Obama Just Compared Christianity With Islam…At National Prayer Breakfast

[Steinlight]

[

Kondor's above statement clearly indicates he does not get why we can't nation build now as we did sixty years ago.

Kondor, old buddy, tell us how to do it.

The real problem is the current administration doesn't have a sound policy, they have a destructive and irresponsible one. They believe in this naive idea of intervention and "bringing democracy" to the Middle East by aiding so called "moderate" islamist rebels. The collapse of Libya into a dysfunctional terrorist state, and Syria and Iraq in civil war are the result of this destructive policy.

Bush made a deal with look tada el sadr because we couldn't fight the Sunnis Shiites and am queda all at the same time.

Stop being stupid

What are you even saying? Put together a coherent thought. From what I gather, you are trying to suggest it was Bush's fault that Obama overthrew Gadaffi and armed the "moderate" rebels in Libya and Syria who later turned over their arms to ISIS?

How do you figure?

Just pointing out the ignorant hypocricy of the right

Hypocrisy? How am I a hypocrite?

I would like to hear this. Please explain.

 

[Synthaholic]

You don't find historical events from eight hundred years ago convincing that Christians are the same as Muslims today? Hmm...me either...

Here's how it works.

Back then you risked your life by denying that either groups God existed. Today, you risk your life by denying that the God of ISIS exists. The Christians would simply pray for you.

The comparison fails

Your argument assumes that ISIL is a religious group, rather than a terrorist group that uses religion as a prop.

All groups that kill in the name of God are.

And so the point is?

Are...what? Terrorist groups?

I agree. That includes the 'death to abortion doctors' crowd.

I'm glad you agree that ISIL is a terrorist group, not a religious movement.

They are religious, they are radical islamists. You aren't going to seriously deny this are you?

In what way are they religious? Because they shout slogans?

 

[Synthaholic]

I don't see liberals opposing ACA to push for singlepayer.

You did in 2009/2010.

 

[sealybobo]

[

Kondor's above statement clearly indicates he does not get why we can't nation build now as we did sixty years ago.

Kondor, old buddy, tell us how to do it.

The real problem is the current administration doesn't have a sound policy, they have a destructive and irresponsible one. They believe in this naive idea of intervention and "bringing democracy" to the Middle East by aiding so called "moderate" islamist rebels. The collapse of Libya into a dysfunctional terrorist state, and Syria and Iraq in civil war are the result of this destructive policy.

Bush made a deal with look tada el sadr because we couldn't fight the Sunnis Shiites and am queda all at the same time.

Stop being stupid

What are you even saying? Put together a coherent thought. From what I gather, you are trying to suggest it was Bush's fault that Obama overthrew Gadaffi and armed the "moderate" rebels in Libya and Syria who later turned over their arms to ISIS?

How do you figure?

Just pointing out the ignorant hypocricy of the right

Hypocrisy? How am I a hypocrite?

I would like to hear this. Please explain.

U know

 

[Synthaholic]

Rachel Mad-Cow...

What do you get from that?

Do you think it makes you look clever? Is it your attempt to be one of the Right-Wing herd?

I see a lot of Right-Wingers denigrate Rachel Maddow but I have yet to see any of you successfully debunk a single thing she has ever said or written.

Name-calling must be your consolation.

 

[Synthaholic]

Yes he did! And did he use that total control to implement a Single-Payer healthcare system like Liberals wanted, or did he accommodate Republicans by adopting the Right-Wing, Heritage Foundation, Romneycare?

I rest my case.

But if you need more . . .

"He" didn't have Reid do a thing. Harry Reid doesn't take orders, and Harry Reid certainly doesn't need a one-term Senator explaining to him how to run the Senate.

Harry Reid blocked House bills that contained poison pills and items included for the sole purpose of embarrassing the president.

Why aren't you concerned with Boehner blocking Senate Bills? Obama's Jobs bill that called for spending on infrastructure - not controversial - has been sitting on Boehner's desk since 2011.

Where's your outrage?

By beating them, politically? OK.

JFK was a Conservative (set by the far left standards of today), so do you hate JFK?

