Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

[the_human_being]

English either, apparently.

how very witty you are...

we were talking about oil...did you have a point you wanted to make? something about "parties" and imports...

...and try to stay on topic and leave me and your opinion of me out of it if you can.
See, I'm an adult and I couldn't care less what you think of me.... and I'm sure no one else here cares either.

Then follow the thread. Duhhhh. You stated we had plenty of oil on this continent. I simply asked you how long it would take for you to bring it in. No rocket science here, pure third grade reading comprehension.

Your question makes no sense and is just an excuse for you to act out and type insulting remarks implying that I have a less than third grade education...it's comical, though...I think that someone who uses "Duhhhh" as a word in a post to "express" themselves is pretty juvenile.

So...back to the topic..
What exactly is the data you want me to provide? current active rig count in the u.s.?..canada? the gulf of mexico?..Daily production rates?...Look, it takes as long to "bring it in" as it does every other day of the week.

Now..you mentioned something about my "party" not letting "me" do something but you got distracted by the urge to type something snarky and weren't able to coherently explain yourself...Want to try again?

So, what is it you allege "my" "party" won't let me do?

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

 

[Rotagilla]

how very witty you are...

we were talking about oil...did you have a point you wanted to make? something about "parties" and imports...

...and try to stay on topic and leave me and your opinion of me out of it if you can.
See, I'm an adult and I couldn't care less what you think of me.... and I'm sure no one else here cares either.

Then follow the thread. Duhhhh. You stated we had plenty of oil on this continent. I simply asked you how long it would take for you to bring it in. No rocket science here, pure third grade reading comprehension.

Your question makes no sense and is just an excuse for you to act out and type insulting remarks implying that I have a less than third grade education...it's comical, though...I think that someone who uses "Duhhhh" as a word in a post to "express" themselves is pretty juvenile.

So...back to the topic..
What exactly is the data you want me to provide? current active rig count in the u.s.?..canada? the gulf of mexico?..Daily production rates?...Look, it takes as long to "bring it in" as it does every other day of the week.

Now..you mentioned something about my "party" not letting "me" do something but you got distracted by the urge to type something snarky and weren't able to coherently explain yourself...Want to try again?

So, what is it you allege "my" "party" won't let me do?

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

 

[the_human_being]

Then follow the thread. Duhhhh. You stated we had plenty of oil on this continent. I simply asked you how long it would take for you to bring it in. No rocket science here, pure third grade reading comprehension.

Your question makes no sense and is just an excuse for you to act out and type insulting remarks implying that I have a less than third grade education...it's comical, though...I think that someone who uses "Duhhhh" as a word in a post to "express" themselves is pretty juvenile.

So...back to the topic..
What exactly is the data you want me to provide? current active rig count in the u.s.?..canada? the gulf of mexico?..Daily production rates?...Look, it takes as long to "bring it in" as it does every other day of the week.

Now..you mentioned something about my "party" not letting "me" do something but you got distracted by the urge to type something snarky and weren't able to coherently explain yourself...Want to try again?

So, what is it you allege "my" "party" won't let me do?

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

 

[Rotagilla]

Your question makes no sense and is just an excuse for you to act out and type insulting remarks implying that I have a less than third grade education...it's comical, though...I think that someone who uses "Duhhhh" as a word in a post to "express" themselves is pretty juvenile.

So...back to the topic..
What exactly is the data you want me to provide? current active rig count in the u.s.?..canada? the gulf of mexico?..Daily production rates?...Look, it takes as long to "bring it in" as it does every other day of the week.

Now..you mentioned something about my "party" not letting "me" do something but you got distracted by the urge to type something snarky and weren't able to coherently explain yourself...Want to try again?

So, what is it you allege "my" "party" won't let me do?

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

 

[LordBrownTrout]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Your buffoon, O, killed gaddafi. Funny you only mentioned saddam.

 

[Camp]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Your buffoon, O, killed gaddafi. Funny you only mentioned saddam.

Thank God, it was long overdue for that fucking murderer who blew up PAN AM 103 over Lockerbie. Every President since Reagan who caused that terrorist attack and the ones who followed with inaction has a shameful mark next to their name for not doing the job Obama finally finished.

 

[S.J.]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Your buffoon, O, killed gaddafi. Funny you only mentioned saddam.

Thank God, it was long overdue for that fucking murderer who blew up PAN AM 103 over Lockerbie. Every President since Reagan who caused that terrorist attack and the ones who followed with inaction has a shameful mark next to their name for not doing the job Obama finally finished.

Yeah, Reagan caused the attack.

 

[Syriusly]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

The Middle East would be safer from Islamic extremists, and that would include Iran.

Dictators like Qaddafi and Saddam and Syria's Assad are more than willing to murder thousands of their citizens to keep them in line.

Of course dictators like Qaddafi also targeted American citizen's with state sponsored- non-Islamic terrorism.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Your buffoon, O, killed gaddafi. Funny you only mentioned saddam.

Thank God, it was long overdue for that fucking murderer who blew up PAN AM 103 over Lockerbie. Every President since Reagan who caused that terrorist attack and the ones who followed with inaction has a shameful mark next to their name for not doing the job Obama finally finished.

Saddam killed between 250,000 to 500,000. But you're against saddam's death because bush got him.

 

[the_human_being]

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

 

[Rotagilla]

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

 

[the_human_being]

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

 

[Rotagilla]

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

LMAO..shut you down for asking ridiculous questions and you play like it's MY fault......comical...

 

[the_human_being]

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

LMAO..shut you down for asking ridiculous questions and you play like it's MY fault......comical...

You can't even read beyond the second grade level.

