What a loon.
What about Chickenhawk?
Posted on 05/07/2011 7:29:09 PM PDT by RummyChick
"We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic."
(Excerpt) Read more at guernicamag.com ...
Chompski and his associates would be dancing in the streets.
“We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.”
Nope.. Trick question. Bush’s security detail is competent, and the Iraqi commandos (assuming there is such a thing) couldn’t even make it through an episode of “Deadliest Warrior”.
First off, considering how well Saddam Hussein’s vaunted Republican Guard performed, any Iraqi “commandos” of that era would have gotten lost in a round room.
Secondly, equating George W. Bush to OBL is insane. Why that’s as crazy as insisting that 0bambi is constitutionally eligible to be President.
Maybe obama will dump them in the Pacific.
I would like to see more of this video of Obama preening for the cameras as he congratulates people. Has anyone seen a fuller version.
Chomsky’s very popular on college campuses. Not that there is much intelligence to be found on campus anymore.
Chomsky—the world’s leading self-hating Jew.
Chomsky...puck.
I called that SOB out once and told him to meet me in the parking lot so I could stomp his nuts into the concrete.
He never showed up.
If GW Bush was killed in a similar matter we would be pissed, obviously!! And by the way, Iraqi commandos? Iraq was made up of Saddam and his henchmen. The other 85% of the population were kept in poverty. There are no commandos in Iraq. Heck, it was barely a functioning country.
Moving on....
We have laws of war. And we have laws against crime. The genius of Al Qaeda (if you allow me) was that were able to find the legal seem between both of these facets of law. Simply put, our laws meant to deal with individuals and even large groups. However, they were never intended to deal with a group numbering into the millions representing no country who one day decide to declare war on America.
From my point of view, an enemy such as this has got to be dealt with by the President in any way he sees fit. Unfortunately, some laws will have to be bent (enhanced interrogation) while others broken completely (Assassinating Bin Laden). Furthermore, some errors might even occur. I’m OK with this not because I like it, but because we have no other choice. Even Barack Obama saw this when he sat down behind the desk at the oval office.
As far as Iraq goes, it was undertaken for many things, but one of the key reasons was to offer the Muslim world an alternative to extremism. Step 1) Kill the terrorist. Step 2) Offer them something better. Get it?
I know many middle easterners who are frustrated by the ignorance and intolerance and violence of their home countries. One day, maybe elected leaders will replace loony control hungry despots in the middle east and if that day arrives, it will undoubtedly be traced back to Iraq
Just goes to show, if you live long enough, you’ll see a day when Judge Napolitano agrees with Noam Chomsky. The judge thinks killing bin Laden was illegal several times over.
Why doesnt Chomsky ask the same question only this time substituting Obama for G W Bush.
Chomsky is so stupid, he still thinks George Bush is President.
I thought Noam Chomsky was dead. Oh, well.
We might also be asking how we’d be reacting if American commandos landed in Berchtesgaden, assassinated Hitler and dumped his body in the Danube.
Even when criticizing Obama's action I note he finds multiple ways to blame Bush.
What a loon.
What about Chickenhawk?
What a Idiot and this nonsense gets Press!!!!!!!!!!! unreal, Hey chopsticks GO Away and do us a favor!
hahaha..that is funny..and who knew Rosie would ever go after Obama. Wonder what Oprah is going to think about that since she has hired Rosie.
Will Starr Jones be far behind on this matter?
I still laugh at NeNe getting in Starr Jones’ face on Celebrity Apprentice and saying “WHERE’S BARBARA WALTERS NOW”
“And if we’re interested in, let’s say, diminishing the amount of violence in the world, it’s at least arguable and sometimes true that a terroristic act does diminish the amount of violence in the world. Hence a person who is opposed to violence will not be opposed to that terroristic act.”
Debate on Firing Line, April 3, 1969
Personally though, I think he's simply being intellectually dishonest and disingenuous.
It's a pity because a lot of college age kids (and their professors) adore him. A reflection of their "intelligence," sadly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.