JFK was no more Conservative than Clinton or Obama.

Seriously you are nuts.

JFK was conservative. Or as I was in those days a classical liberal.

How was JFK a conservative?

JFK was a cold war pragmatic liberal, who favored civil rights and national health care. The far right it trying to claim JFK as the far left is trying to say the GOP would reject Reagan today. Both groups are wrong.

They are trying to claim JFK the way they try to claim MLK.

They would only try to claim them if they were wildly popular and proven right by history.

Why do you think Reagan would be welcomed in the GOP today? He's further Left than Jeb or GW Bush.

 

[sealybobo]

Rachel Mad-Cow...

What do you get from that?

Do you think it makes you look clever? Is it your attempt to be one of the Right-Wing herd?

I see a lot of Right-Wingers denigrate Rachel Maddow but I have yet to see any of you successfully debunk a single thing she has ever said or written.

Name-calling must be your consolation.

If you mention Carl Sagan ed Schultz Randi Rhodes thom hartman Neal degrasse Tyson barney frank or al franken they do the same thing. As if these people have no credibility.

Watch this. Nancy pelosi and harry reid are great americans just like michael Moore and am gore

 

[Synthaholic]

Turks refuse to do anything. The Arabs in Iraq where abandon by Obama. The Kurds needed heavy weapons and still have not gotten much from this pathetic president

More evidence of your ignorance regarding MidEast countries and relationships.

Türkiye is the second largest force in NATO, and has been a stalwart U.S. ally for decades, despite the occasional hiccup (early 1980s coup, Recep Erdoğan, Bob Dole's hatred). Türkiye has been fighting the Kurdish terrorists for decades (PPK). Türkiye does not want us sending arms to the Kurds that could be turned on them when ISIL is finally dispatched.

As for Türkiye "not doing anything", they are the country that is most in danger of attacks throughout their country from ISIL members and sympathizers. Just like how the United States won't "do anything" about drug cartels, and atrocities committed in Mexico. Too many Mexicans throughout the country who could launch retribution attacks.

 

[Synthaholic]

Stephanie Miller is hilarious.

 

[Steinlight]

Here's how it works.

Back then you risked your life by denying that either groups God existed. Today, you risk your life by denying that the God of ISIS exists. The Christians would simply pray for you.

The comparison fails

Your argument assumes that ISIL is a religious group, rather than a terrorist group that uses religion as a prop.

All groups that kill in the name of God are.

And so the point is?

Are...what? Terrorist groups?

I agree. That includes the 'death to abortion doctors' crowd.

I'm glad you agree that ISIL is a terrorist group, not a religious movement.

They are religious, they are radical islamists. You aren't going to seriously deny this are you?

In what way are they religious? Because they shout slogans?

I haven't really heard them shout slogans. I consider them Islamic because they proclaim themselves the Islamic State and enforce Sharia Law in the areas they conquer.

But perhaps you can enlighten me as to how the Islamic State isn't Islamic. Go ahead I am waiting.

 

[Steinlight]

[
The real problem is the current administration doesn't have a sound policy, they have a destructive and irresponsible one. They believe in this naive idea of intervention and "bringing democracy" to the Middle East by aiding so called "moderate" islamist rebels. The collapse of Libya into a dysfunctional terrorist state, and Syria and Iraq in civil war are the result of this destructive policy.

Bush made a deal with look tada el sadr because we couldn't fight the Sunnis Shiites and am queda all at the same time.

Stop being stupid

What are you even saying? Put together a coherent thought. From what I gather, you are trying to suggest it was Bush's fault that Obama overthrew Gadaffi and armed the "moderate" rebels in Libya and Syria who later turned over their arms to ISIS?

How do you figure?

Just pointing out the ignorant hypocricy of the right

Hypocrisy? How am I a hypocrite?

I would like to hear this. Please explain.

U know

No, please explain. I am curious. Do go on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is a lie (U.S. Seen in Middle East as Ally of Terrorists) and Steinlight is describing neo-con policies, which are failures.

What I am saying is a lie?

So Obama is implementing neo-conservative policies? I don't necessarily disagree. I am glad you admit his foreign policy is a failure though.

