The Orlanado Terror Attack Means Trump Just Won the Election

[bripat9643]

The blood is squarely on the hands of Barack Obama and the Dumbocrats. He refused to acknowledge muslim terrorism, he refused to address the ISIS problem, and he did everything in his power to make sure we had no border security in hopes of creating permanent Dumbocrat power.

Hillary and Obama created ISIS by pulling our troops out of Iraq. He actually trained them when they were only a group fighting the Assad regime in Syria.

 

[guno]

How can Hillary win with this blood on her hands?

1. Hillary supports Obama's policy of importing Muslims "refugees."
2. Hillary has no intention of limiting immigration from Muslim countries.
3. Hillary won't even use the words "radical Islam."
4. Hillary supports disarming the American public.

Am I "politicizing" this tragedy? Sure, when have Democrats ever refrained from politicizing any issue? Events like this are precisely why we don't want Hillary in the White House.

sorry, not enough backward inbred christ stains to elect dumph

 

[Contumacious]

The blood is squarely on the hands of Barack Obama and the Dumbocrats. He refused to acknowledge muslim terrorism, he refused to address the ISIS problem, and he did everything in his power to make sure we had no border security in hopes of creating permanent Dumbocrat power.

Hillary and Obama created ISIS by pulling our troops out of Iraq. He actually trained them when they were only a group fighting the Assad regime in Syria.

Incorrect.

After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria.

In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort.

The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.


.

 

[P@triot]

The blood is squarely on the hands of Barack Obama and the Dumbocrats. He refused to acknowledge muslim terrorism, he refused to address the ISIS problem, and he did everything in his power to make sure we had no border security in hopes of creating permanent Dumbocrat power.

Hillary and Obama created ISIS by pulling our troops out of Iraq. He actually trained them when they were only a group fighting the Assad regime in Syria.

I don't know about "trained them" but he certainly armed them in Syria to fight Assad.

 

[P@triot]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

 

[Contumacious]

The blood is squarely on the hands of Barack Obama and the Dumbocrats. He refused to acknowledge muslim terrorism, he refused to address the ISIS problem, and he did everything in his power to make sure we had no border security in hopes of creating permanent Dumbocrat power.

Hillary and Obama created ISIS by pulling our troops out of Iraq. He actually trained them when they were only a group fighting the Assad regime in Syria.

I don't know about "trained them" but he certainly armed them in Syria to fight Assad.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT.


Syrian Opposition’s Amazing CIA Credentials

 

[Contumacious]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.


"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

 

[P@triot]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

 

[Contumacious]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

Incorrect , Syria's previous prime Minister was Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's dad.

Research, learn, then , and only then, repost

 

[P@triot]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

Incorrect , Syria's previous prime Minister was Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's dad.
Research, learn, then , and only then, repost

Dude....what the hell are you talking about? I never said one word about the previous leader before Assad. I'm well aware of the fact that his dad was the ruler before him. What does that have to do with your misinformation that Obama had to involve himself in Syria due to a duty to Netanyahu and Israel?!?

Read. Comprehend. Then, and only then, don't try to cover up your previous misinformation with nonsensical replies.

 

[jwoodie]

The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

=Damning with faint praise. Don't you ever get tired of making excuses?

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's gotta be tough when the guy you support for POTUS needs people to die in order to win an election.

 

[Contumacious]

Incorrect. After WAR CRIMINAL BUSH invaded Iraq , the Sunnis were displaced into Syria. In Syria the Sunnis became the Syrian Resistance trying to replace Assad because Assad is NOT a Sunni. South Arabia joined the effort. The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

Incorrect , Syria's previous prime Minister was Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's dad.
Research, learn, then , and only then, repost

Dude....what the hell are you talking about? I never said one word about the previous leader before Assad. I'm well aware of the fact that his dad was the ruler before him. What does that have to do with your misinformation that Obama had to involve himself in Syria due to a duty to Netanyahu and Israel?!?

Read. Comprehend. Then, and only then, don't try to cover up your previous misinformation with nonsensical replies.

HUH


Didn't the Secretary of State just released Hillary's emails wherein she admits that the US invaded Syria to defend Israel.


