Obama: Nobel PEACE Prize Winner 7 1/2 Years Later....

[Fenton Lum]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

So you finally admit he sucks as a and should return his peace prize?

"I got UBL!"

You don't often hear a Nobel Peace Prize Winner bragging about how he killed someone.... just sayin'....

This is just an example of the twisted fucking logic of the right. Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. This is the kind of stupidity that got Trump where he is today. And have you firmly placed up his ass

Your dear messiah could have turned it down in the first place.


.

Your own personal designation of someone as Satan doesn't indicate your Satan is anyone else's messiah.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This is proof positive that the opinion of our politicians that the rest of the world holds is fucking worthless. Absolutely 100% worthless

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Trump

4 bankrupt businesses
3500 civil suits
1 FRAUD case pending


LIFETIME Nobel Crooked Bastard Award

Hillary Clinton

Still deciding what to do with that 3am phone call.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

"I got UBL!"

You don't often hear a Nobel Peace Prize Winner bragging about how he killed someone.... just sayin'....

This is just an example of the twisted fucking logic of the right. Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. This is the kind of stupidity that got Trump where he is today. And have you firmly placed up his ass

I have no problem with Obama bombing terrorists. No problem at all. But its pretty fucking stupid to preemptively award him a Peace Prize for it.

Again, he did not seek it. And if you bother to check the timeline he was awarded it before he started bombing. And then if you actually dig a little deeper you'll see that the Nobel committee actually publicly regretted giving him the award after he started bombing.

This thread is meaningless and stupid just like its original author.

The irony is how deep the right has to keep digging to try to find something on Obama and they come up with empty shit like this.

 

[LaDexter]

The Peace Prize was clearly an "affirmative action" award for precisely no merit presented.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

I guess the Nobel Peace Prize should not be given for 'Potential'.

I guess you jealous.

Why would someone be jealous of THIS?

Nations Obama Has Bombed
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com
AFGHANISTAN
PAKISTAN
LIBYA
YEMEN
SOMALIA
IRAQ
SYRIA

Groups Obama Has Trained / Funded / Armed
Obama Proposes $500 Million to Aid Syrian Rebels
Blowback! U.S. trained Islamists who joined ISIS
Obama’s New 'Anti-Islamic State' Czar Advocated Funding Hamas Government - Breitbart
The Muslim Brotherhood
Mexican Drug Cartels
Haqqani Network
Al Qaeida
ISIS

 

[LaDexter]

And, of course, O left the Mossad in charge of the CIA for another 8 years...

 

[Timmy]

Is too aggressive wh terrorists or is he doing nothing against radical Islamists ??

You righties need to make up your mind .

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

Actually there are citizens who are opposed to all of it no matter whose "at the wheel".
But your 6 multinational corporate controlled media will not be bringing that to your door step.
And then a goo dmany of you don't want to deal with that anyway.

Right just more protest when its a Republican in the big chair. Face it those who protest war don't want to make to big of a stink for the current administration because they are afraid to be labeled racist which is what happens when you disagree with Obama.

I love the condescending tone people like yourself have towards those who don't believe the way you do. War is necessary and there will never be the utopia people like you are always hoping for not without a shit ton of dead bodies paving the way.

 

[BlindBoo]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

I have no problem with any president who bombs those who attack us. However I do have a problem with a president who attacks an oil rich Arab nation that was not a threat to the USA nor did they participate in the 9-11 attacks against us.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

I have no problem with any president who bombs those who attack us. However I do have a problem with a president who attacks an oil rich Arab nation that was not a threat to the USA nor did they participate in the 9-11 attacks against us.

You probably think the rhetoric on Iraq started with the GW Bush administration.

 

[LaDexter]

You probably think the rhetoric on Iraq started with the GW Bush administration

Actually, the desire to lie to start a US-Iraq war starts with Hillary's likely future NSA Advisor, Madeleine Allbright, who pushed General Hugh Shelton in 1998 to "fly a U2 over Iraq low enough and slow enough for Saddam to shoot it down and start the war we want." .. the WE being Tenet, Burglar, Cohen, and Allbright, the ISRAEL Lobby in Bill Clintons National Security team...

Gen. Hugh Shelton: Clinton Official Suggested Letting U.S. Plane Be Shot Down To Provoke War With Iraq

 

[BlindBoo]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

I have no problem with any president who bombs those who attack us. However I do have a problem with a president who attacks an oil rich Arab nation that was not a threat to the USA nor did they participate in the 9-11 attacks against us.

You probably think the rhetoric on Iraq started with the GW Bush administration.

You lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas.

U.S. Secretly Gave Aid to Iraq Early in Its War Against Iran

WASHINGTON, Jan. 25— The Reagan Administration secretly decided to provide highly classified intelligence to Iraq in the spring of 1982 -- more than two years earlier than previously disclosed -- while also permitting the sale of American-made arms to Baghdad in a successful effort to help President Saddam Hussein avert imminent defeat in the war with Iran, former intelligence and State Department officials say.

The American decision to lend crucial help to Baghdad so early in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war came after American intelligence agencies warned that Iraq was on the verge of being overrun by Iran, whose army was bolstered the year before by covert shipments of American-made weapons.

 

[Fenton Lum]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

Actually there are citizens who are opposed to all of it no matter whose "at the wheel".
But your 6 multinational corporate controlled media will not be bringing that to your door step.
And then a good many of you don't want to deal with that anyway.

Right just more protest when its a Republican in the big chair. Face it those who protest war don't want to make to big of a stink for the current administration because they are afraid to be labeled racist which is what happens when you disagree with Obama.

I love the condescending tone people like yourself have towards those who don't believe the way you do. War is necessary and there will never be the utopia people like you are always hoping for not without a shit ton of dead bodies paving the way.

I haven't seen any indication at all that anyone's holding back on this administration, must be the media bubble you prefer. We haven't had a necessary war since WWII. What we do sf profit from war and we conduct it on the behalf of the “job creator” class and capital globalists who want access to the markets and resources of others. Plenty of folks have been on the droner in chief’s ass about this, mostly those you hate and sneer “liberals” at, with a great deal of condescension I might add. Trillions and trillions and trillions spent on nothing but generating more war and terrorism while economically hollowing society for the unsubstantial people at home. Very North Koreaish.

 

[Fenton Lum]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

I have no problem with any president who bombs those who attack us. However I do have a problem with a president who attacks an oil rich Arab nation that was not a threat to the USA nor did they participate in the 9-11 attacks against us.

Logic and being rational just confuses the hell out of fearful folk running on emotion.

 

[Fenton Lum]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

I have no problem with any president who bombs those who attack us. However I do have a problem with a president who attacks an oil rich Arab nation that was not a threat to the USA nor did they participate in the 9-11 attacks against us.

You probably think the rhetoric on Iraq started with the GW Bush administration.

You lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas.

U.S. Secretly Gave Aid to Iraq Early in Its War Against Iran

WASHINGTON, Jan. 25— The Reagan Administration secretly decided to provide highly classified intelligence to Iraq in the spring of 1982 -- more than two years earlier than previously disclosed -- while also permitting the sale of American-made arms to Baghdad in a successful effort to help President Saddam Hussein avert imminent defeat in the war with Iran, former intelligence and State Department officials say.

The American decision to lend crucial help to Baghdad so early in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war came after American intelligence agencies warned that Iraq was on the verge of being overrun by Iran, whose army was bolstered the year before by covert shipments of American-made weapons.

Especially with regard to the middle east, we keep doing this, over and over. Sadam, Osama, arming folk who in turn, turn those arms against us. Propping up a terrorist state like Israel. Never ends, just like the wars. It is our new way of being in the world; endless war.

 

[jknowgood]

I guess we shouldn’t have gone after the terrorists in those areas?

You lefties seem to have a problem with it when there is a Republican at the wheel.

Only when invading the wrong nations...

For it until your against it right ?

"Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."
-- Sen. John Edwards (D, NC) Feb. 24, 2002

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." "
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed. We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D, MA) Sep. 27, 2002

"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
-- State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois) Oct. 2, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
-- Senator John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002

"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."
-- Sen. Harry Reid (D. NV) Oct. 9, 2002


"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. CA) Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)

I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003

Anything after 2001 is when GWB started cooking the intel.
Before that…just better judgement by the Clinton administration judging from the intel and threat.

That lie has been debunked.