Those are your words, that the neo-con policies have the past have failed.

We are not going to put in scores of thousands of American troops in another neo-con losing strategy.

 

[Steinlight]

This is a lie (U.S. Seen in Middle East as Ally of Terrorists) and Steinlight is describing neo-con policies, which are failures.

What I am saying is a lie?

So Obama is implementing neo-conservative policies? I don't necessarily disagree. I am glad you admit his foreign policy is a failure though.

Those are your words, that the neo-con policies have the past have failed.

We are not going to put in scores of thousands of American troops in another neo-con losing strategy.

That's right Obama's policies, which are neo-conservative have failed. Do you think Obama's neo-conservative policies have succeded?

I would consider the current policy of promoting "democratic revolution" that has resulted hundreds of thousands of dead Libyans and Syrian and the rise of radical Islamists in the resulting power vacuum a failure, but that is just me. Maybe the US has goals other than stability for the Middle East in mind.

I think stability is secondary and not desired if the nations in question refuse to comply with the the Global Neo-Liberal System, like Syria, Libya, Ukraine etc. I think they would prefer compliant liberal democratic regimes. However, if they can't have those, they would prefer geopolitical opponents to be destabilized, and are willing to prop up the most unsavory of characters to achieve this. The result in the case of Syria was the rise of ISIS.

 

[JakeStarkey]

[We are not going to put in scores of thousands of American troops in another neo-con losing strategy.

That's right Obama's policies, which are neo-conservative have failed..

Those are your words, because Obama removed the troops, so the Iraqi Bush-trained army had to stand on its own and so far has failed. I am hoping the application of limited trainers and advisers does the job, because I bet dollars to donuts, after forcing out Al Maliki, that Iraq has been told "you better get your Army to fight well, because it is not going to be American boys in cages being burned to death.

 

[Steinlight]

[We are not going to put in scores of thousands of American troops in another neo-con losing strategy.

That's right Obama's policies, which are neo-conservative have failed..

Those are your words, because Obama removed the troops, so the Iraqi Bush-trained army had to stand on its own and so far has failed. I am hoping the application of limited trainers and advisers does the job, because I bet dollars to donuts, after forcing out Al Maliki, that Iraq has been told "you better get your Army to fight well, because it is not going to be American boys in cages being burned to death.

You keep saying those are my words. You said the policies I outlined are neo-conservative. Those policies are Obama's policies. thus Obama's policies are neo-conservative by your logic. At this point, you are just carrying water for Obama because he happens to be a Democrat, and you have to defend your team. People like you are a dime a dozen in America in both parties. You are carrying Obama's water despite the fact he follows the same exact policy of intervention and nation building Bush did. It's pathetic to be honest.

As far as troop withdrawals, Obama just carried out the policy and timeline implemented by Bush initially. He didn't do anything new. As for Iraq, the US should have never gone in. But the fact is, yes, when the US took out Saddam, then withdrew with no solidified order in his place, along with funding islamists in Syria, this provided a vacuum for civil war in Iraq, absolutely.

You can't blame Bush for Obama funding the rebels in Syria who gave their weapons to ISIS who moved into Iraq. What I don't understand is that you supposedly dislike neo-cons, yet you carry water for a President who supported the same policy McCain did(though I guess McCain's complaint is that Obama somehow didn't go far enough).

The fact is, both the Democrats and Republicans support this imperial policy, they just quibble over the details once in a while. So if you support Obama, you are an enabler of the neo-conservative view.

 

[Kondor3]

Kondor's above statement clearly indicates he does not get why we can't nation build now as we did sixty years ago.

Kondor, old buddy, tell us how to do it.

Oh, there are a great many reason why we have not been successful with recent attempts at Nation Building.

I've already outlined two of the more significant ones that came to mind at the time that I commented, earlier... total destruction of the land to be rebuilt, and total submissiveness on the part of the survivors.

There are others - a great many others.

As to how to move forward with Nation-Building, if I knew the answer to that question, I would be formulating such policy on the Federal level.

