Saddam got a trial, Qaddafi got a bullet

[freedombecki]

Gaddafi Ordered Lockerbie Bombing

Jalil said that Abdelbaser Ali Mohamed Al-Megrahi was personally ordered to carry out the bombing, and that Gaddafi wanted Al-Megrahi released from prison not for humanitarian reasons, but to be sure that Al-Megrahi would not divulge Gaddafi's involvement.

Gadhafi didn't give 270 civilian human beings flying in a plane trial when he ordered a bomb be planted on their airplane. He ordered their mass murder, and he ordered a lot more American murders too.

Not only that, but he claimed his adopted daughter was killed when Reagan sent a missile to his living quarters. Christiana Amanpour just announced on television today that his alleged dead daughter was alive and well, was never killed like he lyingly claimed to take the onus off of his criminal assassination of innocent civilians.

​

My issue is with by passing the constitution. Obama has no more business using our military like he is doing than you do

Obama's constitutional duty is to provide for the common defense.

He did so.

 

[JRK]

Don't be so quick to judge. Don't you remember the day when an American jetliner exploded over Lockerbie Scotland, killing everybody aboard plus 11 Lockerbie residents who died as plane parts hurled to the earth?

The evidence pointed at Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, which at first he denied, and he himself confirmed it in a speech in 2003.

Moammar Gadhafi was a mass murderer of innocent civilians, 159 of whom were Americans. Here's the link, one more time, JRK.

So we are suppose to ignore our constitution? and how many innocent civilians had Saddam killed? we did that one per the constitution
Obama is not a fucking dictator bud, that military he plays god with is mine and yours and the people who represent us has had no say in this

Gadhafi's takeout of the Pan Am Flight 103 was an act of war, JRK. We had the rumor in 2003 he'd told people he ordered it, then in 2010, his minister said he ordered it. Our military acted in compliance with (1) significant evidence that indeed, Gadhafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which is an act of war, and it is a heinous act of war to take out a military plan against civilians, knowing full well they are a civilian and not a military power. NATO believed it also.

If Obama's generals convinced him the Libyan strongman indeed inflicted an act of war against innocent American civilians, and they showed certain documentation, he'd be within his constitutional duty to provide for the common defense against such a heinous predator.

This scares me more than any event going on in our country today
fuck the constitution
Dude there is not words as to how far over the line this event is. Obama is not god. GWB waited 18 months to invade Iraq for this very reason

 

[bripat9643]

America did not invade Libya.

We bombed the crap out of it, nimrod. Only the clinically retarded would believe that not sending ground troops in makes any kind of ethical difference.

 

[bripat9643]

Rightwing nuts who were for the Iraq war now opposed any action in Libya because a Democrat was president.

End of story.

And visa-versa for hypocritical leftwing turds like you.

End of story.

 

[Old Rocks]

In their own words the left claims neither was a direct threat, so why is Obama pounding his chest over a mission he washed his hands of yet now he wants a victory lap, considering he saw fit to be highly critical of another(Iraq)?

I just want to hear Obama supporters opinions.

Dumb fuck. The Libyans did the fighting, we just helped to even the fight. The Libyans will determine Libya's future, we will not be in hock to the tune of 3 trillion for Libya like in Iraq. And Gaddafi had American blood on his hands. Justice long delayed.

 

[JRK]

No question
He is not god and that military equipment is not his to do with as he damn well pleases
right, wrong i do not care
GWB waited 18 months to rid the world of Saddam, no short cuts where taken and you Libs dogged him for 8 years
now this and he is hero?

It is so far outside the constitution, we shall see


merging with your EXISTING thread

 

[bripat9643]

Iraq would have been acceptable if Iraqis were rising up against Saddam.

Like back when Bush 1 promised to help them if they did and then didn't follow through.

When we invaded, Iraqis were happy enough with their dictator.

Your post has just been nominated for 10 Dumbest Posts of all Time list.

Congratulations!

 

[Old Rocks]

America did not invade Libya.

We bombed the crap out of it, nimrod. Only the clinically retarded would believe that not sending ground troops in makes any kind of ethical difference.

Dumbass Pattycake. What we did was ethical. And cost less than two billion. Hell, in Iraq, Halliburton alone stole many times more than that by themselves.

Lockerbie, justice long delayed, finally done. Thank you, Libyan Rebels.

 

[Salt Jones]

I was in the military doing Iraq, I thought ans still think it was a waste. I work in the defense industry now and increased need for weapons pays my bills and feathers my retirement nest. I barely care about my fellow Americans and I really don't give a damn what happens to non-Americans. That's why Libya is acceptable and Iraq wasn't.

 

[Rocko]

Why Is Libya Acceptable But Not Iraq?

The Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 Over Lockerbie, Scotland

Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

how come none of you libs demanded any action until now?

 

[freedombecki]

So we are suppose to ignore our constitution? and how many innocent civilians had Saddam killed? we did that one per the constitution
Obama is not a fucking dictator bud, that military he plays god with is mine and yours and the people who represent us has had no say in this

Gadhafi's takeout of the Pan Am Flight 103 was an act of war, JRK. We had the rumor in 2003 he'd told people he ordered it, then in 2010, his minister said he ordered it. Our military acted in compliance with (1) significant evidence that indeed, Gadhafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which is an act of war, and it is a heinous act of war to take out a military plan against civilians, knowing full well they are a civilian and not a military power. NATO believed it also.

If Obama's generals convinced him the Libyan strongman indeed inflicted an act of war against innocent American civilians, and they showed certain documentation, he'd be within his constitutional duty to provide for the common defense against such a heinous predator.

This scares me more than any event going on in our country today
fuck the constitution
Dude there is not words as to how far over the line this event is. Obama is not god. GWB waited 18 months to invade Iraq for this very reason

Hey, you need to read the Constitution. It says right there the President of the United States' duty is to provide for the common defense.

We had no proof until early last year (2010) that Moammar Gadhafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Gadhafi's own minister fessed up early in early 2010, and I'm certain he furnished irrefutable documentation of the order or our military would never have called their findings to the attention of the Oval Office.

Seems to me, it is about the same amount of time (18 months or so) between receipt of proof of Gadhafi's involvement and today's event.

Your problem, sir, is not with me, it is with the United States Constitution that makes it plain a President's duty.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm sure the hundreds of thousands he murdered and put in mass graves adored his ass.

If they existed....the current population under Saddam didn't seem to care that much.

Sorry you didn't like the answer.

ROFL! How would you know? Did you interview them all?

I've seen and read tons of material about how the families of Saddam's victims feel him. Your description doesn't come within 1000 miles of the mark.

 

[The T]

No question
He is not god and that military equipment is not his to do with as he damn well pleases
right, wrong i do not care
GWB waited 18 months to rid the world of Saddam, no short cuts where taken and you Libs dogged him for 8 years
now this and he is hero?

It is so far outside the constitution, we shall see

Clinton used the same tactic when his creds were suffering...Clinton succeeded in bombing an aspirin factory and killing a janitor that happened to be in the building as a bonus...

 

[bripat9643]

We did not march in and occupy Lybia. We did it with internal and external support, it was a real coalition, not just another USA and GB enterprise

Another bullshit claim that doesn't hold up under inspection.

 

[JRK]

Gadhafi's takeout of the Pan Am Flight 103 was an act of war, JRK. We had the rumor in 2003 he'd told people he ordered it, then in 2010, his minister said he ordered it. Our military acted in compliance with (1) significant evidence that indeed, Gadhafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which is an act of war, and it is a heinous act of war to take out a military plan against civilians, knowing full well they are a civilian and not a military power. NATO believed it also.

If Obama's generals convinced him the Libyan strongman indeed inflicted an act of war against innocent American civilians, and they showed certain documentation, he'd be within his constitutional duty to provide for the common defense against such a heinous predator.

This scares me more than any event going on in our country today
fuck the constitution
Dude there is not words as to how far over the line this event is. Obama is not god. GWB waited 18 months to invade Iraq for this very reason

Hey, you need to read the Constitution. It says right there the President of the United States' duty is to provide for the common defense.

We had no proof until early last year (2010) that Moammar Gadhafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Gadhafi's own minister fessed up early in early 2010, and I'm certain he furnished irrefutable documentation of the order or our military would never have called their findings to the attention of the Oval Office.

Seems to me, it is about the same amount of time (18 months or so) between receipt of proof of Gadhafi's involvement and today's event.

Your problem, sir, is not with me, it is with the United States Constitution that makes it plain a President's duty.

I have no issue with you, I have an issue with any president who thinks he can go and do the things BHO is doing without a declaration of war. Bud your off base and you know it. It is not his place in life to attack a sovereign nation, especially its president without congress giving him the ok, if so GWB would not have waited 18 months to deal with saddam

 

[bripat9643]

Bush tried to assassinate Saddam on the first day of the war.

So?

Obama did assassinate Gadaffi and Osama bin Laden. When you go to war with a country, the leader of that country is fair game. That has always been the case.

 

[JRK]

We did not march in and occupy Lybia. We did it with internal and external support, it was a real coalition, not just another USA and GB enterprise

Another bullshit claim that doesn't hold up under inspection.

support?
we had over 50 nations support us in Iraq, but you know who supported us the most in iraq?

THE US CONGRESS MOONGLOW
YOU THINK OBAMA IS GOD MOONGLOW?

 

[bripat9643]

The difference is that American forces caught Saddam and had him in custody and could control what happened. If Iraqi forces had caught him, he would have died on the spot too.

According to NYbeaner, the people of Iraq were indifferent about Saddam

 

[JRK]

Bush tried to assassinate Saddam on the first day of the war.

So?

Obama did assassinate Gadaffi and Osama bin Laden. When you go to war with a country, the leader of that country is fair game. That has always been the case.

We have no deceleration of war with Libya, that is THE issue

 

[healthmyths]

You wrote:Can you answer/explain that ?

The right was far more universally for the invasion of Iraq than the left was.
__________________

Geez how much more clear can it be?
Saddam signed 1991 CEASE FIRE are you aware of that?
That agreement stopped but didn't end the 1991 war!
Now I know this may be hard to understand but when Saddam signed 1991 agreement he AGREED that if any abrogation of the agreement occurred the conflict as REID said would resume!
That's what gave authority Saddam did when he broke the 1991 agreement and then Congress in 1998 and again in 2002 majority both times gave approval!
WHERE WAS THE SAME WITH Libya?

Tell me so I understand.. If you signed an agreement that called for cessation of conflict that YOU STARTED i.e. invaded Kuwait, and that agreement contained a clause that clearly stated YOU had to keep all the terms.. and then for 10 years you continued to break the agreement... do you not think you breaking the agreement provides authority to continue the conflict started BY you in 1991?
YOU being Saddam in case you don't get it!