I stand with President Obama

[DemocratSinceBirth]

[Sherman A1]

1. I do love TR

He was flawed as are we all and we may disagree about particular issues, but you pretty much knew where he stood.

[zipplewrath]

2. I support Obama

By joining one the choruses of voices that tell him when he is wrong, and when he is right.

[bigwillq]

3. I don't (nt)

[cwydro]

153. I don't either.

This is a massive mistake.

[Quackers]

179. +1000

It's scary how fast this came about. I don't want our troops spending another Christmas in that country. From the current talks, it could be many holidays before we leave there.

[bigwillq]

181. ....

[Adrahil]

4. Same here... sometimes he's wrong, but he strives towards right, IMO. NT

[woo me with science]

10. Yeah. Waaaaaay to the right. nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

60. Willingly, it seems.

[woo me with science]

62. +1 I would say aggressively.

As an overwhelming agenda.

[L0oniX]

76. ^^^this^^^

[Doctor_J]

13. irony alert

[bobduca]

84. And away from "his friends on the left"

[misterhighwasted]

5. Let's see now. Regan, Bush 1 Bush 2, Romney?,

I'll stand with President Obama.

[Scuba]

6. I would prefer that he dared a bit more greatly.

[cstanleytech]

69. With our system of government though Scuba I am not sure if there is actually much more

he can do legally Its just to bad the democrats didnt keep control of congress longer because I suspect if they had that things would be alot better for the majority of us.

[Thespian2]

7. Unfortunately

Obama strives to appease his corporate donors. Is that leadership?

[leftyladyfrommo]

37. I don't think you can survive in this country anymore unless

you appease the corporate donors.

They control everything. And they can bring anyone down. You just have to spend a bunch of money and buy a bunch of people and then set out to totally destroy the target. Truth and lies have nothing to do with it any more.

[Thespian2]

107. Thanks for speaking truth.

[woo me with science]

8. I stand against inverted totalitarianism.

[moondust]

9. The critics are out in full force this morning.

On cable news.

"It's not enough!"

"Won't work!"

"This kind of surgical war failed in Iraq! Failed! Failed!"


I can only assume they are MIC boosters trying to gin up a big profitable war using other people's kids. And scoundrels trying to score political points.

[leftyladyfrommo]

40. Ah, fuck em.

They have no idea whether this will work or not.

[moondust]

45. Exactly.

Getting countries in the region to get together and take over this campaign in their own defense will take some time and could be messy, but the alternatives are worse. It's almost like some of these critics are stuck in WWII mode believing lots more bombs and troops will lead to a surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship or something. Not gonna happen.

[leftyladyfrommo]

47. Obama doesn't hurry things.

He looks at things from every possible angle. Sometimes that takes a while.

I don't always agree with him but I always respect his opinions because they are always really thought out.

[Stellar]

81. hear, hear...

and well said. I can't say I know what goes into his decision making and why he does the things that he does. But he does take his time in getting to the bottom line. I like that...he tries not to do stupid stuff.

[LyndaG]

155. Yes

[cwydro]

156. That is sure right. He was going to close Guantanomo.

Almost the end of his presidency. Still open.

But he doesn't hurry things.

Torturers? Nah, patriots. Takes time to see this clearly.

Big Brother? He has allowed a massive invasion of our privacy. Bush started it. He increased it.

And the build up in nuclear weapons? Well yeah, he waited till the second term to do that.

He doesn't hurry things. Bides his time.

Yup.

Doesn't hurry things.

Wonder what's next?

[MADem]

256. So true. And most of his critics are furious with him because he doesn't hurry things.

They want him to throw down on one side or another. Right effin' NOW, too!

He is a measured guy; he doesn't lose his cool. He has a surprising temperament for a POTUS. No drama, indeed.

[AnalystInParadise]

159. Actually we

have decades of historical data that shows that air campaigns alone don't work.

We also have decades of history showing local forces unmotivated are less than desirable in this type of scenario

Most well known examples of airstrikes alone not working:

Kosovo
Yemen
several of the Israel/Palestine conflicts over the years

Most well known examples of airstrikes and local forces failing to win:
South Vietnam
Bosnia
Colombia

Aside from Libya there is not a lot of positive news about our current configuration.

[Skittles]

240. and you do?

[madokie]

11. Most important though is I stand with this President and don't give a damn who knows it.

I'm proud of what he's done so far and look forward to what he will do in the next couple years. Equality is the new norm and I'm proud of the fact I support that. All men/women are created equal. Whether they be brown, black or white, gay or straight they are my and your equal. No woman/man shall take that away from another woman/man.
I will fight to the bitter end if need be

[woo me with science]

12. Good for YOU!

Woo hoo!



President Obama is massively expanding U.S. Nuclear Weapons: (price tag: 1 trillion bucks)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5570413

Totalitarianism, American Style
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025573232

The American Propaganda State
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025363113#post15

[marble falls]

30. Good stuff. I don't know how I missed all of it the first time. We need a sort of DU/UTNE on DU!

[L0oniX]

79. ^^^this^^^

[Sheepshank]

95. my god...massive blue linkage alert n/t

[Thekaspervote]

14. Thank you for that! it's a great truth spoken by a great man and our president is in there everyday

Swinging

[cali]

15. I don't. and what a crock of hackneyed bullshit from ol' TR

[Doctor_J]

17. See reply 16.

[CaptainTruth]

21. Really?

People who actually take risks & accomplish things don't deserve credit for it?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment.

[Doctor_J]

16. I think Teddy was talking about the climate protestors, war protestors,

beleaguered $7.50/hr workers, Occupy, and so forth. Is it OK if I stand with them?

[dflprincess]

135. I'll join you. nt

[PoliticAverse]

18. "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,...

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,
or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile,
but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt

http://www.voicesoffreedom.us/voices/theodoreroosevelt/theodoreroosevelt.htm

[rhett o rick]

23. LOL, looks like you hit the send button first. nm

[ozone_man]

249. Criticism is healthy. n/t

[ballyhoo]

19. I don't.

[CaptainTruth]

20. I do too.

He's not perfect, but no human being is. There are certainly areas where I feel disappointed in his administration (not closing Gitmo, giving up single-payer ACA so quickly, not standing up more forcefully to Republican obstruction) but what a lot of people don't seem to understand, or perhaps accept, is the fact that being president is a difficult balancing act that requires ongoing tradeoffs, most of which will disappoint most people in some way.

I stand with the president not because he's perfect, he's not. I stand with him because he's a helluva lot better than the alternative candidates who were on the ballot (McCain & Romney).

[rhett o rick]

22. "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the Presid

President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else." Theodore Roosevelt

I prefer to stand by the truth.

[lumpy]

102. One persons ' truth' is not always 'the truth', just an opinion.

[rhett o rick]

115. Ok, but what is your point. My point isn't that I will not blindly stand by any politician.

I should have said I stand by Democratic Principles.

[tkmorris]

24. And you interpret that to mean you should "stand with Obama"

I don't even know what to say to that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Please feel free to stand with whomever you want./NT

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

26. I'ts a nice sounding quote.

But you could apply it just as much to the nuttiest of RW fruitcakes in Congress. Virgina Foxx or Louie Gohmert. Both are 'in the arena' with 'great devotion' to what they consider 'worthy causes'.

Basically, it's the quote of the egotist, who doesn't feel that criticism of actions is an action in and of itself, who refuses to heed such or give it any value.