Personally, I'm all for storming-in, on those occasions that require it, killing the Bad Guys, then just packing up and walking away, and let 'em fend for themselves.

War, without the Nation-Building, afterwards.

Except, perhaps, for whatever humanitarian relief it might take, to keep innocent civilians alive for a finite period of time, while they rebuild with international help.

Screw the Nation-Building... sometimes it pays off, but, so often, it simply does not work, and boomerangs back on us.

We do, indeed, need to do a much better job, of choosing our fights, and generating less war-activity.

Nolo contendere.

But when we DO take up the gauntlet and decide to fight, we need to not only kick ass - which we usually do - but we also need to summon-up the gall to just walk away afterwards, and leave the bastards sitting in a smoking ruin, without this Nation-Building happy horseshit.

Or, in the final alternative, if we DO engage in Nation-Building, we need to do it far more intelligently, and in a manner consistent with the culture and beliefs of the recipients (former enemies), and in a manner that does not enrich their surviving monied classes, and with less reliance upon trying to re-mold them as Westerners and concentrating more on ensuring that Bad Guys don't return to power afterwards, and we need to do such on a sustained and generous basis, utilizing funding from other treasuries as well as our own.

But... generally speaking... I doubt our ability to Nation-Build in an intelligent fashion... so, if we ARE going to engage in war... we're better off turning the keys over to the UN and let them sort it out (or fail in our stead), once we've cooked-down the Bad Guys and hurry our preparations to walk away.

 

[Kondor3]

[

Kondor's above statement clearly indicates he does not get why we can't nation build now as we did sixty years ago.

Kondor, old buddy, tell us how to do it.

The real problem is the current administration doesn't have a sound policy, they have a destructive and irresponsible one. They believe in this naive idea of intervention and "bringing democracy" to the Middle East by aiding so called "moderate" islamist rebels. The collapse of Libya into a dysfunctional terrorist state, and Syria and Iraq in civil war are the result of this destructive policy.

Bush made a deal with look tada el sadr because we couldn't fight the Sunnis Shiites and am queda all at the same time.

Stop being stupid

What are you even saying? Put together a coherent thought. From what I gather, you are trying to suggest it was Bush's fault that Obama overthrew Gadaffi and armed the "moderate" rebels in Libya and Syria who later turned over their arms to ISIS?

How do you figure?

Just pointing out the ignorant hypocricy of the right

That's OK... the Left has its own share of ignorant hypocrites, as well, so... it's all a wash.

 

[JoeB131]

You have this strange, faulty perception that I - and others who caution against the inherent dangers of Islam - are being manipulated by 'Zionists' and 'Neo-Cons'.

Newsflash, sweet-buns... I reached those conclusions back in the 1970s, after doing some university-level coursework on the subject, and reading the Q'uran cover to cover - a task that I repeated by going out and buying a fresh copy of the Q'uran on September 12, 2001.

Ohhhh.. you studied something at a "university". No doubt one that taught you all about Talking Snakes.

You coming to your racist conclusions by reading the Koran have about as much validity as Charles Manson predicting the end of hte world by listening to the White Album.

I am all for phukking-over Radical Militant Muslims, with overwhelming military power, when they rear their ugly heads, and begin to bother and worry decent folk.

You mean when they won't hand over their oil and give up their holiest land to the Zionists.

Again- they aren't invading us, we're invading THEM. I'm sorry you don't fucking get this or don't want to get this.

Seriously, you are like the rapist who blames his victim for wearing a short skirt.

 

[JoeB131]

Hitler, keeping Stalin penned in? They both divided up Eastern Europe for themselves. Have you not heard of the Molotov Ribbentrop pact?

The West was right to fear Communism, the Iron Curtain that was formed after the war proved those suspicious of Stalin right.

I was speaking of what Western Goals were BEFORE the war started. I'm sorry reading comprehension is somehting you haven't gotten.

 

[JoeB131]

Turks refuse to do anything. The Arabs in Iraq where abandon by Obama. The Kurds needed heavy weapons and still have not gotten much from this pathetic president

Why is it our job to arm Kurdish Communists?

Here's a crazy idea. How about we stop throwing gasoline on the fire.