 51% of the voting public. www.gallup.com...

I'm astonished we are even having this discussion.

I'm astonished you could be wrong so many times in a single post.

Originally posted by neo96
historically democrats have always been weak on defense and not highly thought of in the military for good reasons
everyone knows if the democrats had their way there would be no military and no intelligence agencies.

one clarification when i said historically i am talking about from clinton onward and the postions they have taken.

You call less than 20 years "history"? Try the last 100 years - that's history. When you look at that, and consider who was in office for WWI, WWII, Korea, most of Vietnam, and Bosnia, you're argument disappears.

obama and the democrats campaigned against any "tough" policy or anything that strengthens the military.

i have yet to see any democrat in todays world ever to introduce anything that can better the military instead all they do is cut defense and cut intelligence.

Can you explain how US defense spending went up under Obama while he was president? en.wikipedia.org...:U.S._Defense_Spending_Trends.png (You'll need to cut and paste entire link - not just hot link.)

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by JerryB08

 

Apparently no one understands the OP. How can this be possible?

First I am criticized because what I said was not conspiratorial enough so I tried to correct that by saying this is how it would be viewed from the general public meaning that the general public are not conspiracy theorist truthers/deathers. So I was trying to get that point across that this was written so that it could even be read by non-conspiracy theorists and easily understood.

Then I was attacked for being a proponent of the Democratic Party and the policies of President Obama even though I said nothing of the sort and it could not be furthest from the truth. I was attempting to write an objective article and post it onto ATS but I guess that unless my article is completely partisan then it is to defend Obama. Deny ignorance.

Now you are telling me the general public are more worried about the economy... you think!? That is rather part of the main point being made. People do not care about these stupid wedge issues and the Republicans lost the national security superiority fight so now they must argue the positions that are important to people; the economy.

I guess this is what happens when you try and write an objective piece on ATS.

edit on 5/9/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)

S&F for you!

I'd much rather read and comment on a post that invokes actual thought and the presentation of facts than ponder whether the president is a reptilian or not...

reply to post by maybereal11


I commend your hope to the OS.

The Navy Seals killed him. The conspiratorial theorey that it occured earlier or that he still lives is contradicted by our soldiers, our government, Al-Qaeda, the townspeople of Abbotobad and even his wife and child who witnessed it etc. etc. Pictures are the least convincing of the evidence available.

The above could be deemed hearsay, or at the very least a fallacy of truths implemented to get you and others like your self to buy into the story. Fundamentally, people are suckers for the truth. Even though they may not realize the information given is false.

Lets analyze some of the alleged facts:

SEALS: First it was stated that it was a CIA group that took him out. That very same night, it changed to SEALS. Shortly after, they claimed that the SEALS didn't exist. Then it was reported that they had no involvement. Then they renigged, and claimed it was the SEALS.

The facts on whether he died long ago, is still speculation. No facts to submit in the details of such a theory. I have yet to hear anything concrete that the stories are contradicted by our government and or soldiers. ( Keep in mind, the soldiers you wish to use as " evidence " are those who are higher up and will say what they are told too)

As for Al Qaeda, as of late, I have heard reports that they are claiming that our OS is false, and that we did not get BL.

The question now lies on the truth, and where to go to obtain the facts. Its a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, rolled into a paradox. Just as confusing as the possibilities of Professor Plum in the library with the candlestick.

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by JerryB08

 

Apparently no one understands the OP. How can this be possible?

Because people think too literally sometimes. Your post was epic, as usual. The killing of OBL was, to the Amerikan sheeple, practically perfect in every way, and about as real as Mary Poppins herself. Amerika loves Obama, and this one act has cemented his victory as the savior of freedom and liberty, not to mention the next presidential term.

I don't know this Gary Johnson fellow. I was all ready to vote for Herman Cain (if Ron Paul didn't run for some reason) until your post about Cain defending the Federal Reserve. The only possible candidate, short of Chris Christie (who has decided not to run) is Ron Paul. If we can get word out about Dr. Paul without bashing Obama, Ron can win. We just can't play dirty politics and sling mud.

/TOA

reply to post by userid1


my arguement fails? nope it doesnt.

blog.heritage.org...

President Obama on Wednesday announced $400 billion in defense cuts between now and 2023

www.washingtonpost.com...

Lawmakers overseeing defense spending are moving to block or modify deep cuts proposed by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, setting up a key vote this week that could help determine the success of the administration’s attempt to shrink the Pentagon’s budget

www.rawstory.com...

Defense Secretary Robert Gates surprised lawmakers Thursday by announcing that the Pentagon would cut spending by $78 billion over the next five years.

www.csmonitor.com...

The Pentagon budget, rolled out Thursday, is the realization of a warning Defense Secretary Robert Gates issued shortly after America’s economy took a turn for the worse – that the “culture of endless money” created in the booming post-9/11 defense budget would soon be coming to an end.

and the list goes on.

come on now name something anything that adds to the strength of the us military? a base opening here, a new weapons system that can replace older outdated weapons systems.

name anything championed by the left?


the fact is we would not have the military we do if it wasnt for the right.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by userid1

 

my arguement fails? nope it doesnt.

Excluding the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the administration has proposed a $553 billion budget for the Pentagon next year — less than a 1 percent increase over what it requested for 2011 — and the House Armed Services Committee is expected to vote this week on the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill.

