It only took 17 months....

[CBT]

....from winning the Nobel Peace Prize to launching Operation Odyssey Dawn.

~Describing himself as surprised and deeply humbled, Obama said he would accept the award as a "call to action" to confront the global challenges of the 21st century.
"I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments but rather an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," he said in the White House Rose Garden.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," citing his fledgling push for nuclear disarmament and his outreach to the Muslim world.~

Hmmm....Peace Fail!

Not only did he authorize a military operation against another country, he did it from another country. Chile, to be exact. That's some cold hearted **** right there, can't even break away and come back to the U.S. long enough to make an announcement that we are about to put warheads on foreheads, then go back to whatever the hell is so freakin' important in Chile. Probably some NAFTA/CAFTA crap. I wonder how this missle strike can be blamed on Bush? A hundred and sixty one cruise missles launched as of last night before I went to class. Is cruise missle building one of the 'Green Jobs' we were promised?

[Joe Walsh]

Hey,
I'm no Obama fan...but at least he had the cojones to do something!
Remember how nice and accomodating Kadafi was in the years after he received Reagan's "cruise missile suppositories".

If it were Carter or Clinton....Kadafi would just get months and months of stern warnings and serious finger wagging.

BTW: Ratheon is now awaiting a bulk order of 100+ cruise missiles.
Who says our economy isn't coming back!

[Egon Spengler]

They say it is never good to get involved in a civil war. Now we have with no game plan and want to turn over power now that we have done our part and now noone knows who is going to take over. Now that we have gotten involved, the only way to claim success is to off Kadafi by the looks of it now, otherwise it will be considered a US defeat.

As for Obama. He really needs to stop taking vacations and start doing his job. He is out of country more than in and I swear he is just using his presidency as a 4 year free vacation with pay.

[rayjay]

We have no business being involved in Libya's civil war. Let the French deal with it. USA stay the hell out.

Bye, bye Barry Sotoro in 2012... POC communist.

[PonyUP]

Couple things to keep in mind, I'm not really a big Obama supporter either, but dude was getting railed on Fox news for not going in, and now he is getting railed for going in, seems a bit hypocritical, or really just a case of "We don't like the guy, so we'll disagree with everything he does"

Now that having been said, this was a Nato decision, and the US being a leader on the security council is going to be involved, especially since we have the most advanced technology to do this, and minimize allied casualties.

If we left it to the French and the English, then I am sure Obama would be critiqued for that. The bottom line, Gadafhi is a bad guy, and evil left unchecked will corrupt absolutely.

We don't want to be in the business of making kings, as that has never worked for us (Mubarek, Hussein, and yes even Bin Laden) But as a leader on the security council, our hand was kind of forced. Sure we could have refused (And I am so sure that Obama would have been hailed for that right?) but the responsible thing is to go with our allies and play a supporting role. Boots on the ground is where I would draw the line, as we cannot and should not be that heavily involved. But helping to pave the way for the citizens of Libya to rise up and take control of their country (like the french helped us during our rise up) I am in favor of. Enforcing a No Fly Zone so that Gadafhi can't use his airforce, is a good way to open it up for them.

I don't think this would be that large of an issue, if we hadn't been involved in two wars, where we made kings, that have been terribly ineffective for the last 8 years. Our troops are tired, and now we added more on thier shoulders. But pretend Iraq and Afghanistan didn't happen, I would think there would be strong support for what we are doing now.

Just my two centsm though with inflation, I guess it's really $.50 now

[CBT]

Why do we have to do the dirty police work for the Arab world?
Ever notice they never cease selling oil to us when we are kicking sand all over the place? They just raise the price. It is not in their best interest to let us NOT blow stuff up over there, "we" are oil junkies, and they provide the fix, at (currently) over a hunnerd dollars a barrel.
NATO was brought about to thwart the Commies during the Cold War. Cold War is over. Do away with NATO, save a bunch of money without switching to Geico.



Couple things to keep in mind, I'm not really a big Obama supporter either, but dude was getting railed on Fox news for not going in, and now he is getting railed for going in, seems a bit hypocritical, or really just a case of "We don't like the guy, so we'll disagree with everything he does"

Now that having been said, this was a Nato decision, and the US being a leader on the security council is going to be involved, especially since we have the most advanced technology to do this, and minimize allied casualties.

If we left it to the French and the English, then I am sure Obama would be critiqued for that. The bottom line, Gadafhi is a bad guy, and evil left unchecked will corrupt absolutely.

We don't want to be in the business of making kings, as that has never worked for us (Mubarek, Hussein, and yes even Bin Laden) But as a leader on the security council, our hand was kind of forced. Sure we could have refused (And I am so sure that Obama would have been hailed for that right?) but the responsible thing is to go with our allies and play a supporting role. Boots on the ground is where I would draw the line, as we cannot and should not be that heavily involved. But helping to pave the way for the citizens of Libya to rise up and take control of their country (like the french helped us during our rise up) I am in favor of. Enforcing a No Fly Zone so that Gadafhi can't use his airforce, is a good way to open it up for them.