The reality is that we are all affected by the actions and choices of those who hold office, and thus deserve to attempt to sway them from actions we see will lead to pain for those of us who do not hold office, while those who do continue onward in their lives of privilege.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. Well

Having a healthy respect for public opinion and an admiration for people who make the tough decisions and suffer the consequences are not mutually exclusive. I have a lot of empathy for the president. IMHO, the good he does is met with silence and the perceived bad he is does is met with the loudest of voices.

Just my .02.

[BlueCaliDem]

87. Bingo.

Reminds me of a saying taped to the wall of some company:

"When we do right, nobody remembers. When we do wrong, nobody forgets."

[freshwest]

117. Posting this for you:

Michelle Obama's words about her husband.

Here's the thing about my husband: even in the toughest moments, when it seems like all is lost, Barack Obama never loses sight of the end goal. He never lets himself get distracted by the chatter and the noise, even if it comes from some of his best supporters. He just keeps moving forward.

And in those moments when we're all sweating it, when we're worried that the bill won't pass or the negotiation will fall through, Barack always reminds me that we're playing a long game here. He reminds me that change is slow — it doesn't happen overnight.

http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2014/09/not-good-move-from-clinton-camp.html

[sheshe2]

147. Brava!

[calimary]

162. Like this!

President Obama is NOT perfect. But he's still one HELLUVA lot better than the alternative. You'd prefer a President romney maybe? How 'bout President mccain and his five-wars-at-a-time hard-on for war, and his cute little side-kick Vice President Snowdrift Snooki? And no I am NOT happy that we're back on war footing. Even so, if we have to go there, I'd rather have Barack Obama's hand on the steering wheel at a time like this.

[DavidG_WI]

202. Doesn't mean...

we can't call him out on his failures. The only reason I worked for OFA for the re-election campaign was because Romney would have been a rubber stamp.

[Psephos]

27. Unfortunately, he doesn't stand with you.

He doesn't even know you exist.

He doesn't hear you. (But the NSA does...with his tacit permission.)

I am done with the lionization of presidents. Forever.

[marble falls]

31. What you said. 100%.

[bobduca]

38. Amen to that

[SammyWinstonJack]

63. +1000000!

[grahamhgreen]

65. Yup

[woo me with science]

66. +1000000

[msanthrope]

72. He does with me. nt

[steve2470]

96. me also nt

[BlueCaliDem]

254. Me, too. It's because of him we're doing as well as we are today.

President Obama has saved this country from too many catastrophes to list, yet he'll never ever be good enough for some people.

[Maven]

103. BINGO

[Paladin]

113. Perfectly stated. Thank you.

If you're not outraged by what's repeatedly happening as to our War 24/7 agenda, you're just not paying attention. We never, ever learn.

[dflprincess]

137. ^^^What you said^^^

[Zorra]

145. Sad but true nt

[tartan2]

29. Teddy, my hero

I hope the people of this country know how much we owe this man! Without Theodore Roosevelt there would be condos, drilling and god knows what else in the "Grand Canyon"! Congress would not allow President Theodore Roosevelt to put the "Grand Canyon" in the National Park service, so he declared the "Grand Canyon" a national monument to protect it under the antiquities act!

[marble falls]

33. A good anti-trust, progressive Republican. And totally full of himself.

[Ryano42]

32. Me too. The best most thoughtful measured response to this awful situation.

McCain surely by now would have us in a 3 front ground war or much worse...tac nukes lobbed here and there in one of his fits of rage. We could be all dead given his an Putin's instability and hubris.

Rmoney, full Gulf War 3 including Iran.

I remember the uproar over the Kosovo campaign from both sides and screams of "No Blood for Monica" from the right.

[Iliyah]

61. I remember that "No Blood for Monica" saying

I also remember the bombing campaign against Serbia wherein the GOPers/corporate media was gun ho about it until they started to complain about it taking toooooooooooo long and therefor "needed ground troops".

Clinton was weak weak weak womanizer.

I stand with President Obama.

[Enrique]

34. the same quote was used to support Bush

on the verge of the disastrous Iraq War

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/858646/posts?page=1858

[m-lekktor]

35. yep. the freeper archives will come in handy

for talking points in support of Obama warmongering! the "we don't know what they know, we don't have all the information" one ,for example, has been SERIOUSLY worn out already.

[NYC_SKP]

43. Yeah, maybe if we put together enough keyboard "experts" we can get close to having Obama's intel.

Not.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. Tu quoque fallacy/NT

[Capt. Obvious]

128. How dare you compare Obama to Bush

*alert sent*

[Cha]

142. Smart people are able to tell the difference between what bush was saying and what Pres Obama says.

[NYC_SKP]

36. Proud to Recommend this. People on discussion boards know 1/100th of what Obama knows.

They are, of course, entitled to their opinions and I thank those who offer constructive insight.

But we need to trust, to some degree, our officials to do the right thing.

More often than not, what Obama has done has been the right thing to do.

[bobduca]

41. I disagree

Democracy requires us to question our officials, and distrust them, regardless of their partisan affiliations.

[tkmorris]

46. I wish we COULD trust our elected officials to do right

Unfortunately I fear that the time when we could afford to do that has long passed, if indeed it ever was.

[Logical]

56. LOL, we knew 1/100th of what Bush knew also. Lol, get it now? nt

[Stellar]

83. But Bush knew nothing!

At least as far as I could see. Not even the time of day.

[TheKentuckian]

212. 2003 just called and they want their lame ass excuse back they have to return it to

previous decades to prop up our adventures in the middle east, South America, Vietnam, Korea, as well as to justify taking a shit on the constitution.

If the people are ignorant then those in the know must educate them and if they do not then they are using this pitiful excuse as a weapon against the governed for their own aims not ours.

[Iliyah]

42. I stand with President Obama

[TBF]

44. Give peace a chance -

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. Orwell seems to be of two minds

[Enrique]

51. are you sure that wasn't Col. Jessup?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. It was Orwell. I believe he wrote fiction but was, alas, not a fictional character./NT

[TBF]

64. Actually that "quote" is attributed to Richard Grenier.

Dear Quote Investigator: The brilliant writer George Orwell authored two of the most powerful and acclaimed political books of the last century: 1984 and Animal Farm. The saying that interests me is usually attributed to him, and there are two popular versions:

We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf

I think these words are consistent with the sentiments Orwell expressed in essays, but I have read conflicting comments about whether these words are correctly ascribed to him. Would you trace the source of these statements?

Quote Investigator:There is no substantive evidence that George Orwell who died in 1950 made this remark. The earliest known matching statement appeared in a column in the Washington Times newspaper written by the film critic and essayist Richard Grenier in 1993 ...

More here: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/11/07/rough-men/

[Enrique]

82. fascinating

look at the parallels with this other made up quote.

Like Grenier, Frank Gaffney is also a neoconservative. Like the apparently fake Orwell quote, this fake Lincoln quote elevates the military. I guess the neocons correctly figure that people aren't going to buy authoritarianism from them, so they have to put their words in the mouths of dead folks that are more credible than the neocons.

Here is Frank Gaffney's fake Lincoln quote which appeared in the Washington Times, like the Grenier one did:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/PrintArticle/-Wash-Times-Columnist-Uses-Fabricated-Abraham-Lincoln-Quote

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." ? President Abraham Lincoln.