Do you pay attention?

 

[Contumacious]

The Obama Administration proceeded to help the Sunnis aka, the Syrian Resistance. The Syrian Resistance became ISIS. The Obama administration continue to help them because he did not want to place US troops on the ground in Syria.

=Damning with faint praise. Don't you ever get tired of making excuses?

HUH

WTF

One more time in ENGLISH

 

[jwoodie]

It's gotta be tough when the guy you support for POTUS needs people to die in order to win an election.

It's gotta be tough when people have to die before you wake up.

 

[P@triot]

So then why not stay the hell out of it all together? History has proven that a vicious dictator is exponentially better than muslims, Sharia Law, etc.

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

Incorrect , Syria's previous prime Minister was Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's dad.
Research, learn, then , and only then, repost

Dude....what the hell are you talking about? I never said one word about the previous leader before Assad. I'm well aware of the fact that his dad was the ruler before him. What does that have to do with your misinformation that Obama had to involve himself in Syria due to a duty to Netanyahu and Israel?!?

Read. Comprehend. Then, and only then, don't try to cover up your previous misinformation with nonsensical replies.

HUH. Didn't the Secretary of State just released Hillary's emails wherein she admits that the US invaded Syria to defend Israel. Do you pay attention?

And that has to do with Assad's father......how?

 

[Contumacious]

It's gotta be tough when the guy you support for POTUS needs people to die in order to win an election.

That's the way it is here in these US of A

residents of Pearl Harbor - FDR
1.5 Million Palestinians - Harry S Truman
sailors and the USS Liberty - LBJ

.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's gotta be tough when the guy you support for POTUS needs people to die in order to win an election.

It's gotta be tough when people have to die before you wake up.

Wide awake. We live in the safest America that has ever existed. Fear of terrorists is for ignorant people.

 

[Contumacious]

I agree that the US should have never entered the fray.

But the US had made prior commitments to Bibi and the Jewish State.
"
This doctrine was prefigured in a 1996 paper prepared for then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a working group consisting of several individuals who are now in top spots in the Bush administration. "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" recommended that Israel set itself free from its embarrassing and debilitating dependence on U.S. military and diplomatic support: no matter how unconditional, this support constrained Israel and prevented it from pursuing its true interests. The paper, co-authored by Richard Perle, James Colbert,Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, portrayed Syria as the main enemy of Israel, but maintained the road to Damascus had to first pass through Baghdad:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq."

That's nonsensical. Assad has been leader of Syria for 16 years. If we had a responsibility to Bibi and Isreal over it - we would have been in there in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama hates Bibi and Isreal. He's disregarded many commitments the U.S. has to them. So why would Syria be any different? The fact is - Obama loves islam. That's why the Middle East has been on fire since he took over. Because he's engaged in operations all over the Middle East to over throw dictators and replace them with islamic sharia law.

Incorrect , Syria's previous prime Minister was Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's dad.
Research, learn, then , and only then, repost

Dude....what the hell are you talking about? I never said one word about the previous leader before Assad. I'm well aware of the fact that his dad was the ruler before him. What does that have to do with your misinformation that Obama had to involve himself in Syria due to a duty to Netanyahu and Israel?!?

Read. Comprehend. Then, and only then, don't try to cover up your previous misinformation with nonsensical replies.

HUH. Didn't the Secretary of State just released Hillary's emails wherein she admits that the US invaded Syria to defend Israel. Do you pay attention?

And that has to do with Assad's father......how?

Listen dingleberry , don't tell me you suffer of alzheimer's

American Likudnicks and Israel have declared that Syria has to be destroyed - can't do it with Assad in power.

You gave me the bullshit that Obama hates Israel . Well , he may , but political correctness requires hat he grin and bear otherwise he will destroy the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton in the process.

Quit being a fucktard and assimilate.

 

[bripat9643]

It's gotta be tough when the guy you support for POTUS needs people to die in order to win an election.

It's gotta be tough when people have to die before you wake up.

Wide awake. We live in the safest America that has ever existed. Fear of terrorists is for ignorant people.

So those people who were shot in Pulse where ignorant?