I don't think this would be that large of an issue, if we hadn't been involved in two wars, where we made kings, that have been terribly ineffective for the last 8 years. Our troops are tired, and now we added more on thier shoulders. But pretend Iraq and Afghanistan didn't happen, I would think there would be strong support for what we are doing now.

Just my two centsm though with inflation, I guess it's really $.50 now

[Fosters]

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1025165&postcount=2094

:D

[Fosters]

Couple things to keep in mind, I'm not really a big Obama supporter either, but dude was getting railed on Fox news for not going in, and now he is getting railed for going in, seems a bit hypocritical, or really just a case of "We don't like the guy, so we'll disagree with everything he does"


All I can say is, what goes around, comes around. :cool4:

I think the criticism is why he bypassed congress. King Obama does not have that kind of power... At least Bush had congress approval before he went into Iraq.


DECEMBER 20, 2007

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. As commander in chief, the president does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the president would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent.

[PonyUP]

Why do we have to do the dirty police work for the Arab world?
Ever notice they never cease selling oil to us when we are kicking sand all over the place? They just raise the price. It is not in their best interest to let us NOT blow stuff up over there, "we" are oil junkies, and they provide the fix, at (currently) over a hunnerd dollars a barrel.
NATO was brought about to thwart the Commies during the Cold War. Cold War is over. Do away with NATO, save a bunch of money without switching to Geico.

Well that I would agree with, doing away with NATO, but thats a different argument. I honestly think the Arab world loves when we go over there and kick up the sand (let's face it, the middle east is not Atlantis, it's not like we are blowing anything up worth any money) just so they can raise oil prices and the dictators can pocket the cash for when they are out of power. It's the Dictator pension plan

[rayjay]

Sheesh, B HO would not do this, he doesn't have the cohones for it. Hillary Clinton does and did. Could care less about Foxy News or the Communist New Network, MS LSD. Like CBT said, let someone else do it, then when it turns to crap, again, let them take the blame. Sick of the USA always ending up the bad guy. :mad2:

[guspech750]

I'm tired of the USA being the world police. If I want to see world police. I'll watch "Team America. World Police". At least that's funny. Let the rest of the Arab/Muslim world kill one another. They have been doing it for thousands of years. 2012 here we come.

[CBT]

Well that I would agree with, doing away with NATO, but thats a different argument. I honestly think the Arab world loves when we go over there and kick up the sand (let's face it, the middle east is not Atlantis, it's not like we are blowing anything up worth any money) just so they can raise oil prices and the dictators can pocket the cash for when they are out of power. It's the Dictator pension plan
Exactly, well said, Sir. We need to come up with our own 'plan' to cause demand for a product (that we need to invent) that we can raise the price on when there is uncertainty in the world.

[SC Cheesehead]

Couple things to keep in mind, I'm not really a big Obama supporter either, but dude was getting railed on Fox news for not going in, and now he is getting railed for going in, seems a bit hypocritical, or really just a case of "We don't like the guy, so we'll disagree with everything he does"


The lamestream media has been doing that for the past 10 years to W...:rolleyes:

PrezBO's an amatuer, and in way over his head; this lastest fiasco just further supports that.

[PonyUP]

Exactly, well said, Sir. We need to come up with our own 'plan' to cause demand for a product (that we need to invent) that we can raise the price on when there is uncertainty in the world.

I had an idea, well a campaign really. The Middle East is so up in arms and they hate the rest of world why? (Probably because it's so damn hot) I guess there are a variety of reasons to it, but mostly they don't like Israel in possession of the religious center and they don't like living by civilized rules of the free world, kind of like a teenager. So let's deal with them like teenagers

Let's ground em, take away TV, keys to the car and make them do chores. In other words, let's give them an island, surround it by naval vessels, and let them do whatever they want on that island. How do we get them there? we launch a campaign that says "As it turns out, Mohammed did not make his famous trek to Mecca, instead he went to Japan (Or Greece or Australia, or any other island)"

In the end, they'll end up killing each other anyway. Then we divy up the middle east among the countries that will share the responsiblity of the Naval Police outside the island.

One step closer to the Bradtopian society

[Fosters]

The lamestream media has been doing that for the past 10 years to W...:rolleyes:

PrezBO's an amatuer, and in way over his head; this lastest fiasco just further supports that.

Exactly. You can't fight the libtards with being nice and not pointing out these "little" things.

[GAMike]

This is what GB and (especially) France have been waiting for....... They have always maintained imperialistic desires in Africa, and under the veil of American support, they are one step closer to boots on the ground on that continent again.

They played Obama here, but at least he has enough sense to back off now and expose their intentions. To me this is more politics between U.S., GB, and France than about the lives of Libyan citizens.

[Dr Caleb]

Now that having been said, this was a Nato decision, and the US being a leader on the security council is going to be involved, especially since we have the most advanced technology to do this, and minimize allied casualties.


Point of order: This was a UN Security Council decision, not NATO.

[LIGHTNIN1]

Wait till we send in ground troops. I think invading Libya will prove to be a bigger bear than they thought they were going to wrestle. We are still in Afghanistan after how long?

[CBT]

Wait till we send in ground troops. I think invading Libya will prove to be a bigger bear than they thought they were going to wrestle. We are still in Afghanistan after how long?

Ten 10 years, give or take.

[PonyUP]

Point of order: This was a UN Security Council decision, not NATO.

Right you are, I fumbled that one :beer:

[tbone]

Couple things to keep in mind, I'm not really a big Obama supporter either, but dude was getting railed on Fox news for not going in, and now he is getting railed for going in, seems a bit hypocritical, or really just a case of "We don't like the guy, so we'll disagree with everything he does"


Fox didn't criticize him for not going in to Libya, they were criticizing him for kicking back and saying nothing, doing nothing, not taking a stand on anything and everything, not leading and contradicting himself over and over on the issues in the middle east, whether Qhaddafi should go or not, etc. etc.

BIG difference.

He's not "getting railed" for going in now, he's being criticized because he and his staff cannot agree on the purpose of the mission, again whether they are "after" Qhaddafi, exit strategy, etc. And now Obama is falling all over himself to turn over the entire operation to the French? The French!?

[PonyUP]

Fox didn't criticize him for not going in to Libya, they were criticizing him for kicking back and saying nothing, doing nothing, not taking a stand on anything and everything, not leading and contradicting himself over and over on the issues in the middle east, whether Qhaddafi should go or not, etc. etc.

BIG difference.

He's not "getting railed" for going in now, he's being criticized because he and his staff cannot agree on the purpose of the mission, again whether they are "after" Qhaddafi, exit strategy, etc. And now Obama is falling all over himself to turn over the entire operation to the French? The French!?

Well Bill O'Reilly has been railing him for not initiating the no fly zone and have the US lead the way, not fair of me to say Fox news, I should say O'Reilly and Hannity.

I think GAMike said it best, that this has more to do with politics between GB, france and the US then it does Libya.

[tbone]

A "no fly zone" and "going in" are two completely different things.

Obama authorized dropping bombs, that's "going in". No one on Fox advocated that. A no fly zone means they will protect the skies in a given area against other warplanes. Fox was for that.

Do you watch Fox or just hear what the lamestream media says about them?

[Dr Caleb]

A no fly zone means they will protect the skies in a given area against other warplanes. Fox was for that.

Do you watch Fox or just hear what the lamestream media says about them?

So, how does FOX plan to keep planes in those skies, when there are anti-aircraft positions all over the place below the planes? IIRC, FOX was not brought in on the tactical planning stage of the operation specifically for it's inability to organize anything more complicated than a child's birthday party.

Disclaimer: I don't watch FOX, as it's a subscribe only channel here, and I actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years back.

[SC Cheesehead]

So, how does FOX plan to keep planes in those skies, when there are anti-aircraft positions all over the place below the planes? IIRC, FOX was not brought in on the tactical planning stage of the operation specifically for it's inability to organize anything more complicated than a child's birthday party.

Disclaimer: I don't watch FOX, as it's a subscribe only channel here, and I actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years back.

"actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years"

Typical liberal response. If a postion differs from yours, the holder of that position must be stupid... :shake:

[ChiTownMaraud3r]

You guys watch FOX? :rofl:

[PonyUP]

A "no fly zone" and "going in" are two completely different things.

Obama authorized dropping bombs, that's "going in". No one on Fox advocated that. A no fly zone means they will protect the skies in a given area against other warplanes. Fox was for that.

Do you watch Fox or just hear what the lamestream media says about them?

I do watch Fox T-Bone, I actually like Bill O'Reilly, not a big fan of Hannity, but there are sometimes good debates on there. Going in may be the wrong terminology, but a no fly zone starts with dropping bombs. You have to take out air defenses and radar to protect your planes

And Tbone, I like you, we have some different views, but you are a good guy. I sometimes feel though in these threads that you are out to pick a fight.

[DOOM]

All I can say is, what goes around, comes around. :cool4:

That's what she said! :banana2: :banana: :banana2:

[PonyUP]

"actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years"

Typical liberal response. If a postion differs from yours, the holder of that position must be stupid... :shake:


Same thing can be said about conservatives Rex, as a country there is just too much anger towards the other side, no matter what side of the aisle you sit on. That having been said, While I don't agree with a number of opinions on Fox, there are some good prpgrams and good information.

But all 24 hour news stations will make you les intelligent eventually, their sole purpose for being in business in to get ratings, which means they have to be entertaining and by virtue of creating entertainment, a large part of what you will see is editorialized.

But Caleb, you can't get on a station because they broadcast the opinion of a view opposite of yours. There are some very good discussions that take place on Fox news. The key with anything is to have an open mind, for the minute we close our minds, we cease to learn.

