Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on August 01, 2007, 12:53:17 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7)
Is this smart? Not the military move but is the political move, pre-election smart?
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7)
Is this smart? Not the military move but is the political move, pre-election smart?
It's a good political move. You know the Republican nominee will say the same thing. He needs to show he isn't a marshmallow on defense given his strong anti-war views.
He also needs to hit the gym. I watched the Democrat debate last week and he looks like he weighs about 140 pounds soaking wet.
-
He also needs to hit the gym. I watched the Democrat debate last week and he looks like he weighs about 140 pounds soaking wet.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ;D :D :) :D ;D :D :D ;D :D :)
Ain't it the truth?
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7)
Is this smart? Not the military move but is the political move, pre-election smart?
Stone cold dummy he is. His parties whole platform is railing bush out on Iraq and bringing the troops home, at the very least he should have given the standard "we will continue the fight on terror by all means..." Vague like Hillary did.
-
Stone cold dummy he is. His parties whole platform is railing bush out on Iraq and bringing the troops home, at the very least he should have given the standard "we will continue the fight on terror by all means..." Vague like Hillary did.
That phrase should be followed by, "...Just not by using the military. We have a strategy to hug the radical islamics into submission. It will be the largest hugging campaign we have ever launched on anyone since JFK got a hold of some cocaine at party in his first month of presidency... We aren't nessicarily going to hug them hard...We don't want to hurt them, but believe me as sure as I stand here... Our presence will be felt!"
-
Its the Bush doctrine of pre emptive attack. I'm sure Hillary will have a ball with this. Obama is a lightweight.
-
It was a very foolish statement.
Hillary is going to have a field day with this lightweight.
-
Probably the right thing to do.
Like that fucking ugly dyke can spit out something better.
-
Its the Bush doctrine of pre emptive attack. I'm sure Hillary will have a ball with this. Obama is a lightweight.
Actually that's the US doctrine, hit em before they know what the hell they did wrong.
Hey Camel where did you hear she was a dyke? grapevine
-
It was a very foolish statement.
Hillary is going to have a field day with this lightweight.
Hi honey. I missed you. Where you been hiding?
-
obam..lightweight? you guys are stupid. you dont know shit about politics, or how to play politics.
the only thing you are correct on is that hillary will attack every little thing of obama's that she can. because she knows that he is the better candidate, the more liked candidate, the more sincere candidate, the more intelligent candidate.
sending troops into pakestein would be a last option, but it is nonetheless an option.
-
Thanks for that..go back to your cave. ::)
Sincere, he's an idiot. Musharrif is hanging on by a thread and he's going to "invade" Pakistan. Gimme abreak. Hil rattled him last week and since then he's been spouting nonsense. "I'd never use nuclear weapons".. What?
-
obam..lightweight? you guys are stupid. you dont know shit about politics, or how to play politics.
the only thing you are correct on is that hillary will attack every little thing of obama's that she can. because she knows that he is the better candidate, the more liked candidate, the more sincere candidate, the more intelligent candidate.
sending troops into pakestein would be a last option, but it is nonetheless an option.
You know something the rest of the world doesn't about the current state of affairs in Pakistan? The statement was naive and foolish. Like HH6 said, Musharrif is walking a fine line and this lightweight throws around threats of invading an ally?
This guy is playing right into Hillary's hands. Everyone, but him, saw this coming.
-
Hi honey. I missed you. Where you been hiding?
work work work. :P
-
work work work. :P
:'( That's a bummer.
I got an idea... maybe you should sent the kids to grandma's house for a bit,
...and you and your lovely wife could join me on a nice warm beach in a coupla weeks.
It could be lots of fun. We could sea-doo, laze around on a boat, ...eat lots of pizza :P ;D
-
Pakistan Fires Back At Obama
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, August 3, 2007
(AP) Pakistan criticized U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday for saying that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes against terrorists hiding in this Islamic country.
Top Pakistan officials said Obama's comment was irresponsible and likely made for political gain in the race for the Democratic nomination.
"It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say," Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri told AP Television News. "As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."
Also Friday, a senior Pakistani official condemned another presidential hopeful, Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, for saying the best way he could think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. would be to threaten to retaliate by bombing the holiest Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.
Obama said in a speech Wednesday that as president he would order military action against terrorists in Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan if intelligence warranted it. The comment provoked anger in Pakistan, a key ally of the United States in its war on terror.
Many analysts believe that top Taliban and al Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are hiding in the region after escaping the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.