 

[Rotagilla]

no..you go for hyperbole and exaggeration as usual...no one "went haywire"..
...and since you're just making things up as you go I'll say we could be energy independent by wednesday at 3:17 p.m. central time..it doesn't matter about what time it could happen.That's a non issue...but it's all you have now....you're just trying to deflect...

this country could be 100% energy independent...we don't need opec oil...

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

LMAO..shut you down for asking ridiculous questions and you play like it's MY fault......comical...

You can't even read beyond the second grade level.

Oh, my..I'm grievously wounded....

why are you trying to change the subject?

 

[the_human_being]

Could be. Could be. Could be. But it isn't. And it won't be by Wednesday at 3:17 in the year 2020.

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

LMAO..shut you down for asking ridiculous questions and you play like it's MY fault......comical...

You can't even read beyond the second grade level.

Oh, my..I'm grievously wounded....

why are you trying to change the subject?

Because I'm tired of playing games with a child.

 

[Slyhunter]

Your question makes no sense and is just an excuse for you to act out and type insulting remarks implying that I have a less than third grade education...it's comical, though...I think that someone who uses "Duhhhh" as a word in a post to "express" themselves is pretty juvenile.

So...back to the topic..
What exactly is the data you want me to provide? current active rig count in the u.s.?..canada? the gulf of mexico?..Daily production rates?...Look, it takes as long to "bring it in" as it does every other day of the week.

Now..you mentioned something about my "party" not letting "me" do something but you got distracted by the urge to type something snarky and weren't able to coherently explain yourself...Want to try again?

So, what is it you allege "my" "party" won't let me do?

Ok. I'll make it as simple as I can: You admit we do import some oil from OPEC. You also say we import oil from Canada. We also import oil from Venezuela. Could one conclude then that we do not produce enough oil ourselves to meet our own demands? Then if we are not meeting our own demands, my question is: How long would it take you to get up to producing enough of our own oil to meet our demands? Six months? One year? Five years? I next stated that the Democrat party will not allow you to drill new wells if you still have to hunt for the oil necessary to meet our demands. I hope that is simple enough for you.

You are clueless about oil, that much is apparent.
This country could be 100% energy independent...if the government and the leftists wanted it to be.

Oh..the DEMOCRATIC party..THAT'S the party you meant when you said "my party" wouldn't allow it..

Well, son..I don't have a party..I have a country... and NEITHER party works for what's best for the country, so at this point after hearing the same old BS from politicians on BOTH sides for decades, I'm an anarchist..

Let it all collapse..we'll draw some new borders, make some "adjustments" and reconstruct what's left.

I agree that this country COULD be 100% energy independent - but it certainly isn't. That was my whole point. I wanted to know how long it was going to take you to become so.

what is this business of constantly using the word "you"?
This has nothing to do with me personally...So far you've tried to imply that i was a democrat..then you want to know how long it will take "me" to "bring in the oil"...

Trying to link "me" to a poor u.s. energy policy isn't going to get you very far.
you hyperpartisans have one track minds...

Well, You're the one who claimed we had enough oil on this continent that we didn't need OPEC. I simply asked you how long before you could get it in production and you went totally haywire about it.

The sooner we get started the sooner it gets produced. If we never start because of how long it'll take to get done it'll never get done.

 

[Rotagilla]

don't ask ridiculous "questions" and you won't get ridiculous answers...cause and effect...

No. You run off at the mouth and make statements you know are wrong before you make them.

LMAO..shut you down for asking ridiculous questions and you play like it's MY fault......comical...

You can't even read beyond the second grade level.

Oh, my..I'm grievously wounded....

why are you trying to change the subject?

Because I'm tired of playing games with a child.

who is a child?

 

[deltex1]

Trump is 100% correct.

Thanks to the idiotic US foreign policy we have certainly succeeded in removing all stability from the Middle East and encouraged radical Islam to continue its quest of domination.

Saddam and Gaddafi were bad but the alternative has proved to be not only bad, but ghastly!

The alternative is provided courtesy of The Gonad...The Man Who Does Nothing...The Magic Neeeeeeeeeegro. Amen, yo....

 

[Camp]

"It's not even a contest."

Donald Trump said Sunday that the Middle East would be more stable if Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi were still in power.

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he thought the region would be "safer" with Hussein and Gaddafi ruling Iraq and Libya, respectively, the real estate mogul and ersatz Republican presidential candidate replied, "It's not even a contest."

Trump reasoned that had the United States not forced Hussein out of power in Iraq, the Islamic State would not have come into existence.

More: Donald Trump: Middle East Would Be Better Off With Saddam, Gaddafi

Amen! I totally agree! Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool.

Your buffoon, O, killed gaddafi. Funny you only mentioned saddam.

Thank God, it was long overdue for that fucking murderer who blew up PAN AM 103 over Lockerbie. Every President since Reagan who caused that terrorist attack and the ones who followed with inaction has a shameful mark next to their name for not doing the job Obama finally finished.

Yeah, Reagan caused the attack.

Correct. Reagan failed to retaliate in strength after the Disco bombing. The retaliation included bombing Qaddafi's home and while missing Qaddafi, managed to allegedly kill his daughter. This was a great insult to the Libyan leader who was vying for the title as leader of a coalition of Arab states. Custom required revenge for his daughters death and he vowed to have revenge. The attack on PAN AM was the Christian holiday revenge he promised.
Qaddafi attacked American military personnel with a terrorist attack in Germany. Reagan responded with a weak and ineffective one night bombing raid when a devastating attack that should have continued until Qaddafi was brought to the negotiating table for a negotiated halt that brought about a vow not to conduct terrorist attacks against Americans, not a vow to kill Americans in the future. Of course this was after the world knew the kind of response that could be expected from Reagan. His lame responses to the Embassy bombing in Beirut followed by the lame response to the Barracks bombing shortly thereafter proved Reagan's lack of courage to respond to terrorist attacks.