[SC Cheesehead]

Same thing can be said about conservatives Rex, as a country there is just too much anger towards the other side, no matter what side of the aisle you sit on. That having been said, While I don't agree with a number of opinions on Fox, there are some good prpgrams and good information.

But all 24 hour news stations will make you les intelligent eventually, their sole purpose for being in business in to get ratings, which means they have to be entertaining and by virtue of creating entertainment, a large part of what you will see is editorialized.

But Caleb, you can't get on a station because they broadcast the opinion of a view opposite of yours. There are some very good discussions that take place on Fox news. The key with anything is to have an open mind, for the minute we close our minds, we cease to learn.

Spot on, Brad, and you are correct; the fringe on either end of the political spectrum typically responds with hostility to opposing viewpoints.

Me I'm more in the middle. I don't get hostile, just sarcastic... ;)

[tbone]

I do watch Fox T-Bone, I actually like Bill O'Reilly, not a big fan of Hannity, but there are sometimes good debates on there. Going in may be the wrong terminology, but a no fly zone starts with dropping bombs. You have to take out air defenses and radar to protect your planes

And Tbone, I like you, we have some different views, but you are a good guy. I sometimes feel though in these threads that you are out to pick a fight.


Not trying to pick a fight, just stating the facts. 99.99% of people that don't like Fox don't watch it. They only know what MSNBC and their ilk tell them. If you are part of the .01% then fine.

I could say the same thing about you (trying to pick a fight) by making claims against Fox on a largely conservative forum.

[tbone]

So, how does FOX plan to keep planes in those skies, when there are anti-aircraft positions all over the place below the planes? IIRC, FOX was not brought in on the tactical planning stage of the operation specifically for it's inability to organize anything more complicated than a child's birthday party.

Disclaimer: I don't watch FOX, as it's a subscribe only channel here, and I actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years back.


:lol: Let's bring Olbermann back! Then he and Matthews and Maddow can plan the operation! They would do a better job than Oblamo.

[CBT]

Who gives a rats ass who watches what channel. We (The U.S., not Upper Minnesota AKA Canada) just got into another conflict, it's rediculous!!

[SC Cheesehead]

Who gives a rats ass who watches what channel. We (The U.S., not Upper Minnesota AKA Canada) just got into another conflict, it's rediculous!!

Well, have you asked the rat's opinion? Just sayin...

[PonyUP]

Not trying to pick a fight, just stating the facts. 99.99% of people that don't like Fox don't watch it. They only know what MSNBC and their ilk tell them. If you are part of the .01% then fine.

I could say the same thing about you (trying to pick a fight) by making claims against Fox on a largely conservative forum.

Fair enough T, though what I was stating I did hear directly on Fox, and as mentioned I do watch it. For the record, not an MSNBC fan. But I definitely see and have seen your point about people railing Fox and not watching it.

I do really like O'reilly's show, he does a good job of getting multiple views on there, and I like the former NPR guy, Juan, he does a really good job as well. Not a bug fan of Brit Hume though, but overall I do enjoy Fox.

I like to consider myself, I guess somewhat Neutral. I don't agree with everything from either side, but agree with many things from both sides. :beer:

[tbone]

Fair enough T, though what I was stating I did hear directly on Fox, and as mentioned I do watch it. For the record, not an MSNBC fan. But I definitely see and have seen your point about people railing Fox and not watching it.

I do really like O'reilly's show, he does a good job of getting multiple views on there, and I like the former NPR guy, Juan, he does a really good job as well. Not a bug fan of Brit Hume though, but overall I do enjoy Fox.

I like to consider myself, I guess somewhat Neutral. I don't agree with everything from either side, but agree with many things from both sides. :beer:

O'Reilly is pretty middle of the road leaning right. Hannity is a Reagan Conservative, which is my stand as well. Hannity has opposing sides on his show all the time, and defends his beliefs vehemently. Same thing the left does on all their outlets, but it's ok for them to do it. Fox and conservatives must be silenced!

Peace bro!

[PonyUP]

O'Reilly is pretty middle of the road leaning right. Hannity is a Reagan Conservative, which is my stand as well. Hannity has opposing sides on his show all the time, and defends his beliefs vehemently. Same thing the left does on all their outlets, but it's ok for them to do it. Fox and conservatives must be silenced!

Peace bro!

I do like Hannity's American Panel, and he also does a good job of representing both sides. I like a good spirited debate, where any show will lose me is when they don't respect the opinions being offered. But Hannity and O'Reilly do a good job of moderating it and keeping it on topic. But as you know, I lean to the right, so I have to take my hannity in doses.

Peace man :beer:

[LIGHTNIN1]

WHAT YA GONNA DO NOW?

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

[Dr Caleb]

"actually felt myself get dumber when it was a free preview a couple years"

Typical liberal response. If a postion differs from yours, the holder of that position must be stupid... :shake:

Typical Republican response, to call people 'liberal' without having a clue about their political leanings.

