In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
There are many differences, including these:

No one in the Obama administration is lying about why we might get
involved in a limited way in Libya. The Bush administration lied us into
Iraq.

Nobody in the administration has laid out our national interests in
Libya.

I haven't seen any statements that would commit U.S. ground troops to Libya.

The fact that you haven't seen the statements doesn't mean that they
don't exist.

What may take place in Libya is an incursion to remove the dictator
there. How many *years* has Bush's war in Iraq been going on?

The war in Iraq is over we have no combat troops in Iraq.

You are an idiot, Herring. With your help, we lost in Southeast Asia.

The Democrats ensured our loss in SEA. Johnson's Tuesday pick a target
lunches. McNamara running the war as an accounting exercise.

Tet '68 could have been a turning point. The VC and NVA got their asses
handed to them and if we had loosed the dogs of war we could have taken
the war to Hanoi.

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:30:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , payer3389
says...
There are many differences, including these:

No one in the Obama administration is lying about why we might get
involved in a limited way in Libya. The Bush administration lied us into
Iraq.

Nobody in the administration has laid out our national interests in
Libya.

Our national interests? How about removing a dictator who's hated by
most everyone in that part of the world. I guess that won't do
anything for US credibility, which was pretty much destroyed by Bush.

I haven't seen any statements that would commit U.S. ground troops to Libya.

The fact that you haven't seen the statements doesn't mean that they
don't exist.

The president has said explicitly that there wouldn't be any. I
supposed you want to see the original? Perhaps Obama can send it to
you along with the original birth certificate.

What may take place in Libya is an incursion to remove the dictator
there. How many *years* has Bush's war in Iraq been going on?

The war in Iraq is over we have no combat troops in Iraq.

Finally. Of course, we're still not finished cleaning up Bush's mess.

You are an idiot, Herring. With your help, we lost in Southeast Asia.

The Democrats ensured our loss in SEA. Johnson's Tuesday pick a target
lunches. McNamara running the war as an accounting exercise.

So, you're blaming Obama for Johnson's mistakes? How about Johnson's
successes, like civil rights.

Tet '68 could have been a turning point. The VC and NVA got their asses
handed to them and if we had loosed the dogs of war we could have taken
the war to Hanoi.


It's been over for a while now. VN is now a trading partner. Get over
it.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John H
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Kurds are a bigger problem due the their domain being within Turkey,
Iran and Iraq.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see the Arab League sending troops or assistance to help the
rebels in Libya.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

The weapon of mass destruction in Libya is Gaddafi.

On 19/03/2011 12:00 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Kurds are a bigger problem due the their domain being within Turkey,
Iran and Iraq.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see the Arab League sending troops or assistance to help the
rebels in Libya.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

The weapon of mass destruction in Libya is Gaddafi.

People who midles hate like that also followed Adolph.

On 19/03/2011 10:30 AM, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

No need to any more. Just take the country over. Libya isn't the only
place this is going on. Media has been well managed by our governments
and the UN. Don't like the leader? Incite riot, arm the militants and
excuse to trash the country. Then install a UN puppet leader. The
modern way.

Because just a list of where UN-France and other foreign invaders are
messing up include Guiana, Ivory Coast and I hear Rwanda and Zimbabwe
are ramping up. Our leaders are quietly ignoring the carnage in Yemem
and Bahrain but I suspect that is because Saudi's are pulling Obama and
the UN srings here.

Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/03/2011 10:30 AM, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar?
Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

No need to any more. Just take the country over. Libya isn't the only
place this is going on. Media has been well managed by our governments
and the UN. Don't like the leader? Incite riot, arm the militants and
excuse to trash the country. Then install a UN puppet leader. The modern
way.

Because just a list of where UN-France and other foreign invaders are
messing up include Guiana, Ivory Coast and I hear Rwanda and Zimbabwe
are ramping up. Our leaders are quietly ignoring the carnage in Yemem
and Bahrain but I suspect that is because Saudi's are pulling Obama and
the UN srings here.

Take the country over?

Colonialism is sort of out of date, eh?

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:11:20 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:

On 19/03/2011 10:30 AM, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

No need to any more. Just take the country over. Libya isn't the only
place this is going on. Media has been well managed by our governments
and the UN. Don't like the leader? Incite riot, arm the militants and
excuse to trash the country. Then install a UN puppet leader. The
modern way.

Because just a list of where UN-France and other foreign invaders are
messing up include Guiana, Ivory Coast and I hear Rwanda and Zimbabwe
are ramping up. Our leaders are quietly ignoring the carnage in Yemem
and Bahrain but I suspect that is because Saudi's are pulling Obama and
the UN srings here.

It's all about oil. I keep waiting for jps to jump in and say that.

What a bunch of jokers!

On Mar 19, 5:23*pm, John H wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:11:20 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/03/2011 10:30 AM, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

No need to any more. *Just take the country over. *Libya isn't the only
place this is going on. *Media has been well managed by our governments
and the UN. *Don't like the leader? *Incite riot, arm the militants and
excuse to trash the country. *Then install a UN puppet leader. *The
modern way.

Because just a list of where UN-France and other foreign invaders are
messing up include Guiana, Ivory Coast and I hear Rwanda and Zimbabwe
are ramping up. *Our leaders are quietly ignoring the carnage in Yemem
and Bahrain but I suspect that is because Saudi's are pulling Obama and
the UN srings here.

It's all about oil. I keep waiting for jps to jump in and say that.

What a bunch of jokers!

Better than a crusty, old teat-sucking asswipe like you.

Have you written Obama yet to complain, crusty?

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:30:51 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John H
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.

Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

This is far too complex for the simpletons on the right to figure out
on their own. Attacking a country on juiced up intelligence vs.
taking out military installations of a dictator actively killing his
own countrymen in open warfare.

They don't get the difference.

jps wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:30:51 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 08:58:15 -0400, John
wrote:

...doing that is much worse than what Sadam was doing.

Now 'Bama wants to attack Libya. Where's all the liberal uproar? Where is the
threat to the US from Libya?

This man has gone off the deep end.
Why not help people that want to help themselves? I didn't see that in
Iraq.... except by the Kurds.

The Libyans people seem to need help and the world community
*including* The Arab League is on board.

I don't see ANY similarities between that and the Iraq debacle....
we're certainly not looking for imaginary weapons of mass destruction.
Are we?

This is far too complex for the simpletons on the right to figure out
on their own. Attacking a country on juiced up intelligence vs.
taking out military installations of a dictator actively killing his
own countrymen in open warfare.

They don't get the difference.

Let's be real here. What sort of intellectually and logically based
commentary would you anticipate coming from the racist birthers here?
Are you expecting that a glimmer of enlightenment might strike Herring,
Ingersoll, Frogwatch, Canuck, et al? Why?