Do you see anything in the above quote you posted that says there's a decrease in the spending?
Do you have a problem dropping (for instance) a secondary engine for the F-35 that even DoD didn't want - but would've been made in part in Boehner's home state?

the fact is we would not have the military we do if it wasnt for the right.

edit on 10-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

If I'm not mistaken - the Dems controlled congress in 2009 and most of 2010 - were there any defense spending cuts?

Originally posted by Realms

SEALS: First it was stated that it was a CIA group that took him out. That very same night, it changed to SEALS. Shortly after, they claimed that the SEALS didn't exist. Then it was reported that they had no involvement. Then they renigged, and claimed it was the SEALS.

Precisely...a story that was planned and concocted far in advance complete with a Helicopter crash would not have inconsistencies. The inconsistencies are actually testimony to the validity of the story.

Team 6 works for the CIA more often than the military these days....and this was the first time the Gov acknowledged publicly that Team 6 exists. So the fumbling between CIA operation and Team 6 seems natural to me.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by userid1

 

my arguement fails? nope it doesnt.

blog.heritage.org...

Reread my comment c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y, and then post an on point response

reply to post by userid1


nah im done with the conscending elitist attitude

reply to post by neo96


Facts are hard to argue with aren't they?

reply to post by maybereal11

.and this was the first time the Gov acknowledged publicly that Team 6 exists.

Which is rather comical considering that there are actually 9 teams in all. And that knowledge came out back in the day.

Originally posted by Realms
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

Iraqi Theatre concluded formally Aug 2010.

Are you suggesting that the war in Iraq is over? If so, then why do we still have troops over there? Sounds more like an oxymoron comment.

Transitional permanent force is all this is! By 2015 - 2018 that will be reduced to a few thousand.

All,

Obama will run on the capture and death of bin Ladin because that is what the Dems will do because remember, The GOP "Cut and ran" on al-Qaida in favour of caputring Saddam Hussien, that is a fatal decision that will continue to backfire.

Under the GOP's watch the nation literately went to hell yet people see nothing the matter with it.

Govt needs to be the big, bad entity that keeps companies up at night living in fear so that the products they make are safe, work conditions are safe, that people are issued a fair a decent wage, the electronic you buy won't crash or not work and does what it says it will do, keep and maintain leverage against the larger lobbyists groups to make sure the wants and will of the people never gets drowned out. This is why Gov't needs its claws and fangs. Besides, we do not want industry running this ship.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

Under the GOP's watch the nation literately went to hell yet people see nothing the matter with it.

You do realize that, thats an oxymoron right? The country has been going to hell since Roosevelt ( the first one ), and everyone in between. To suggest one party is the culprit over the other suggests naivety.

Govt needs to be the big,

And you do understand that the liberals have never been champions of smaller government right?

Originally posted by Realms
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

Under the GOP's watch the nation literately went to hell yet people see nothing the matter with it.

You do realize that, thats an oxymoron right? The country has been going to hell since Roosevelt ( the first one ), and everyone in between. To suggest one party is the culprit over the other suggests naivety.

Govt needs to be the big,

And you do understand that the liberals have never been champions of smaller government right?

edit on 10-5-2011 by Realms because: (no reason given)

And conservatives can't seem to recognize the quality quotient when there is a discussion about government.
You do not paint a house with dog chit and complain about flies do you?

Or the link of corporatism and the size of government, there is a corollary.

The righteous base and politicians preach the merits of small government and liberty... meanwhile the
conservative SUPREME COURT works tirelessly to engorge corporations, who in turn engorge government and
attack individuality with their contractual pacification and dictate.

Liberty is on sale and guess who lines it up? Its all freedom and liberty, one day you will have a logo, one day you might be born with contractual obligations, you are free to be subjugated.

reply to post by Janky Red

Conservative SUPREME COURT

You do understand that the standing judges are liberal right?

Originally posted by Realms
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Conservative SUPREME COURT

You do understand that the standing judges are liberal right?

www.nytimes.com...

www.nytimes.com...

No, I understand that the conservative SCOTUS's members are making some very poor decisions in the advancement of corporate personhood. Corporations used to have charters, specific missions and lifelines which were approved and adhered to. Now thats to Lawyers and the Supreme court ( via stare decisis) we have a world where disembodied entities are benefiting from the humanity bestowed upon personhood and the benefits of legal
protection provided by the charter itself. This culmination of this is an outright perversion... humanity will lose control of these monsters one day, currently these domestic forces will eliminate all forms of restraint which
can equalize capital resource, which is normally reserved to royalty and federalism. If you are against pre emptive regulation then you are for post conflict legal resolution, you are fool who cannot grasp reality or
you welcome a modern Royal class in abandonment of all principles of justice.

The SCOTUS is leaving little room for the later, which is the old way of doing things, you cannot not make laws for the billionaires and they are allowed to shape the bounds of all recourse.

The most recent decision should trouble any person who thinks liberty lies not in government, but in law and traditional recourse. How can you expect to be free, if you systematically hack away at the libertarians chosen
vehicle for justice? This SCOTUS is putting into place the pieces which will form a wall of tyranny soon enough.
I can only think of a brave new world...

Originally posted by Realms
reply to post by maybereal11

 

.and this was the first time the Gov acknowledged publicly that Team 6 exists.

Which is rather comical considering that there are actually 9 teams in all. And that knowledge came out back in the day.

Actually at the time they were named "Team 6" there were only 2 elite Seal Teams doing black ops.

They named the second team "Team 6" to throw the Russians off and make them believe there was more than just two.

The US Government still hasn't ever publicly acknowledged that Area 51 exists.