It has nothing to do with politics, only the "Natalie Holloway" channels' ability to say lots, and mean nothing. There are actually important stories in the world, FOX should try to report on one of those some time. The latest 'craze' of taking huge world events and distilling them down to somehow having local effects just wobbles my mind.



But Caleb, you can't get on a station because they broadcast the opinion of a view opposite of yours. There are some very good discussions that take place on Fox news. The key with anything is to have an open mind, for the minute we close our minds, we cease to learn.

It had nothing to do with their opinion differing from mine, it had to do with my belief that "news" organizations should actually report facts, not opinions. There may be some good discussions, that's great. But I'm not paying for some channel that says they report news, but doesn't. A few decades ago two reporters took down the President of the United States using only a typewriter. That is 'news reporting'. "FOX News" is exactly the opposite of that. For the record, I too do not watch MSNBC, CNN or any other cable news network.

I can name many things that people believe to be true, that are categorically false, all because 'News channels' feed their viewers opinion and presents them as fact, because that sells airtime. People believing that Libya is a NATO operation, for example. ;)

[hamcheese]

You better have a backup plan...Food, water, generator, gas, seeds, and of course, weapons, and ammo. Sure say it, im a loon. Ok, when the economy fails (and the cat is out of the bag that we are bankrupt) and all hell breaks loose, dont come knocking on my door (because I wont be there).

AND WE DONT BELONG IN LIBYA!!!...I will not go there and fight.

[Fosters]

Typical Republican response, to call people 'liberal' without having a clue about their political leanings.

It has nothing to do with politics, only the "Natalie Holloway" channels' ability to say lots, and mean nothing. There are actually important stories in the world, FOX should try to report on one of those some time. The latest 'craze' of taking huge world events and distilling them down to somehow having local effects just wobbles my mind.

Funny, that Libya conflict had quite the local impact at the gas stations around me...


It had nothing to do with their opinion differing from mine, it had to do with my belief that "news" organizations should actually report facts, not opinions. There may be some good discussions, that's great. But I'm not paying for some channel that says they report news, but doesn't. A few decades ago two reporters took down the President of the United States using only a typewriter. That is 'news reporting'. "FOX News" is exactly the opposite of that. For the record, I too do not watch MSNBC, CNN or any other cable news network.

The news portion of fox news, is news. The fox news you hear about is Hannity, O'Reilly, Greta, etc. That is not news, that is opinion. I bet you a 100% news only station would have no viewers. Would you really want someone to tell you the same news and weather every 15-30 minutes, with minor developments every 1-2 hours?


I can name many things that people believe to be true, that are categorically false, all because 'News channels' feed their viewers opinion and presents them as fact, because that sells airtime. People believing that Libya is a NATO operation, for example. ;)

Fantabulous. You can even read people's minds through an internet forum. Even Al Gore didn't foresee this stuff when he invented the internets. :cool4:

[rayjay]

You better have a backup plan...Food, water, generator, gas, seeds, and of course, weapons, and ammo. Sure say it, im a loon. Ok, when the economy fails (and the cat is out of the bag that we are bankrupt) and all hell breaks loose, dont come knocking on my door (because I wont be there).

AND WE DONT BELONG IN LIBYA!!!...I will not go there and fight.

Well then I'm a loon too... I've said it for years the USSR, now Russia, and the USA should just divide up the coordinates and make all those POS countries from Africa to sub Asia glow in the dark for the next 10,000 years. Problem solved. I know I have a NUKE THEIR ASS, TAKE THE GAS t- shirt around here somewhere. :flamer:

[MrBluGruv]

The latest 'craze' of taking huge world events and distilling them down to somehow having local effects just wobbles my mind.

Something in a similar vein, in a way I suppose:

The other night I saw a panic/terror story about "should you be concerned about the radioactive nature of goods coming out of Japan now?"

Sometimes I hate news outlets, and especially as a student of journalism, I am particularly disgusted at what gets passed as newsworthy and ethically reportable....

[kernie]

Well then I'm a loon too... I've said it for years the USSR, now Russia, and the USA should just divide up the coordinates and make all those POS countries from Africa to sub Asia glow in the dark for the next 10,000 years. Problem solved. I know I have a NUKE THEIR ASS, TAKE THE GAS t- shirt around here somewhere. :flamer:

Nothing wrong with having a backup plan, that wouldn't make you a loon.

Now nukking the part of the world you don't like...

Yee-haw!!!!

:beer:

[SC Cheesehead]

Typical Republican response, to call people 'liberal' without having a clue about their political leanings.

Ahhh, but I DO have a clue to yours, my friend, from past postings. :D

It has nothing to do with politics, only the "Natalie Holloway" channels' ability to say lots, and mean nothing. There are actually important stories in the world, FOX should try to report on one of those some time. The latest 'craze' of taking huge world events and distilling them down to somehow having local effects just wobbles my mind.

