Darth Omar (01-15-2019)
Members banned from this thread: ThatOwlWoman |
I can remember when liberals were anti-war like Tulsi Gabbard is. But then Obama came along and took us from two wars to several wars. Now the liberals have decided that, when it comes to wars, the more, the merrier.
Darth Omar (01-15-2019)
Darth Omar (01-15-2019)
Phantasmal (01-15-2019)
Phantasmal (01-15-2019)
anonymoose (01-15-2019)
PoliTalker (01-15-2019)
Your memory seems to be failing you.
Obama never, ever, not one single time said he was "anti-war" and against all wars.
Calling air strikes and cruise missle strikes on Libya, Syria, and southwest Asia "wars" is stretching it to the extreme.I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
Barack Obama, 2002 Speech Opposing George Bush's Invasion of Iraq
Pick up any high school history book. What are defined as "wars" are military engagement involving the conventional use of ground forces and conventional military power. I doubt there is a high school history book out there that defines drone strikes as a "war".
Bookmarks