[TBF]

90. A lot of misattributed quotes on the Internet -

I saw another one attributed to Orwell this morning that he never said (no matter how much I wanted it to be true) - that is how I ended up on this topic. At any rate the book 1984 had quite a lot in it that spoke to this topic overall. I don't like wars any more under Obama than I did under Bush. I'd really rather we put our efforts into working on climate change. If we don't change our priorities soon it is going to be too late.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

114. I will look further to see if the quote is apocryphal. If it is I'm frosted.

John Stuart Mill, whose liberal credentials are impeccable, made a even more strident quote on that topic.

I can post it if you want.

[TBF]

140. It's not that big a deal

I am socialist and very antiwar so something a liberal says is not going to be that convincing to me anyway. Even Marx saying it wouldn't help - and he talked plenty about war (ie revolution). Also I do not hate Obama - I think overall he is a thoughtful person in a very difficult position.

[Capt. Obvious]

130. Lincoln was a wise man

[FrodosPet]

163. As was Sir John Gielgud

[freshwest]

111. Another thrown under the bus, like Warren and Sanders for supporting Obama on ACA, ISIS, etc..

Damn, it's crowded under that bus. Maybe another bus is needed.

[pitchforx]

48. Dear President Obama,

Close Gitmo, open up Cuba, get in somebody's face about income inequality, and i will stand right with you.
yours truly,
pitchforx

[kansasobama]

50. Hard Core Liberal here stands with President

We liberals need to be realistic about the situation.

Remember how the GOP and some Democrats stood by Bush and his lies about WMD?

At least, ISIS is not a lie. We may differ in strategy but for now a bombing campaign is a must. It cannot be long-term.

By the way, we liberals (and our friends) have not voted with us during mid-terms. Let us face the truth. Many of our friends are suffering for apathy.

If Charlie Crist cannot win in Florida (where that Tea party governor blocked African-American voters) and our Hispanic friends do not understand that they have to help us win the Senate (I hear we may lose Iowa and CO), I have nothing to say. Hispanic friends need to be realistic. If there are more Dems, it makes it easy to face a challenge on Executive orders. And, mind you, there is a good chance the Court could overturn Obama immigration order if Senate goes GOP.

Liberals have to bear some blame for why Dem Presidents have to be center-left.

[bobduca]

52. please

Liberals are to blame for the center-right policies forced upon us by trojan democrats?

As a self-professed "Hard Core Liberal", you should learn more about the recent history of Liberalism, and not hand-wave over the inexorable parade of sell-out corporatist "moderates" willing to fuck over the 99% for re-election campaign funds, and then secure a sweet gig fucking over the little guy in the private sector as lobbyists and political consultants for the corporations who fund them.

[noiretextatique]

70. i am always wary of self-professed "liberals"

who blame liberals for the ills of the third way.

[TBF]

55. ...

[bobduca]

58. My hispanic friends thought this post was funny n/t

[Capt. Obvious]

132. My air quotes friends thought your post was pretty funny too

[bobduca]

146. Thanks Capt. Obvious!

[Cha]

144. Sorry, kansasobama.. you can't tell some to be "realistic".. they can't handle it. And, the ones

who are.. are standing with the President already.. like ..

Jimmy Carter, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, all well respected leaders, have access and know a hellava lot more about this than those on the internet who can't grasp this isn't being run by the bush-cheney neocon crowd.

"I think we need to attack ISIS. I'm really concerned about them."

"Is the bombing of ISIS justified? I say yes. And I hope President Obama has every possible success in getting allies to join with us, some with ground troops effected inside Syria."

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5566788

Bernie stands with the President on this "Enormously complicated issue".. as he calls it. He disagrees with staying out of ISIS like some around are clamoring on about.

As he stated it's an "International effort" and guess what.. "they have to put money in it too."

Senator Sanders also said Assad Gassed his own people.. whether the conspiracy theorists around here believe it or not..

Hartman and he talked about one republiCon saying.. they'll "blast him if it doesn't work and ask why he didn't do it sooner if it does." Sounds like a familiar whine.

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5527989

Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she supports President Obama's decision to authorize airstrikes in Iraq

BOSTON — Warning against a new U.S. war in Iraq, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Friday stood by President Barack Obama’s decision to authorize targeted airstrikes to help defend Americans in Erbil, Iraq, and provide aid to a religious minority taking refuge in the Sinjar mountains.

“It’s a complicated situation right now in Iraq and the president has taken very targeted actions to provide humanitarian relief that the Iraqi government requested, and to protect American citizens,” Warren told reporters. “But like the president I believe that any solution in Iraq is going to be a negotiated solution, not a military solution. We do not want to be pulled into another war in Iraq.”


Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said she supports president Barack Obama's decision to authorize new airstrikes in Iraq but cautioned against U.S. involvement in a new war in the Middle East.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/08/sen_elizabeth_warren_warns_abo.html



Leyla @MiamiLib
Follow
The French Did For President Obama What They Refused To Do For Bush http://nydn.us/1tz28Oy
#p2 #tcot #uniteblue #teaparty #gop #lnyhbt
8:43 AM - 23 Sep 2014
Au revoir, ISIS fighters: French jets kill dozens of jihadists,...
The French did for President Obama on Friday what they refused to do for his predecessor — they joined the fight in Iraq.
New York Daily News @NYDailyNews

72 Retweets 20 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2014/09/23/a-tweet-or-two-125/

[sheshe2]

150. Excellent points, my dear Cha.

[Cha]

154. Those trying to blame only the President for trying to get rid of Daesh need to face reality, she..

their "avatars and sig lines" of Bernie and Elizabeth are standing with the President, too.

[BlueCaliDem]

255. Do you think they'll toss Senators Sanders and Warren under the bus as easily as they've done Obama?

Somehow I think they won't. They might show their true colors, Cha.

[cui bono]

245. How are those cherries you picked tasting?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025604523

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

54. I stand with this guy.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

59. If i see somebody about to lob somebody's dome off and I shoot him or her somebody's still dead...

If i see somebody about to lob somebody's dome off and I shoot him or her somebody's still dead, just not the intended victim.

[Romulox]

57. Not me. Not in MY name. nt

[grahamhgreen]

67. How you gonna pay for this new war?

[woo me with science]

74. What day is this now?

I will have to find that post and kick it again.

[grahamhgreen]

75. 13. Soon to be week 13. Year 23 since Iraq war 1. Decade 3, I guess....!

[BuelahWitch]

167. Pfffft! Put it on the credit card of course!

And then deny the proles their healthcare, education, etc. and tell them to eat their peas and be happy about it!

[Erose999]

68. I stand with Obama about 60% of the time. Fuck his new war in the middle east though, and fuck every

Dem in Congress who voted for it.

[cstanleytech]

71. I dont think the democrats were voting for a new war so much as voting to try and help fix

a mess that the prior administration created and hopefully Obama keeps it limited to air support primarily with no major troop deployment.
The republicans though? It wouldnt surprise me if they really are for starting a new full blown war considering their history for these past 20+ years.

[Erose999]

73. Getting more involved in the middle east would mean handing the next president the keys to start a

new war. Gawd forbid a ReThug wins in 2016 we'd be right back in the shit.

And its downright foolish to think that this will be "limited to air strikes". Since when has that ever been the case. Its like they're saying "just the tip"

[cstanleytech]

91. On the other hand ignoring it can potentially cause even more trouble.

Look at how the US ignored what the taliban was doing who then went on to provide a safe haven for Bin Ladens people or better yet look at the 1920s and 30s and the negative effect a policy of not wanting to get involved led to.