Interesting how one who doesn't watch FOX has such profound insight into it's content. ;)

FOX has news, and then it has opinion shows (O'Rielly, Hannity, etc.). As for the latest news distilling 'craze', spend a few minutes watching an Ann Curry segment on NBC, and note how her "reporting" on the events in Japan will effect us here in the US. Her political agenda is so transparent it's mind-boggling.

It had nothing to do with their opinion differing from mine, it had to do with my belief that "news" organizations should actually report facts, not opinions. There may be some good discussions, that's great. But I'm not paying for some channel that says they report news, but doesn't. A few decades ago two reporters took down the President of the United States using only a typewriter. That is 'news reporting'. "FOX News" is exactly the opposite of that. For the record, I too do not watch MSNBC, CNN or any other cable news network.

Again, I believe you're mixing FOX news segements with their opinion shows. As for MSNBC, you are doing yourself a favor by passing on that one. :rolleyes:

I can name many things that people believe to be true, that are categorically false, all because 'News channels' feed their viewers opinion and presents them as fact, because that sells airtime. People believing that Libya is a NATO operation, for example. ;)

^^^^^^ +1 on your last points, spot on. ^^^^^^

[Dr Caleb]

Originally Posted by Dr Caleb
Typical Republican response, to call people 'liberal' without having a clue about their political leanings.

Ahhh, but I DO have a clue to yours, my friend, from past postings.



Interesting, considering my past postings have nothing to do with my political views. My country is currently led by the Conservative Party of Canada, my province has been led by the Alberta Conservative Party for 40 odd years. We are known to be so conservative and red neck here the rest of Canada calls us 'Texas North'. My pickup even has a gun rack.

So what exactly about my postings makes you think I'm a liberal? Or is it just that that everyone who disagrees with you is? The thing that confounds most 'you are with us or you are with them' types, is the political spectrum has more than 'left' and 'right'.



Originally Posted by Dr Caleb
It has nothing to do with politics, only the "Natalie Holloway" channels' ability to say lots, and mean nothing. There are actually important stories in the world, FOX should try to report on one of those some time. The latest 'craze' of taking huge world events and distilling them down to somehow having local effects just wobbles my mind.

Interesting how one who doesn't watch FOX has such profound insight into it's content.


I guess calling it the 'Natalie Holloway' channel doesn't give you any indication as to how long ago I watched it.



FOX has news, and then it has opinion shows (O'Rielly, Hannity, etc.). As for the latest news distilling 'craze', spend a few minutes watching an Ann Curry segment on NBC, and note how her "reporting" on the events in Japan will effect us here in the US. Her political agenda is so transparent it's mind-boggling.


So, tell me why again I need to pay to watch this channel about US news?



Originally Posted by Dr Caleb
It had nothing to do with their opinion differing from mine, it had to do with my belief that "news" organizations should actually report facts, not opinions. There may be some good discussions, that's great. But I'm not paying for some channel that says they report news, but doesn't. A few decades ago two reporters took down the President of the United States using only a typewriter. That is 'news reporting'. "FOX News" is exactly the opposite of that. For the record, I too do not watch MSNBC, CNN or any other cable news network.

Again, I believe you're mixing FOX news segements with their opinion shows. As for MSNBC, you are doing yourself a favor by passing on that one.


Nope. My comment had nothing to do with FOX, rather it had to do with ALL news channels nowadays. I'm more of a ROB TV guy anyhow.



Originally Posted by Dr Caleb
I can name many things that people believe to be true, that are categorically false, all because 'News channels' feed their viewers opinion and presents them as fact, because that sells airtime. People believing that Libya is a NATO operation, for example.

^^^^^^ +1 on your last points, spot on. ^^^^^^

See! We can agree on some things! :beer:

[FordNut]

Alright, I don't give a rat's a$$ what news channel anybody watches, but...

We got no business in Libya, and it's a bad idea to get involved in another country's civil war.

I don't like Khadafi, didn't like Hussein, but in some regards a tyrant in charge is better than mob rule.

How about the protests in Wisconsin? What if the UN decided the US government wasn't treating the protesters humanely and decided to send Chinese and Russian military to enforce a no-fly zone over US airspace? If the UN world police was around when Lincoln sent General Sherman to burn Atlanta along with the rest of the South, I wonder if they would have sided with the South since they were being murdered by an oppressive government? Maybe there would be separate USA and CSA now? Just some thoughts...

[sailsmen]

There are many countries near Lybia that have the military to eliminate Quackdaffi or to enforce the UN Resolution.

Lybia for the USA is a no win. No matter what we will be painted as the Great Devil.

How many women have you seen in any of the recent demonstrations in any of the countries in this area? Are there any women demonstrating?

[TJCOX]

Don't be too quick to judge the President, until you've been in his shoes.

[CBT]

Don't be too quick to judge the President, until you've been in his shoes.

I've done community organizing. Next.

