On Mar 19, 4:40*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/03/2011 2:21 PM, wrote:



On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:27:04 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
*wrote:

On Mar 19, 2:59 pm, *wrote:
In ,
says...

On 19/03/2011 11:35 AM, Frogwatch wrote:
So, why does it make sense to attack Gaddafi and it did not make sense
to attack Saddam. *So what if the "Arab LEague" wants us to attack.
Do you see them helping? *With Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and
many other nations were on the side of the USA. *Even Hillary and most
Dems thought there were WMD in Iraq and THEY VOTED TO ATTACK IRAQ.
Now, I will support the US in attacking GAddafi if the DNC issues an
apology to Bush saying he was correct and that they *are mindless
ninnies.

Gaddafi ticked off the wrong people.

Lets face it, they drag out crimes for the ast 4 decades yet do not
explain why they didn't do anything until now but do business with him.
* *Not even Loberbie was enough and that is old history.

Nope, Gaddafi must have told the French prime minister and Obama to
stuff it. *So this is their revenge. *These power hungry mogals.....
Obama will stop short as he has to go to congress and they are not
looking for more expensive wars.

Meanwhile the Obama hypocrite is ignoring Yemen and Behrain's shooting
of peaceful unarmed protestors while backing a violent armed minority in
Liba....makes no sense but it is the way it is.

Gaddafi probably called Obama a name. He is a thin skinned dude for
sure...

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh, Now I see the difference. *Obama is president now and
Bush was president then.

Yes, Obama is president. Get over it.

Tick-tock-Obama-be-on-a-rock -- 2012 is a coming.

Did "boating All out" support the war in Iraq, if not, he has no
business calling anyone a traitor.
Of course, all you libs have to do is to say "Bush was right and we
were wrong" so I can believe you are in this for the right reasons and
not just to get Libya's oil for George Soros. If you do that, then I
will support you, otherwise, "NO".