[Cha]

122. Fuck the bush-cheney war on Iraq and now the President has to clean it up. These Dems actually know

what's going on.. they realize that doing nothing about Daesh is not an option..

Jimmy Carter, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren all well respected leaders, have access and know a hellava lot more about this than those on the internet who can't grasp this isn't being run by the bush-cheney neocon crowd.

"I think we need to attack ISIS. I'm really concerned about them."

"Is the bombing of ISIS justified? I say yes. And I hope President Obama has every possible success in getting allies to join with us, some with ground troops effected inside Syria."

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5566788

Bernie stands with the President on this "Enormously complicated issue".. as he calls it. He disagrees with staying out of ISIS like some around are clamoring on about.

As he stated it's an "International effort" and guess what.. "they have to put money in it too."

Senator Sanders also said Assad Gassed his own people.. whether the conspiracy theorists around here believe it or not..

Hartman and he talked about one republiCon saying.. they'll "blast him if it doesn't work and ask why he didn't do it sooner if it does." Sounds like a familiar whine.

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5527989

Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she supports President Obama's decision to authorize airstrikes in Iraq

BOSTON — Warning against a new U.S. war in Iraq, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Friday stood by President Barack Obama’s decision to authorize targeted airstrikes to help defend Americans in Erbil, Iraq, and provide aid to a religious minority taking refuge in the Sinjar mountains.

“It’s a complicated situation right now in Iraq and the president has taken very targeted actions to provide humanitarian relief that the Iraqi government requested, and to protect American citizens,” Warren told reporters. “But like the president I believe that any solution in Iraq is going to be a negotiated solution, not a military solution. We do not want to be pulled into another war in Iraq.”


Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said she supports president Barack Obama's decision to authorize new airstrikes in Iraq but cautioned against U.S. involvement in a new war in the Middle East.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/08/sen_elizabeth_warren_warns_abo.html

[Erose999]

188. So what warren and the President are saying is that "there is no military solution" while they are

actively persuing a military solution.

That makes perfect sense

Fuck American involvement in this war. Yes, it really is that simple. Its a horrible situation for the people of Iraq and Syria who are getting fucked over by ISIS, but that is for the Iraqi military and the neighboring countries to sort out. The US has a terrible record of nation building in that region and any rebel factions we support now with arms, money, or air strikes will inevitably become the next ISIS.

If the people of these nations want stability and democracy they're going to have to claim it for themselves. We will continue to fail in attempts to impose it on them at gunpoint.

[Docross]

78. Arm-chair quarterbacks..

Maybe one thing worse than an 'arm-chair quarterback' and that's an "arm-chair Commander in Chief". We might know one third of what he's handling..and GLAD we don't.

There's a reason we have 'civilian' Commander in Chiefs and that's because the military, Generals, Admirals job - is WAR. How many Generals did Barack get rid of? One General President, Eisenhower, warned us about the military industrial complex and they are very hard at work.

Meanwhile the traitor Republicans, trying to destroy him, i.e.... OUR COUNTRY; don't care about the American people. One day in history all their names will be INFAMOUS.

Extremely dangerous times and there's NO ONE better to be in charge than President Obama.

[cali]

100. oh bollocks. One doesn't need to know everything to have an informed opinion

we have plenty of recent history with our military interventions to do that. what's dangerous is an acquiescent, unquestioning citizenry.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

139. Same thing republicans said 2002.

Ironic.

[kansasobama]

80. Sorry Friends if I offended some

Hello

I am not being disrespectful. Apologize for that..

Yes, I am a liberal but I know the reality.

Politics is unfortunately a game of strategy. One has to win with a center-right message and later implement left-leaning policies. This is United States. House is GOP-based and we are a democracy.

We have to win election first. The Democratic Governor in KS is far from being liberal. In fact, he is a moderate GOP. But, we have to win in small steps to get away from lunatics like Brownback. Do I like it? No. But, reality demands supporting anyone but GOP (even in mid-terms)

[woo me with science]

89. No, we're not a democracy.

No, we're not a democracy:

Jimmy Carter: "America has no functioning democracy."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1268113

Totalitarianism, American Style
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025573232

"Friendly Fascism"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025573232#post11

The American Propaganda State
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025363113#post15

And no, Americans are not right-leaning:

USA Is A Center-Right Nation? Nope...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017205489

America has never been a center right nation.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101779166

Not this nonsense again.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024356791#post61

[BlueCaliDem]

93. ^^^This!^^^

Too many people bought the propaganda about the "unitery executive" (a.k.a. dictatorship). President Obama, though not perfect in any way, has his heart in the right place and has done everything he can to do good work within the powers of the Executive. But if Congress doesn't want to play ball and all media are itching to pounce on every single word he says that doesn't conform to the Right-wing in this country, well, there's not much else he can do, is there?

So I stand with this president, because I can and continue to see the forest for the trees.

[woo me with science]

94. LOL.

Good thing we have all these entirely spontaneous 24/7 pro-corporate postings here to warn us about the nefarious propaganda machine being wielded against the poor NSA, CIA, MIC, President, US government, corporate PTB...

It's so important to expose the *actual* propagandists here. I will support anyone who keeps tirelessly working to expose Glenn Greenwald's plot to ramp up war for profit in the Middle East and impoverish millions.



The American propaganda state
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025363113#post15

[cui bono]

247. The forest you are looking at is plastic. n/t

[BlueCaliDem]

253. I say the same to you, cui. eom

[Kermitt Gribble]

112. President Obama had the exact opposite strategy -

he won with a center-left message and has implemented right-leaning policies.

[JonLP24]

221. He won w/ left-leaning messages

and enacted center-right policies (not across the board but important ones)

[cui bono]

246. You are wrong. Dems are doing the exact opposite of what you say.

They are running on a progressive campaign, getting elected and implementing center-right policies.

Clinton and Obama are both prime examples of that.

Plus what woo said. Read that post and all the links if you want to learn something.

[jwirr]

85. He is my president but that does not always mean I agree with him.

[Iggo]

86. There's room here on the anti-war left if he wants to stand with me. (n/t)

[dilby]

88. ^^This^^ +1000 = He can join us anytime he wants. (n/t)

[Maedhros]

92. "The Leader is good! The Leader is great! I surrender my will as of this date!"

[MrScorpio]

97. TR and I share both a birthdate and this exact same sentiment. nt

[maced666]

98. Cool...smooth.

Patient.
Thought out.
Obama.

[Iggo]

99. Cool. Green.

[ZombieHorde]

101. That is a nice, feel-good quote that doesn't reflect reality.

If elections are mostly fair, then the critics count very much. Perception is a real human experience --even if the perception is false-- and people vote based upon their perceptions.

[choie]

104. I don't...

"daring greatly" would have been NOT to go to war. He didn't dare greatly. He caved to all of the warmongers..

[1000words]

105. Bookmarking

[ForgoTheConsequence]

131. Good call.

...

Wish we had screen caps of all the people who supported the war in Iraq in 2002.

[colsohlibgal]

106. The Sadness Of Blind Obedience

It's not like there are not things to like about Obama but....nobody who is populist at heart, who has ordinary people in mind, would push hard to fast track the TPP. Or hire the same old Wall Street Insider financial team branch that got almost bankrupted us in the 1st place. Or bring in a super third way democrat, Emmanuel, as his chief of staff.

He talked super progressive running in 2008 - and he's proven to be center right on too many issues for many of us.