[Spectragod]

Hey,
I'm no Obama fan...but at least he had the cojones to do something!


No balls at all, remember this......

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/tragic-end-americans-kidnapped-pirates-hostages-yacht-somalia-murder-12975649

So..... Americans are kidnapped and killed, you do nothing.

Lybia's people have a problem (because THEY protested) and we are over there dumping millions, I'm sure we'll rebuild it next and put them on some sort of welfare.:mad2:

[CBT]

No balls at all, remember this......

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/tragic-end-americans-kidnapped-pirates-hostages-yacht-somalia-murder-12975649

So..... Americans are kidnapped and killed, you do nothing.

Lybia's people have a problem (because THEY protested) and we are over there dumping millions, I'm sure we'll rebuild it next and put them on some sort of welfare.:mad2:

Not we. Haliburton and KBR will get no bid contracts to rebuild "stuff" over there.

[SC Cheesehead]

See! We can agree on some things! :beer:


Now if you were a Roughriders fan, that would be TWO things we could agree on, but I'm not gonna push that one... ;) -----> :D

[Fosters]

Not we. Haliburton and KBR will get no bid contracts to rebuild "stuff" over there.

Haliburton won't get a contract from this white house... their (WH) supporters would pop a blood vessel :mad2: :D

[Spectragod]

Not we. Haliburton and KBR will get no bid contracts to rebuild "stuff" over there.


But "we" will pay for it, providing you not one of those just living off the "system". Our taxes will be taxed more.:mad2:

[CBT]

But "we" will pay for it, providing you not one of those just living off the "system". Our taxes will be taxed more.:mad2:
No doubt man, no doubt. The first thing taught in Economics class: ~There is no such thing as a free lunch.~ Someone (taxpayers) will pay for it. And also, aside from those hundred plus cruise missles, how much is a replacement F-15 going for these days, 'cause one crashed and burned, so there's a few million more spent.

[SC Cheesehead]

No doubt man, no doubt. The first thing taught in Economics class: ~There is no such thing as a free lunch.~ Someone (taxpayers) will pay for it. And also, aside from those hundred plus cruise missles, how much is a replacement F-15 going for these days, 'cause one crashed and burned, so there's a few million more spent.

Unless you're a proponent of thi school of thought:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-keynesian-economics.htm

[Fosters]

No doubt man, no doubt. The first thing taught in Economics class: ~There is no such thing as a free lunch.~ Someone (taxpayers) will pay for it. And also, aside from those hundred plus cruise missles, how much is a replacement F-15 going for these days, 'cause one crashed and burned, so there's a few million more spent.

http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f15/

~30 mil in 1998 dollars. Probably about 50 now.

Tomahawk missiles I remember reading are in the 1-1.5 million dollar each range; and there were just over 150 of them fired.

The fuel, maintenance, combat pay, etc... It's ok, we can just print more. :)

[LIGHTNIN1]

http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f15/

~30 mil in 1998 dollars. Probably about 50 now.

Tomahawk missiles I remember reading are in the 1-1.5 million dollar each range; and there were just over 150 of them fired.

The fuel, maintenance, combat pay, etc... It's ok, we can just print more. :)


There is the reason for us to stay in Germany, to protect our need for printing presses.;)

[Dr Caleb]

Now if you were a Roughriders fan, that would be TWO things we could agree on, but I'm not gonna push that one... ;) -----> :D

Roughriders!?! No, not a big football fan in general, but Roughriders!?! The watermelon death squad? Not likely. ;)

http://cfl.ca/video/index/id/8611

[SC Cheesehead]

Roughriders!?! No, not a big football fan in general, but Roughriders!?! The watermelon death squad? Not likely. ;)


Didn't think so, but thought asking was worth a try. :D

Just curious, are you and Edminton or a Calgary fan?

[Dr Caleb]

Didn't think so, but thought asking was worth a try. :D

Just curious, are you and Edmonton or a Calgary fan?

More of an apathetic Eskimos fan. I like when they are wining, but am unconcerned the rest of the time.

[SC Cheesehead]

More of an apathetic Eskimos fan. I like when they are wining, but am unconcerned the rest of the time.

Gotcha! :D

[rayjay]

More of an apathetic Eskimos fan. I like when they are wining, but am unconcerned the rest of the time.

Oh, you're a closet Bills fan I see.

[CBT]

This just in, Obama has officially fired more Tomahawk Cruise Missles than any other Nobel Peace Prize winner in history! :beer:

[kernie]

Ok, are there any right wingers who are big enough to admit that the President has handled Libya well?

Don't ask me any questions, this is a one time post.

:beer:

[PonyUP]

Ok, are there any right wingers who are big enough to admit that the President has handled Libya well?

Don't ask me any questions, this is a one time post.

:beer:

Loaded question, yes he worked with aliies and the UN, or rather the UN kind of backed him into it, and he established a coalition. He didn't talk to congress first, which by law he doesn't have to as he is not declaring war, and even if he did, he ahs 90 days for congressional approval. And lastly there aren't any boots on the ground.