President Gen. Pervez Musharraf has come under growing pressure from Washington to do more to tackle the alleged al Qaeda havens in Pakistan. The Bush administration has not ruled out military strikes, but still stresses the importance of cooperating with Pakistan.
"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again," Obama said. "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."
The Associated Press of Pakistan reported Friday that Musharraf was asked at a dinner at Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's house on Thursday about the potential of U.S. military operations in Pakistan. Musharraf told guests that Pakistan was "fully capable" of tackling terrorists in the country and did not need foreign assistance.
Deputy Information Minister Tariq Azim said no foreign forces would be allowed to enter Pakistan, and called Obama irresponsible.
"I think those who make such statements are not aware of our contribution" in the fight on terrorism, he said.
Pakistan used to be a main backer of the Taliban, but it threw its support behind Washington following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Since then, Pakistan has deployed about 90,000 troops in its tribal regions, mostly in lawless North and South Waziristan, and has lost hundreds of troops in fighting with militants there.
But a controversial strategy to make peace with militants and use tribesmen to police Waziristan has fueled U.S. fears that al Qaeda has been given space to regroup.
In Pakistan's national assembly on Friday, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan said he would bring on a debate next week on recent criticism of Pakistan from several quarters in the U.S., including Tancredo's remarks.
It was a matter of "grave concern that U.S. presidential candidates are using unethical and immoral tactics against Islam and Pakistan to win their election," Afghan said.
Tancredo told about 30 people at a town hall meeting in Osceola, Iowa, on Tuesday that he believes that a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. could be imminent and that the U.S. needs to hurry up and think of a way to stop it.
"If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina. Because that's the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they otherwise might do," he said.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
-
They really haven't been all that much help but if Mussariff wants to stay in power he's gotta be careful of what he does and says. If Bush wants to go into Pakistan, they won't announce it, they'll just go. They need to give the Pakistani government denyability. I know we've gone in on occasion. If we keep it low key, then there will be no problems. Obama is an idiot, he's throwing crap out so he can show he has an opinion. He has to say something to combat Hillary. I think this was a big mistake. I think Hillary will use this to separate herself from him. I think that had this happend closer to the election it could have hurt him. I think he will recover for now but Clinton will revisit this later.
-
The burning flag is a nice touch.
But let's get real for a second.
Many American flags have been burnt because of our actions in the middle east due to the BUSH administration.
We really should be in Pakistan rooting out the germs called Al Queda and the paki government should brutally crush any resistance toward us doing it.
Of course we can't because we're too busy giving democracy to Iraq instead protecting our own.
-
This guy is hanging on by a thread. If it were any other group ready to take the reigns maybe we would do what we have to, but the alternative is a nuclear state run by nutbags. As far as the last comment..spot on..neither they nor the Afghani's are ready or even willing to be ruled democratically, sometimes a country just is not mature enough to handle it. They need years of help, education, rebuilt infrastructure etc, to take on democracy. Hell, Russia can't even do it.
-
This guy is hanging on by a thread. If it were any other group ready to take the reigns maybe we would do what we have to, but the alternative is a nuclear state run by nutbags. As far as the last comment..spot on..neither they nor the Afghani's are ready or even willing to be ruled democratically, sometimes a country just is not mature enough to handle it. They need years of help, education, rebuilt infrastructure etc, to take on democracy. Hell, Russia can't even do it.
Yes it's a sad reality in Pakistan that we must compromise what have to do in exchange for what could end up being far worse.
Funny thing about being ready for democracy. I would think the people are ready, not the ones in charge.
-
Look at Russia, no real history of Democracy but a long, very long, history of autocratic rule. They seem to feel better as a people with a strong ruler. Now u could have a British style democracy, or even a Western Style socialism type and be ok. I don't think a US based democratic style works there. They have a Duma and a President but as a people they need that strong leader. A czar or a Stalin like figure. he doesn't neccesarily need to be a horrible prick either. Afghanistan is a complete disaster. They are much more loyal to a tribal system then to the central government. Iraq is the same Unless u have a tyrant, they just splinter.
-
:'( That's a bummer.
I got an idea... maybe you should sent the kids to grandma's house for a bit,
...and you and your lovely wife could join me on a nice warm beach in a coupla weeks.
It could be lots of fun. We could sea-doo, laze around on a boat, ...eat lots of pizza :P ;D
That would be hella fun. 8) 8) 8)
-
That would be hella fun. 8) 8) 8)
;D