Love TR. my only bone with him was his zeal for war and empire. But, and he was from wealth, he went after big shots, he trust busted. He would have thrown the book at the Jamie Dimons of the collapse, we would have seen big shot perp walks.

[freshwest]

109. Said a long time ago, but still true today. Thanks for posting this.

[LittleBlue]

110. That sentiment leads to recklessness. A much wiser man once said

The strong manly ones in life are those who understand the meaning of the word patience. Patience means restraining one's inclinations. There are seven emotions: joy, anger, anxiety, adoration, grief, fear, and hate, and if a man does not give way to these he can be called patient. I am not as strong as I might be, but I have long known and practiced patience. And if my descendants wish to be as I am, they must study patience.

-Tokugawa Ieyasu

We should have taken a lesson from one of history's greatest strategists. The US is right now like a chess player who can't think more than two moves ahead. We tried to change Muslim lands, and in the end created ISIS. Now we're back again, trying once again to fix our mistakes with the same methods that created the problems in the first place. Each time we try to fix these problems, we create something worse in its place because we have no solution to fill the void left by our destructive impulses.

This is a policy failure that no one is willing to own, so we persist with failure.

[Autumn]

116. If a republican is elected in 2016 and continues this are you standing with that one too?

Because it will continue after Obama slides into history.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

118. Depends. I guess if I was around in the 19th century I would have supported Abraham Lincoln (R) war.

.

[cui bono]

248. Oh, so you supported the Iraq war?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

257. I supported the first Iraq war that liberated Kuwait. I strenuously opposed the second Iraq War...

I strenuously opposed the second Iraq War because we had Saddam in a box with the no fly zones and the sanction regime.


"I don't oppose all wars , just stupid wars" and wars that do more harm than good for the people they are intended to help.

[Major Hogwash]

119. Depends. Will her name be Hillary?

The mid-term elections are upon us.

[Autumn]

120. There's really not a dime difference between Obama and Hillary. I was wondering if

these people standing with Obama on this shit will stand straight up and proud with an actual douche bag republican, like mittens, Jeb, Christie .

Yeah, the mid-term elections are upon us and with this going on I think we are fucked, six ways to sunday.

[Major Hogwash]

134. Lessee here, you don't like Obama, Carter, Clinton, or Roosevelt.

Hmmm, seems to me that you've got some very limited choices in 2 years.

[Autumn]

136. I don't like Obama, Carter, Clinton, or Roosevelt ??? Where did you pull that out of?

[Cha]

123. Sorry, to disappoint you but a republicon is not going be elected in 2016 or anytime soon..

And, continue what exactly? Getting rid of Daesh that all these Dems are behind?

These Dems who actually know what's going on.. they realize that doing nothing about Daesh is not an option..

Jimmy Carter, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren all well respected leaders, have access and know a hellava lot more about this than those on the internet who can't grasp this isn't being run by the bush-cheney neocon crowd.

"I think we need to attack ISIS. I'm really concerned about them."

"Is the bombing of ISIS justified? I say yes. And I hope President Obama has every possible success in getting allies to join with us, some with ground troops effected inside Syria."

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5566788

Bernie stands with the President on this "Enormously complicated issue".. as he calls it. He disagrees with staying out of ISIS like some around are clamoring on about.

As he stated it's an "International effort" and guess what.. "they have to put money in it too."

Senator Sanders also said Assad Gassed his own people.. whether the conspiracy theorists around here believe it or not..

Hartman and he talked about one republiCon saying.. they'll "blast him if it doesn't work and ask why he didn't do it sooner if it does." Sounds like a familiar whine.

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5527989

Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she supports President Obama's decision to authorize airstrikes in Iraq

BOSTON — Warning against a new U.S. war in Iraq, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Friday stood by President Barack Obama’s decision to authorize targeted airstrikes to help defend Americans in Erbil, Iraq, and provide aid to a religious minority taking refuge in the Sinjar mountains.

“It’s a complicated situation right now in Iraq and the president has taken very targeted actions to provide humanitarian relief that the Iraqi government requested, and to protect American citizens,” Warren told reporters. “But like the president I believe that any solution in Iraq is going to be a negotiated solution, not a military solution. We do not want to be pulled into another war in Iraq.”


Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said she supports president Barack Obama's decision to authorize new airstrikes in Iraq but cautioned against U.S. involvement in a new war in the Middle East.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/08/sen_elizabeth_warren_warns_abo.html

[Autumn]

124. You couldn't disappoint me if you tried, you don't have the ability

[Cha]

125. Right.. there's no need to be disappointed because all these Dems stand with the President against

Daesh.. and all these countries..



Leyla @MiamiLib
Follow
The French Did For President Obama What They Refused To Do For Bush http://nydn.us/1tz28Oy
#p2 #tcot #uniteblue #teaparty #gop #lnyhbt
8:43 AM - 23 Sep 2014
Au revoir, ISIS fighters: French jets kill dozens of jihadists,...
The French did for President Obama on Friday what they refused to do for his predecessor — they joined the fight in Iraq.
New York Daily News @NYDailyNews

72 Retweets 20 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2014/09/23/a-tweet-or-two-125/

[Autumn]

126. Not going to bother reading this post of yours either

[Major Hogwash]

138. Even Elizabeth Warren supports our President!!

Yet, she fails to acknowledge that fact, although she is using a quote by Warren as her signature!!

What's up with that?

[Cha]

141. The ODSers cannot handle reality.. they have their eyes covered and their fingers in their

ears.. and expect to be taken seriously. smh, Major.

[great white snark]

121. I proudly do so.

[ailsagirl]

127. "...there is no effort without error and shortcoming..."

And it takes a lot of guts to MAKE errors and not then disappear out of insecurity or embarrassment.

"...his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."

Bravo!!!

[ForgoTheConsequence]

129. eight civilians dead today.

The blood is on the hands of anyone who supports this war. Own it.

[cwydro]

133. You stand with Obama attacking

yet another country? The same one he "drew a red line" with in regard to Assad gassing his own people?

Then did nothing. Now bombing those same people?

Bush the third.

In no way will this end well. Sickened and horrified at my country.

I voted for him twice. I am so ashamed

[Cha]

143. These Dems stand with the President because they know what's going on..Bernie, Elizabeth, and Jimmy.

they realize that doing nothing about Daesh is not an option..

Jimmy Carter, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren all well respected leaders, have access and know a hellava lot more about this than those on the internet who can't grasp this isn't being run by the bush-cheney neocon crowd.

"I think we need to attack ISIS. I'm really concerned about them."

"Is the bombing of ISIS justified? I say yes. And I hope President Obama has every possible success in getting allies to join with us, some with ground troops effected inside Syria."

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5566788

Bernie stands with the President on this "Enormously complicated issue".. as he calls it. He disagrees with staying out of ISIS like some around are clamoring on about.

As he stated it's an "International effort" and guess what.. "they have to put money in it too."

Senator Sanders also said Assad Gassed his own people.. whether the conspiracy theorists around here believe it or not..

Hartman and he talked about one republiCon saying.. they'll "blast him if it doesn't work and ask why he didn't do it sooner if it does." Sounds like a familiar whine.

FrodosPet http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5527989

Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she supports President Obama's decision to authorize airstrikes in Iraq

BOSTON — Warning against a new U.S. war in Iraq, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Friday stood by President Barack Obama’s decision to authorize targeted airstrikes to help defend Americans in Erbil, Iraq, and provide aid to a religious minority taking refuge in the Sinjar mountains.