Now for the negative, if we are going to go in, we should have lead the way instead of being backdoored by the security council. You can't say it is US policy to remove Gaddafhi, as it simply is not US policy. If it were, we would have to go into Syria, Iran, and North Korea. Ofcourse we won't do that because China and Russia back those countries. But Libya, who noone likes? Sure no problem.
In addition, now that covert ops have been approved, it looks more and more like we are going to put boots on the ground eventually. So now we are going in to 3 wars. For someone that campaigned on closing Gitmo, leaving Iraq and Afghanistan, it's been two years and hasn't happened, instead it looks like we are adding a third

Lastly, supplying arms to the rebels doesn't work. We tried that with the Contra's, oops. We also tried that in Afghanistan in the war against the Soviets and we create Osama Bin Laden, oops. So what nightmare wil come of this?

To me Kernie, and I voted for him, but he has wish washed on this, like he has so many things, that I can't say he has handled it well. And I am fearful that we are in yet another conflict that we can't possibly win, because our resolve is done with humanitarian needs in mind. If you are going to go to war (with the exception of nukes) you go to win, you don't fight with rules. You blow everything up, seek out to kill every enemy. In other words you can't go half way.

And is it jsut me, or is it insane that we still have a political ban on assassination? These dictators we want removed so bad, I'm thinking Chuck Norris could be sent in and take them out, no wars, just a few bullets.:beer:

[Baaad GN]

God I didn't think anyone was admitting they voted for the number 1 Dude! :-)

[LIGHTNIN1]

We will better know the answer to this one in 6MOS to a year, and I think we will be there at that time. But arming this bunch of rebels may turn out to not be the smartest thing we have done.

[Leadfoot281]

Ok, are there any right wingers who are big enough to admit that the President has handled Libya well?

Don't ask me any questions, this is a one time post.

:beer:

Once again I believe Ann has hit the nail on the head about this topic.

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/03/30/obama_cried,_kids_died

[PonyUP]

Once again I believe Ann has hit the nail on the head about this topic.

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/03/30/obama_cried,_kids_died

Sorry Lead, but I can't lend a whole lot of credence towards Ann Coulter, in my opinion she is about as Right Wing Nutty as you can get. Not to say there aren't an equal amount of left wing nutbags, but most of her stuff is driven by her personal opinion as opposed to fact, at least in my opinion. But I lend myself a little more towards the middle, so I disagree with most far right and far left opinions, but Ann is most definitely far right, which is an agenda that I don't align with at all.

[Merc-O-matic]

Sorry to say people, if you want to fight a few more wars........
you better bring back the DRAFT!

Gotta Love It!:flamer:

[Leadfoot281]

Sorry Lead, but I can't lend a whole lot of credence towards Ann Coulter, in my opinion she is about as Right Wing Nutty as you can get. Not to say there aren't an equal amount of left wing nutbags, but most of her stuff is driven by her personal opinion as opposed to fact, at least in my opinion. But I lend myself a little more towards the middle, so I disagree with most far right and far left opinions, but Ann is most definitely far right, which is an agenda that I don't align with at all.

...and I'll be you let your predjudice prevent you from reading the article too.

Minds are like parachutes.

[Vortex]

I get so tired of all the carping on Obama for everything he does. Its almost hilarious how some have done the huge flip-flop; before they were screaming for another war (though they seem to be generally opposed to actually serving in the military themselves) and now that they've got one they've all become the great peacemakers. I dont agree with the Libya thing but I will assume the President and Joint Chiefs know more about it than I do. Personally I'd love to see Kadaffi hung from a post by his own people (as one of my classmates and a good friend was murdered on Pan Am 103 along with another coworker of mine). I vote we "declare victory" and get out of Afganistan, Iraq and Libya and just pump all their oil dry.

[SC Cheesehead]

I get so tired of all the carping on Obama for everything he does. Its almost hilarious how some have done the huge flip-flop; before they were screaming for another war (though they seem to be generally opposed to actually serving in the military themselves) and now that they've got one they've all become the great peacemakers. I dont agree with the Libya thing but I will assume the President and Joint Chiefs know more about it than I do. Personally I'd love to see Kadaffi hung from a post by his own people (as one of my classmates and a good friend was murdered on Pan Am 103 along with another coworker of mine). I vote we "declare victory" and get out of Afganistan, Iraq and Libya and just pump all their oil dry.

^^^^ Wouldn't count on that Jim... ^^^^;)

[rayjay]

Personally I'd love to see Kadaffi hung from a post by his own people (as one of my classmates and a good friend was murdered on Pan Am 103 along with another coworker of mine). I vote we "declare victory" and get out of Afganistan, Iraq and Libya and just pump all their oil dry.


+1 Jim. IMHO, Billary probably gave the orders to fire the Tomahawks while B HO was waiting for the poll numbers on what to do. :rolleyes: