Saddam got a trial, Qaddafi got a bullet

[California Girl]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/w...ay-qaddafi-stronghold-has-fallen.html?_r=1&hp

You know it amazes me how much history is decided to be right or wrong by what the media says
Without our fighter jest Qaddafi is probably still alive, no congress, no reason we are ever told. Saddam is given years, congress twice concludes we are better off without him by resolve, he is arrested, has a fair trial and hanged for crimes against his own people. Some-how GWB is the bad guy in all of this and not sure what BHO is suppose to be any-more

Dumb ass, Gaddafi was responsible for Lockerby. He ordered the deaths of Americans. His death was well deserved.

Bush went after Hussien, and failed to get Bin Laden, who was responsible for the deaths of 3000 Americans on American soil. Bush invaded Iraq on the basis of lies, and created a worse situation there than already existed.

Those '3000 Americans' were not all Americans. 86 countries lost citizens in the WTC. Show some fucking respect to them.

 

[bripat9643]

Saddam got a trial, Qaddafi got a bullet

Wrong again, Saddam was Lynched - NO TRIAL.

.

Wrong. He had a trial. He wasn't lynched.

 

[California Girl]

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

We weren't 'at war' with Libya. We were part of a NATO action, sanctioned by the UN, to stop Gadaffi from slaughtering his own people.

 

[bripat9643]

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

He did so.

Libya had nothing to do with defending America.

 

[freedombecki]

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

No, I'm not off base. The Constitution is clear about who has the authority to provide for the common defense. That would be the President of the United States. The information was furnished in 2010, the White House warned citizens through the State Department about Libya. Obama himself said in a speech a few months ago that Moammar Gadhafi had to go, though I was so shocked after all these years it was hard to believe finally someone in America was gonna stand up to this serial killer of American citizens, and it takes just about 18 months from receipt and confirmation of hard evidence against a criminal conspirator against citizens of the United States, to execute the decision to remove the thread of an enemy of the people of the USA.

I'm telling you the 100% truth about the Constitution. It's not anybody else's job except the President's. This President doesn't do things your way, he does them his way.

The military saying is "lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way." You're not leading, you're not following, so get out of the way, dude.

You should be happy that finally, this president is catching on to his job description, and he's caught on pretty well after ridding the world of the World's Most Wanted Terrorist, Osama bin Laden, and now, he's ridded the world out of the guy who took his place as the World's Most Wanted Terrorist, Moammar Gadhafi.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

There's nothing ethical about it. Libya was in no way a threat to the United States, and Obama did not get permission from Congress for his little adventure. The cost of an action doesn't determine whether it's ethical.

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

The U.S military does not exist for the purpose of revenge, especially for something that happened 30 years ago.

Your approval is determined solely by whether the person responsible has a (D) or an (R) after his name. Like the rest of the leftwing turds in here, you're just a two-bit partisan hack.

 

[The T]

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

They feared him lest they wind up like the Kurds...

Halabja, Iraq <WARNING: Graphic Images

 

[JRK]

Every-one here misses the biggest point. It is not BHO place in life unless it is to protect this country from immanent attack to be using our military for anything without asking congress, this includes UN or NATO support
For $1 Billion, One Dictator - Kevin Baron - NationalJournal.com
we are not at war with Libya.This is not his private Army people. GWB spent 18 months before we invaded Iraq, if you think there is a difference in killing people with a Drone or a M-16, your not thinking then

 

[Lovebears65]

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.

You can make it what you want to make it but the truth is Obama bombed Libya without Congress approval which is against the constitution . Bush got a by partisan with both Dems and Rep. both approving going into Iraq. Saddam Hussein was killing his own people just like Qaddafi doing the same to his people. Because the left hated Bush they went after him like crazy. Look at Rosie O'Donnell who counted each and every military personal that got KIA but not one word about the ones in Afghanistan. And the money thing. Maybe Obama has not spent as much as Bush but he found to spend more money then Bush in his 3 years on social programs then Bush did his 8 years with 2 wars...

 

[freedombecki]

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

He did so.

Libya had nothing to do with defending America.

Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, was proven to have issued the order to bomb Pan American Flight 103 on December 21, 1988 just last year. We knew he did it, but firm proof was not held by us until January of 2010 when one of Gadhafi's ministers furnished us with irrefutable proof. 179 Americans and citizens of 21 other countries were also killed at this order.

President Obama did his Constitutional Duty when he had certain and irrefutable proof of two of the worst 10 world's terrorists harming American citizens.

The Constitution is clear on who has the authority to provide for the common defense of American citizens, and that would fall to President Obama, his staff, and his military.

 

[Salt Jones]

Every-one here misses the biggest point. It is not BHO place in life unless it is to protect this country from immanent attack to be using our military for anything without asking congress, this includes UN or NATO support
For $1 Billion, One Dictator - Kevin Baron - NationalJournal.com
we are not at war with Libya.This is not his private Army people. GWB spent 18 months before we invaded Iraq, if you think there is a difference in killing people with a Drone or a M-16, your not thinking then

With a drone the person pulling the trigger is in an air conditioned office in Idaho.

 

[Photonic]

Every-one here misses the biggest point. It is not BHO place in life unless it is to protect this country from immanent attack to be using our military for anything without asking congress, this includes UN or NATO support
For $1 Billion, One Dictator - Kevin Baron - NationalJournal.com
we are not at war with Libya.This is not his private Army people. GWB spent 18 months before we invaded Iraq, if you think there is a difference in killing people with a Drone or a M-16, your not thinking then

With a drone the person pulling the trigger is in an air conditioned office in Idaho.

Nevada, Sir.

 

[JRK]

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

He did so.

Libya had nothing to do with defending America.

Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, was proven to have issued the order to bomb Pan American Flight 103 on December 21, 1988 just last year. We knew he did it, but firm proof was not held by us until January of 2010 when one of Gadhafi's ministers furnished us with irrefutable proof. 179 Americans and citizens of 21 other countries were also killed at this order.

President Obama did his Constitutional Duty when he had certain and irrefutable proof of two of the worst 10 world's terrorists harming American citizens.

The Constitution is clear on who has the authority to provide for the common defense of American citizens, and that would fall to President Obama, his staff, and his military.

So what your saying is Bush should have done the same thing with iraq? fuck the constitution and those who died defending it?
Take the hi road brother, Qaddafi did not go 30 years as a person who you defend Obama and what he done to have Obama decide to kill him, and what about Egypt?
And when is Obama going to explain to congress this is why he did this? or have you had this discussion with him?

 

[freedombecki]

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.

There's nothing ethical about it. Libya was in no way a threat to the United States, and Obama did not get permission from Congress for his little adventure. The cost of an action doesn't determine whether it's ethical.

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

The U.S military does not exist for the purpose of revenge, especially for something that happened 30 years ago.

Your approval is determined solely by whether the person responsible has a (D) or an (R) after his name. Like the rest of the leftwing turds in here, you're just a two-bit partisan hack.

The trouble with mentally ill dictators who issue orders to harm civilians is that someday, someone furnishes full proof of their involvement. I'm certain that's the case.

Mentally ill people in power who order civilian assassinations either need to be removed by their own people or by whoever lost civilians to such an assassin.

Libya was an ongoing threat with Moammar Gadhafi as its leader who was trying to protect himself from prosecution for masterminding civilian American deaths. The irrefutable proof took a long time in coming--21 years, to be exact, and now, 23 years later, it's over with Gadhafi's death. He can't order any more American civilian deaths when his meds wear off.

 

[JRK]

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.

There's nothing ethical about it. Libya was in no way a threat to the United States, and Obama did not get permission from Congress for his little adventure. The cost of an action doesn't determine whether it's ethical.

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

The U.S military does not exist for the purpose of revenge, especially for something that happened 30 years ago.

Your approval is determined solely by whether the person responsible has a (D) or an (R) after his name. Like the rest of the leftwing turds in here, you're just a two-bit partisan hack.

The trouble with mentally ill dictators who issue orders to harm civilians is that someday, someone furnishes full proof of their involvement. I'm certain that's the case.

Mentally ill people in power who order civilian assassinations either need to be removed by their own people or by whoever lost civilians to such an assassin.

Libya was an ongoing threat with Moammar Gadhafi as its leader who was trying to protect himself from prosecution for masterminding civilian American deaths. The irrefutable proof took a long time in coming--21 years, to be exact, and now, 23 years later, it's over with Gadhafi's death. He can't order any more American civilian deaths when his meds wear off.

Who decides he is mentally ill? be careful or you will be next. This is about the U.S. constitution
nothing else. for the people, by the people

 

[freedombecki]

Libya had nothing to do with defending America.

Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, was proven to have issued the order to bomb Pan American Flight 103 on December 21, 1988 just last year. We knew he did it, but firm proof was not held by us until January of 2010 when one of Gadhafi's ministers furnished us with irrefutable proof. 179 Americans and citizens of 21 other countries were also killed at this order.

President Obama did his Constitutional Duty when he had certain and irrefutable proof of two of the worst 10 world's terrorists harming American citizens.

The Constitution is clear on who has the authority to provide for the common defense of American citizens, and that would fall to President Obama, his staff, and his military.

So what your saying is Bush should have done the same thing with iraq? fuck the constitution and those who died defending it?
Take the hi road brother, Qaddafi did not go 30 years as a person who you defend Obama and what he done to have Obama decide to kill him, and what about Egypt?
And when is Obama going to explain to congress this is why he did this? or have you had this discussion with him?

That's not what I'm saying. Bush was not president in 2010. Obama is. Very early in 2010, Gadhafi's old minister came forward with proof Gadhafi had issued the order to take out Americans on Pan Am Flight 103 with a bomb of a plastic explosive called Semtex and was activated by a timer. The bomb was hidden in a Toshiba radio-cassette player. Parts of it were found in a wood 80 miles from Lockerbie by a man walking his dog who found a t-shirt containing some of the chips that helped investigators link it to the tragedy at Lockerbie. Most of the wreckage was found within a 50-mile parameter, it was a heinous explosion. When all the pieces of the puzzles came together, along with other intelligence, the stuff was traced to the 2 terrorists eventually convicted of the crime--11 years later. Firm proof of Gadhafi's order was obtained in 2010. Knowing someone did it and having irrefutable proof are completely different. Bush did not have the irrefutable proof, it came on Obama's watch.

Obama acted in accordance with his oath of office according to the Constitution, imho, in this instance.

 

[Uncensored2008]

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

Congratulations!

I'm betting the other 9 are split evenly between Ravi, Jillian and TruthMatters....

 

[JRK]

Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, was proven to have issued the order to bomb Pan American Flight 103 on December 21, 1988 just last year. We knew he did it, but firm proof was not held by us until January of 2010 when one of Gadhafi's ministers furnished us with irrefutable proof. 179 Americans and citizens of 21 other countries were also killed at this order.

President Obama did his Constitutional Duty when he had certain and irrefutable proof of two of the worst 10 world's terrorists harming American citizens.

The Constitution is clear on who has the authority to provide for the common defense of American citizens, and that would fall to President Obama, his staff, and his military.

So what your saying is Bush should have done the same thing with iraq? fuck the constitution and those who died defending it?
Take the hi road brother, Qaddafi did not go 30 years as a person who you defend Obama and what he done to have Obama decide to kill him, and what about Egypt?
And when is Obama going to explain to congress this is why he did this? or have you had this discussion with him?

That's not what I'm saying. Bush was not president in 2010. Obama is. Very early in 2010, Gadhafi's old minister came forward with proof Gadhafi had issued the order to take out Americans on Pan Am Flight 103 with a bomb of a plastic explosive called Semtex and was activated by a timer. The bomb was hidden in a Toshiba radio-cassette player. Parts of it were found in a wood 80 miles from Lockerbie by a man walking his dog who found a t-shirt containing some of the chips that helped investigators link it to the tragedy at Lockerbie. Most of the wreckage was found within a 50-mile parameter, it was a heinous explosion. When all the pieces of the puzzles came together, along with other intelligence, the stuff was traced to the 2 terrorists eventually convicted of the crime--11 years later. Firm proof of Gadhafi's order was obtained in 2010. Knowing someone did it and having irrefutable proof are completely different. Bush did not have the irrefutable proof, it came on Obama's watch.

Obama acted in accordance with his oath of office according to the Constitution, imho, in this instance.

GWB had proof beyond any irrefutable reason that Saddam had been lying, but he went to the US congress and told the american people why and what he was doing
Why?
Because that is what the constitution told him to do.

 

[Mustang]

Yea i hear ya but i do think NATO's bombing and killing his Grandchildren should be thoroughly investigated. I believe that was a War Crime. Human Rights Watch should take the lead on this.

Exactly who is the person or persons who you think should be prosecuted for war crimes?

Who gave the order to bomb the living hell out of them with no involvement from the US congress. Those are not Obama's jets, missiles and drones to do with what ever he wants to do
There the american tax payers

Got a pink slip?

 

[California Girl]

I'm really interested in hearing what Leftist orgs like Human Rights Watch have to say about this. They have a long history of inconsistency and hypocrisy.

i doubt they can say anything, it was a war battle that gadafi was involved in, that got him killed...as others in these battles were killed by gadafi's people.

Yea i hear ya but i do think NATO's bombing and killing his Grandchildren should be thoroughly investigated. I believe that was a War Crime. Human Rights Watch should take the lead on this.