“It’s a complicated situation right now in Iraq and the president has taken very targeted actions to provide humanitarian relief that the Iraqi government requested, and to protect American citizens,” Warren told reporters. “But like the president I believe that any solution in Iraq is going to be a negotiated solution, not a military solution. We do not want to be pulled into another war in Iraq.”


Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said she supports president Barack Obama's decision to authorize new airstrikes in Iraq but cautioned against U.S. involvement in a new war in the Middle East.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/08/sen_elizabeth_warren_warns_abo.html



Leyla @MiamiLib
Follow
The French Did For President Obama What They Refused To Do For Bush http://nydn.us/1tz28Oy
#p2 #tcot #uniteblue #teaparty #gop #lnyhbt
8:43 AM - 23 Sep 2014
Au revoir, ISIS fighters: French jets kill dozens of jihadists,...
The French did for President Obama on Friday what they refused to do for his predecessor — they joined the fight in Iraq.
New York Daily News @NYDailyNews

72 Retweets 20 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2014/09/23/a-tweet-or-two-125/

"bush the third".. you really have no fucking clue..

[cwydro]

148. I disagree

that this is in any way a good thing.

This is wrong. Period.

My opinion. This is very very bad.

I don't care if some senator says something different.

[lovemydog]

152. Thank you Cha. Excellent information.

On a personal note, I have mixed feelings. I do with anything involving bombing.

But I support President Obama.

That doesn't mean I agree with every single thing blindly. Or that I pretend to understand all the complexities and dangers of what is going on.

I do feel better knowing he has gathered allies at home and abroad. Allies I respect.

Anyone comparing President Obama to Bush has their head in the sand or up their ass. In my humble opinion.

[Cha]

157. "Anyone comparing President Obama to Bush has their head in the sand or up their ass. In my humble..

opinion." Exactly how I feel.. on the "not agreeing with everything he does", too. Hell no! And, I write letters and sign petitions when I don't.

You're welcome, lovemydog.

[bobduca]

149. Loyalty is overrated these days.

especially at DU.

[cwydro]

151. Comparing Obama to Teddy Roosevelt?

No way.

Not even half the man.

[Number23]

158. The "he's no different from Bush" fools are out in full force blithely unaware that American support

for attacking ISIS is high and growing more by the month. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/09/22/why-americans-support-for-bombing-isis-may-not-last/ Support will very likely go down soon enough, but the "Americans don't support this" crowd are without clue.

41% of Americans say that the president's air strikes on Isil DON'T GO FAR ENOUGH. http://www.people-press.org/2014/09/15/bipartisan-support-for-obamas-military-campaign-against-isis/

This will be yet another in a loooooong line of stuff that DU is completely on the other side of the world on. Beware those screaming that supporting this president is "propaganda!1!" while they flood this board with the same shit they're "warning" every one else about.

[BuelahWitch]

168. Hmm, "you're either with us or agin' us!" eh?

Where have I heard that before?

[stevenleser]

176. Like most strawman efforts, you fail. nt

[woo me with science]

177. No, actually that was a good summary of the pablum in that post. nt

[Number23]

200. Yes, facts are "pablum" to those incapable of understanding them

But it's okay. I know it's hard to hear/understand much when you've got your fingers in your ears screaming "PROPAGANDA!!1one!" at everything that varies from your narrow world view in any way.

[Number23]

199. You could not have typed a more irrelevant response to my post if you were trying

But your post does beautifully illustrate the quality of discourse from the "He's no different from Bush" crowd when confronted with uncomfortable facts.

That unanimous UN resolution probably rendered you semi-catatonic, which may explain your post a bit better. I can only imagine what you must have felt when you read that it was Arab nations that were very insistent that this president take the action that he has taken.

[BuelahWitch]

203. It was more of a comparison of you with Ari Flescher than Obama w/Bush

And the heightened rhetoric going into Iraq. I found it disgusting then and I find it disgusting now.

[Number23]

205. Ari Fleischer (I can only assume you misspelled it on purpose) was an architect of a false

war drummed up by his deceitful Commander in Chief.

Obama has world support and is leading a charge that has been instigated and requested by other nations, particularly those most affected by the threat of ISIL.

He not only has world support he has the support of a sizable majority of Americans which is what you found so "odious" in my post for reasons only you know.

If you don't see the difference between the two, again, thank you for so perfectly illustrating the arguments and level of understanding of those putting forth the "he's no better than Bush" defense.

[frylock]

208. can you post the numbers for support of the iraq war in 2003 kplzthx?

[TheKentuckian]

213. The idiotic war on Iraq was far more popular at one time but that 90% support did not prevent

utter failure nor devastating consequences.

Your argument to manufactured popularity is beyond meaningless. The people are easily riled up for disaster they often regret later and are often motivated to keep on digging no matter how deep the hole by any number of hooks.

[Number23]

225. The Iraq War had people protesting by the masses all over the world

The complete polar opposite of this particular endeavour. The vast majority are in full support for this ALL OVER THE WORLD. Obama didn't need to send his SoS to lie to the UN and cajole other nations to participate. Other participating nations have been identified as MORE willing than we are and the air strikes come after significant lobbying from Arab Nations, the ones most affected by ISIL, for the president to lead the charge.

If that upsets you or anyone else, too bad. Braying about "manufactured popularity" is what is truly meaningless in this conversation.

[TheKentuckian]

227. Then those teeming billions eager to settle up a few tens of thousands can take care of it

Their nations can exhaust their treasuries, savage their safety nets, and spend their blood to do so and they can have the omnipresent blowback too.

Your argument to popularity is beyond meaningless and has been no few times in history. I have had enough of our military adventures and pissing away precious resources into a black hole only to find worse monsters to gin up new cycles.

[Number23]

229. Then saddle up those principles and run for office, cowboy!

I have had enough of our military adventures and pissing away precious resources into a black hole only to find worse monsters to gin up new cycles.

See how many other people in this country and throughout the world subscribe to your view of doing nothing while people are slaughtered. Since my other post to you, three more countries -- all European -- have WILLINGLY joined the campaign to end ISIL. Enjoy being on the wrong side of history and humanity.

[TheKentuckian]

233. I've been right on these matters over the years enough to more than cover any imaginary balance

I'll take my chances and again if the will is so damn overwhelming then there would be way more than plenty of capacity without any actual need for our participation.

[Number23]

234. The will is overwhelming and the world has spoken. CLEARLY

And the US is rightfully one of the countries that has listened and is participating. That you and a loud few others here choose not to listen yourselves is your loss and yours alone.

[TheKentuckian]

236. If the will is overwhelming then the world has got this one going away.

Let the world take care of it with the world's resources and blood.

Get this straight, I lose nothing except by "listening". "Listening" costs hungry Americans.

"Listening" creates veterans who won't be cared for.

"Listening" means cutting programs.

"Listening" means debt service and military spending chewing up federal revenue before there is another dollar for anything.

"Listening" costs those we pretend to be saving their lives.

"Listening" means we create yet another cycle of worsening conditions and fundamentalist backlash as we've seen cycle since we destabilize the region for the same espoused reasons already.

"Listening" means keeping on digging when we are already in deep hole.

A united world does not need Team America to swoop in to save the day against a few tens of thousands of irregulars in pickup trucks with a similar airforce and navy as the average millionaire at most and likely far closer to my own personal (and nonexistent) forces.

What isn't that you can't get that this is what our "help" generates? We've been helping for decades no, does the region look helped?

I'm far more inclined to live with my choice than yours. Almost certainly mine would not have led to this conversation in the first place so I will stick but those in charge will see you have yours and in a few years you will be wringing your hands yet again and hollering about how it will be different this time (again).

[Number23]

239. You keep posting your opinion as if it carries as much (if not more) weight than the vast

majority of Americans that support this campaign. Than the numbers of Europeans, Arabs, and Asia-Pacific countries that have signed on WILLINGLY and will continue to do so. Hint for you: it doesn't.

Where are the masses of Americans hitting the streets to protest this? Where are the thundering Congress people proclaiming this a mistake? Pounding out missives on a little seen message board might make you feel good, and it's truly obvious that it does, but that doesn't change the fact that you are in the PROFOUND minority on this and I'm damn glad for it. People who think that "treasure" are more valuable than human lives and suffering are libertarian fools and generally tend to be universally ignored precisely as they should be. As I said, have fun being on the wrong side of history and humanity. Judging by how highly you seem to hold your own opinion, you'd probably be just fine there.

[flvegan]

160. Really? That's it? A graphic without context and assumed lockstep.

Holy shit. We're Facebook. Lockstep achieved, don't think...just do.

Congrats to what's wrong.

[NanceGreggs]

161. Where is the "assumed lockstep"?

The OP expressed their own position, which is that they "stand with President Obama".

They did not demand that others do likewise, nor imply that they have any obligation to do so.

They did not insist anyone adopt the same position without thought or consideration.

The OP made a simple statement, reflective of their own stance. If that is your idea of "lockstepping", or an encouragement or assumption thereof, perhaps "what's wrong" here is your own assumption that anyone who stands with this President does so without thought, without assessment of the facts, and without weighing the man's abilities and conduct.

The fact that your knee-jerk reaction to someone making a positive statement about Obama was to accuse them of fostering "lockstepping" is more reflective of your own lock-stepping behaviour than anyone else's.

At the rate this site is going, I imagine that stating one's personal support of President Obama will soon be an "alertable" offense, but it's not quite there - yet.

[woo me with science]

170. What "thought and consideration"?

It's a vapid quotation with a picture of a political figure attached to it. There's no argument here. It's an appeal to emotion and blind loyalty and stirred patriotism or something.

Posts like this would be fine, if they existed in the context of a well-argued rationale for war that offered reasons, how it will be funded, clear goals, probability of success, etc. But they can't, so they don't. Instead, we get empty froth. And that is the quality of the vast majority of the appeals to war on this board. Appeals to authority. Appeals to emotion. Appeals to patriotism. Appeals to party. Garbage propaganda.

Yes, it is by definition an appeal to lockstep, because there is no argument here for any other type of agreement. It is a vapid propaganda poster, a bid to fall in line through loyalty and emotion.

And it's utter garbage.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

171. The goal is to degrade and defeat ISIS

Failing that it is to reduce them to a manageable threat.

As to how it will be funding it will be funded most likely out of future revenue as is a lot of government spending. If someone is going to use the "can't afford it" argument they should have the intellectual honesty to apply it to all government spending.


I proudly stand with President Obama. I trust he has weighed all the alternatives and has come to the conclusion that attacking ISIS is in the best interest of the United States and the world.


"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing."

[woo me with science]

174. So how's that been working for us, bombing the shit out of countries to destroy terrorists?

I'm sure it will work this time. That word, "trust," makes me all warm and fuzzy and sure of it.

What an embarrassing post for you, given all recent history of the MIC *and* the history of ISIS itself. And made even more so by the addition of your assurance that we will find the money in "future revenue." Your bland attempt to lecture about how government funding works these days is particularly inspiring when we can't even get a farm bill now without "pension smoothing," and our Democratic president is signing food stamp cuts into law in a country that has already obliterated its middle class.

Thanks for the great example of the quality of "argument" we are fed....ended, predictably, with another appeal to "trust" and another gonad-stirring quotation about good and evil.





.
__________________________________________________________________________
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023543284

Barack Obama in 2007: bvar22 (34,779 posts)
20. Senator Obama, 12-20-2007

“The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” ---Senator Obama, 12-20-2007

[DemocratSinceBirth]

182. I will be the bigger person and ignore the ad hominem attacks

If you believe that ISIS doesn't pose a threat to the United States and its allies in the region there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

[woo me with science]

183. Spare that, please. There was no ad hominem attack. There was an accurate observation

that that post did not provide any argument whatsoever that was not based on appeals to blind loyalty and hope that people haven't been paying attention to recent history, the actual track record of the MIC, and the history of ISIS itself. The *content* of the post was vapid and embarrassing to you.

You haven't made a case for war or for funding it. You have merely offered more platitudes.

Frustrating as it may be, those pushing to bomb yet another country for years into the future have an obligation to provide some reasons why doing the same damned thing that has brought us to this lovely place will miraculously start to make things better.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

186. As Keynes said "In the long run we will all be dead."

There will be no winners in the war on terror but by confronting ISIS we can keep them at bay and reduce their ability to attack us and our allies in the region.

Just because we can't totally eliminate a threat doesn't mean we should ignore it. I know you find my quotes trifling but I believe with every fiber of my being that to ignore evil, when you have the means to confront it, is actually countenancing it.

[woo me with science]

189. Funny how those gonad-stirring quotations always seem to apply

only to evil in the world where the US has oil interests.

And, as usual, the argument has devolved into a vapid:

BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING

Never mind the complete lack of any evidence whatsoever that what is being proposed will be effective. Never mind who will have to pay for it. Never mind that what you are proposing is to extend a pattern of behavior that (while making billions for war profiteers!) has consistently led to increased chaos and murder and has bloodsucked this country to the point that we are told we can't even provide basics for our own citizens anymore.

We just have to DO something.

Your stirring platitudes about "confronting" evil are not good enough. Welcome to yet more murderous clusterfuck for profit, but this time Obama and Democrats are stepping up to own it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

190. I am in favor of confronting evil, within the bounds of reason, whatever the source

An Algerian jihadist group has released a video that appears to show the beheading of French tourist Herve Gourdel, who was seized on Sunday.

Jund al-Khilafa, an ally of the Islamic State (IS) group in Syria and Iraq, had set a 24-hour deadline for France to halt air strikes on IS in Iraq.

Mr Gourdel, 55, was abducted in the north-east Kabylie region.

France joined US air strikes on IS in Iraq last week but has not taken part in strikes on the group in Syria.

French President Francois Hollande and his Prime Minister, Manuel Valls, publicly rejected the group's ultimatum on Tuesday.

The video of Mr Gourdel apparently being killed was entitled "Message of blood for the French government", reports said.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29352537

...

And our efforts disrupting the terrorists have been effective. There hasn't been a major attack on the United States since 9-11. I hope you don't attribute that to serendipity.

[woo me with science]

191. Are we safer, or are we less safe?

Do you even hear how incoherent your argument is? That is the quality of the neocon (now neolib) talking points you are repeating:

Our wars have made us safer. We haven't had a terrorist attack in years.

Yet we are simultaneously less safe. In fact, we are in *such* grave danger that we need another preemptive war.

Here, watch this beheading. Then you will know for sure that WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.

This vapid script is old. And it is not only tiresome. It is revolting.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

192. We are more safe.

There hasn't been a major attack on the United States since 9-11-01. If you think that is of no moment there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.


By your definition of a neocon, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and John Kennedy were neocons.


To paraphrase President Obama I don't oppose all forms of violence, just stupid and gratuitous violence for which violence is an end in itself.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

194. I don't see anything in my emboldened quotes that are incongruous

My world view is my own and my moral compass is set by me.

[frylock]

209. unless you're at the recruiting center, you aren't confronting jack shit

[frylock]

216. the fuck is this all about?

did you have a point? keyboard tough guys? hunh?! you're the one talking about confronting evil, apparently, from behind a keyboard.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

217. Do you think you are going to intimidate me with your ad hominems and obscenities?

Doesn't work that way with me, pardner.

Again, I am doing my best to remain within the protocol of this board.

I said I am in favor of confronting evil wherever i see it, within the bounds of reason, and you tell me I should go to a recruiting office. If they started accepting quinquagenarians I just might.

BTW, my offer stands.

[frylock]

218. so tell me what it is that YOU are doing to confront evil..

what's your major contribution to confronting this great evil? hmnnnn?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

219. Do you want accounts of instances...

Do you want accounts of instances where I have come to the aid of a vulnerable person in distress or just the most recent one.

[frylock]

228. i'm just going to assume you're a superhero of some sort, and back slowly away from this discussion

and no, I didn't copy your address. please do me the courteously of not messaging that to me, or anything else.

[aikoaiko]

222. And the jury results are in....

On Fri Sep 26, 2014, 04:22 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Why don't you try to behead or harm someone in my presence
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5589230

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

What the hell? This guy is posting his address with an attached threat of violence? This crap needs gone.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Sep 26, 2014, 04:33 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree that this is a threat of violence
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I suggest the jury leave it so the poster can delete it. This is a public MB for crying out loud, use some sense.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Alerter is correct.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I like it.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the poster wants his idiocy out there, leave it. If the poster was listing someone else's address, then hide. I say let it stay for a bit till the poster self deletes.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

223. My comment wasn't made in a vacuum.

Last edited Fri Sep 26, 2014, 11:44 PM - Edit history (4)

This is what was said to me:

unless you're at the recruiting center, you aren't confronting jack shit

And I responded in kind and I am the bad guy. The person tells me I'm not jack shit and I should join the army and I respond and I'm the bad guy. I respectfully submit the person who alerted my post and those who voted to delete it search their conscience.

Oh, a careful reading suggests I didn't threaten anybody with violence . i did offer my location and provide the opportunity to determine what I will confront Including "jackshit".

edited for punctuation and elaboration. I had to catch a bus and then I returned.

[cui bono]

242. First of all, read my sig. See how incorrect you are in your OP.

Second of all, you need to self-delete the post to get rid of your address. Anyone can still see it using the edit history link. I just saw that you live in the SF Valley.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

243. I deleted it because posting (my) address was causing some people distress . That's not my intention

That is the only reason I deleted it. I have no problem with people knowing where I live. I live without fear.


BTW, impugning my character, which started this brouhaha, caused me a great deal of distress. I guess some people lack empathy.

[cui bono]

244. You didn't delete it. I'm trying help you actually delete it.

If you click on your "edit history" you can still see the address because you can see the original post with no edits. That's why I said I see that you live in the SF Valley.

I don't know about the impuging of your character, but your OP is flat out wrong if you think TR doesn't think a president should be criticized and one should simply support POTUS because they are not POTUS. See my sig.

Someone already failed with that line of thinking. At least you didn't call out the best minds at DU in your OP.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

250. I think it's gone now

Who would have thunk (sic) you could get so much grief for standing with a Democratic president on a Democratic board, mea culpa, mea culpa...

[cui bono]

251. Well I'm not going to support center-right policies that infringe on my rights

just because there's a "D" after his name. When he stands with the people I will stand with him. As long as he keeps standing with Wall Street and the MIC, well, I will not support that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

252. Such is your right and I won't make an ad hominem attack on you for doing so.

I hope one day you get the president you want.

[NanceGreggs]

206. You've missed the point entirely.

Why am I so NOT surprised.

[CakeGrrl]

166. Would you lodge this same objection if the OP

substituted the name "Bernie Sanders" instead of the POTUS?

With everything else being the same?

Or is it only "lockstep" when you find the individual not to your liking?

[Capt. Obvious]

172. I'm glad the OP added the pic of Teddy Roosevelt to the quote

otherwise, everyone would probably just assume Bernie Sanders said that.

It sounds like something he would say.

[liberal_at_heart]

164. I would rather stand with Gandhi.

I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.


Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.

Mahatma Gandhi

[Capt. Obvious]

173. This Gandhi?

[bobduca]

178. Suprising Quote!

Noteable that even Ghandi would stand with Obama!

God bless this War!

[Capt. Obvious]

187. Gandhi thinks Obama doesn't go far enough

[woo me with science]

184. Excellent!

I'm SO glad all our libraries are going digital now.

It will make it so much easier for the PTB to provide evidence of every damned thing they claim we have always been at war with.

[liberal_at_heart]

195. good one.

[lame54]

197. Is that bizarro Gandhi?

[liberal_at_heart]

198. maybe alternative universe Gandhi? Or opposite day Gandhi?

[grahamhgreen]

165. Enlist.

[stevenleser]

175. That tired meme doesn't work. It's an air war. No enlisted soldiers are fighting it. nt

[frylock]

210. see you in another month

[grahamhgreen]

237. It takes 4500 sailors to support the aircraft. 18,000 meals per day... Go be a cook!

[woo me with science]

185. Yup.

We need boots on the ground. Or whatever they are calling them now. Non-boots.

Washington Gripped by Madness: When War Is Not War, Combat Is Not Combat & Boots Are Never on Ground
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025578512

[BuelahWitch]

204. Agree, much more patriotic

than beating the drums for war on a message board.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

230. My better angels tell me to ignore this ad hominem but my darker angels say fuck it

I will enlist it when they start accepting quinquagenarians.

[grahamhgreen]

231. Maybe you can drive a supply truck for a contractor.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

232. By your logic Malia Obama should enlist as she presumably supports her father's policies

By your logic Malia Obama should enlist as she presumably supports her father's policies and is of the appropriate age. If she doesn't then my suggestion is in err but I don't think so. After all Robert Todd Lincoln served in the Civil War.

[grahamhgreen]

235. Works for me. Note: Bidens son is in the military, I believe.

[dipsydoodle]

169. Hopefully we all do so.

Nuff said.

[lame54]

196. That could apply to Bush's invasion of Iraq

[DemocratSinceBirth]

201. Bush's invasion of Iraq was a strategic blunder

We had Saddam in a box with the no fly zones and sanctions. This is different.

[lame54]

207. On re-reading I caught the words worthy cause

the only reference to whether the engagement is for the right

[MuttLikeMe]

211. Me too!

[dipsydoodle]

214. Yep - he's fine by me.

I take people on balance.

[JonLP24]

220. I would never want to be President

Aside from the fact I'd never be elected to any office anywhere I wouldn't want to deal with the pressure, stress, and attention but feel it is fair to address and evaluate based on the issues. I stand with 2008 candidate Obama, Obama is a different story. What is a failure (on an issue) when the person in question already knew the right to do. Probably not daring greatly but more likely compromised or said things for votes.

[NaturalHigh]

224. Um...you know, I really don't.

This war is going to be a disaster like the rest. How much money do we spend every day on war anyway?

[Scootaloo]

226. Roosevelt went into the wars he endorsed. Kind of a different thing. n/t

[elleng]

238. Thank you.

[cui bono]

241. Read my sig: