Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Saint Patrick
()
Date: March 22, 2011 01:41PM
With the United States and its allies poised to take military action to protect rebels in the far east of the country, it may be too late to revive the failed uprising in the capital. In Tripoli, Gaddafi’s stronghold, the real battle for Libya appears to have already been fought and won by a regime that was willing to use live ammunition against its opponents.
It was that brutal response by Gaddafi’s forces that probably sealed the fate of the month-old uprising, according to the whispered confidences of residents opposed to the government who spoke only on the condition that they not be identified. There have been just a few scattered demonstrations since Feb. 25, when Gaddafi supporters roamed the streets opening fire on protesters, reportedly killing dozens.
But the rebels may have miscalculated, too. Their revolt rekindled regional rivalries, tainting the uprising with a whiff of separatism. Their calls for Western intervention also summoned the specter of civil war, alienating some who might have supported peaceful protests.
“Any Western military action against the government now will only stimulate more support for the government, because it will show that this battle is being fought on behalf of the West,” said Mustafa Fetouri, director of the business administration program at the Academy of Graduate Studies in Tripoli.
Fetouri, who describes himself as independent, says he initially supported some of the protesters’ demands for greater freedoms and an end to corruption. But he says the rebels made a mistake by taking up arms and appealing for outside help, as well as by adopting as their symbol the flag of King Idris, an easterner overthrown by Gaddafi’s 1969 coup whose rule was deeply resented by Libyans elsewhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-libyan-capital-a-revolution-crushed/2011/03/17/ABrHJPp_story.html
It was that brutal response by Gaddafi’s forces that probably sealed the fate of the month-old uprising, according to the whispered confidences of residents opposed to the government who spoke only on the condition that they not be identified. There have been just a few scattered demonstrations since Feb. 25, when Gaddafi supporters roamed the streets opening fire on protesters, reportedly killing dozens.
But the rebels may have miscalculated, too. Their revolt rekindled regional rivalries, tainting the uprising with a whiff of separatism. Their calls for Western intervention also summoned the specter of civil war, alienating some who might have supported peaceful protests.
“Any Western military action against the government now will only stimulate more support for the government, because it will show that this battle is being fought on behalf of the West,” said Mustafa Fetouri, director of the business administration program at the Academy of Graduate Studies in Tripoli.
Fetouri, who describes himself as independent, says he initially supported some of the protesters’ demands for greater freedoms and an end to corruption. But he says the rebels made a mistake by taking up arms and appealing for outside help, as well as by adopting as their symbol the flag of King Idris, an easterner overthrown by Gaddafi’s 1969 coup whose rule was deeply resented by Libyans elsewhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-libyan-capital-a-revolution-crushed/2011/03/17/ABrHJPp_story.html
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 22, 2011 01:45PM
So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting Congress to declare war, first?
Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Saint Patrick
()
Date: March 22, 2011 01:49PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
whoa! no need to get all UPPITTY! im just reporting the facts here pal. He's the President of the United States! I voted for him. I can BITCH ALL I WANT!
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
whoa! no need to get all UPPITTY! im just reporting the facts here pal. He's the President of the United States! I voted for him. I can BITCH ALL I WANT!
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
roonie
()
Date: March 22, 2011 01:58PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
So, you advocate dithering and dithering while Congress is in session? The fucking second Congress goes out of session for a recess start military operations. There was ample opportunity to get Congress' consent, but it seems EXTREMELY suspect that all activities begin the second Congress leaves town.
Like St. Pat above, I will bitch til the operations cease or Congress consents. Shrub may have treated the Constitution like a roll of toilet paper, but this President should not.
If you supported this President's campaign and you voted for this President because you shared the same principles he did at the time, there is no way in good conscience you cannot be pissed right now. Either you aren't thinking for yourself or you have compromised your beliefs along the way - either way, it's fucking pathetic.
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
So, you advocate dithering and dithering while Congress is in session? The fucking second Congress goes out of session for a recess start military operations. There was ample opportunity to get Congress' consent, but it seems EXTREMELY suspect that all activities begin the second Congress leaves town.
Like St. Pat above, I will bitch til the operations cease or Congress consents. Shrub may have treated the Constitution like a roll of toilet paper, but this President should not.
If you supported this President's campaign and you voted for this President because you shared the same principles he did at the time, there is no way in good conscience you cannot be pissed right now. Either you aren't thinking for yourself or you have compromised your beliefs along the way - either way, it's fucking pathetic.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Lopsided genitals
()
Date: March 22, 2011 02:00PM
I supported his campaign because he was gonna pay ma bills and I was gonna get free ca$h money bitch!
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Dane Bramage
()
Date: March 22, 2011 06:53PM
roonie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you supported this President's campaign and you
> voted for this President because you shared the
> same principles he did at the time,
That is the funniest thing I've read lately. His principles didn't change since he took office, the Hope and Change hogwash is what he needed to get into office. He's a politician, he lied, it's what they do.
To WTL, I would have approved of Obama's action in Libya if his choice was inaction. It looks like NATO has no idea on how to proceed, what the goals are, how to close this out, or what to do once it is over. Dumb dumb dumb
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you supported this President's campaign and you
> voted for this President because you shared the
> same principles he did at the time,
That is the funniest thing I've read lately. His principles didn't change since he took office, the Hope and Change hogwash is what he needed to get into office. He's a politician, he lied, it's what they do.
To WTL, I would have approved of Obama's action in Libya if his choice was inaction. It looks like NATO has no idea on how to proceed, what the goals are, how to close this out, or what to do once it is over. Dumb dumb dumb
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
dika-dika
()
Date: March 22, 2011 06:58PM
No Sweat Bamey will call WTL on the Hot line for advice. You know WTL is a Obama Advisor in real life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
justsayin
()
Date: March 22, 2011 07:05PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
He should have done nothing and let a civil war be a civil war (I wrote that weeks ago so this isn't hindsight). At most he should have supplied arms to the resistance, no one would have batted an eye at that. I thought we had better people at the help, this is an international disaster and an embarrassment of epic proportions.
I expected "Ready, Fire, Aim!" out of Bush and the Neocons but not out of Obama. Shit CLEARLY wasn't worked out with the powers that be. Now running the operation is a hot potato, just a goatfuck and it is embarrassing.
----------------------------------------
"She looks pretty good for 12, admit it." - WingNut, 04/24/2012
"I'm racist too. So what?" - Ellipsis 9/16/2011
"If you only knew who I was, and what I was working to do you would...have the decency to tell me I hated my nation and the way of life. I may not agree with...the government...I hate the "government"......" - Firrat 9/1/10
"there seems to be a queer...why? To try and further demean a defeated... dumb Tea party... I think we need more... far left folks on a regular basis - Louis Farakhan, Jesse Jackson...Al Sharpton" - Registered Voter, 8/19/2011
"If your computer is running slow, or you have any other problems, email me at with the problem and i am willing to fix it, for a price of course" - Taylor, spamming FFU on 04/12/2006. "N****rs as slaves again? I think so..." - Taylor, 09/20/2009
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
He should have done nothing and let a civil war be a civil war (I wrote that weeks ago so this isn't hindsight). At most he should have supplied arms to the resistance, no one would have batted an eye at that. I thought we had better people at the help, this is an international disaster and an embarrassment of epic proportions.
I expected "Ready, Fire, Aim!" out of Bush and the Neocons but not out of Obama. Shit CLEARLY wasn't worked out with the powers that be. Now running the operation is a hot potato, just a goatfuck and it is embarrassing.
----------------------------------------
"She looks pretty good for 12, admit it." - WingNut, 04/24/2012
"I'm racist too. So what?" - Ellipsis 9/16/2011
"If you only knew who I was, and what I was working to do you would...have the decency to tell me I hated my nation and the way of life. I may not agree with...the government...I hate the "government"......" - Firrat 9/1/10
"there seems to be a queer...why? To try and further demean a defeated... dumb Tea party... I think we need more... far left folks on a regular basis - Louis Farakhan, Jesse Jackson...Al Sharpton" - Registered Voter, 8/19/2011
"If your computer is running slow, or you have any other problems, email me at with the problem and i am willing to fix it, for a price of course" - Taylor, spamming FFU on 04/12/2006. "N****rs as slaves again? I think so..." - Taylor, 09/20/2009
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
dika-dika
()
Date: March 22, 2011 07:21PM
Goody Goody a Hybrid deal was made. WTL is on the Job.
The U.S. and France have effectively reached an agreement in their dispute over who would assume command of the U.N.-backed military campaign against Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi: a NATO-backed entity, a senior State Department official confirmed to Fox News.
President Obama had promised a swift transfer of command, with NATO coordination, once the allies (principally the U.S.) had succeeded in degrading Libyan air assets to the point where they could establish a no-fly zone over the country.
That point has effectively been reached, but France had been insisting that the entity that assumes command of the no-fly zone and other multilateral missions in the Libyan conflict should exist independently of NATO.
The official told Fox News the arrangement will be "something of a hybrid," with NATO's unique command-and-control capabilities fully harnessed to the tasks at hand, but "using that in a broader coalition that doesn't have a big, fat NATO flag on it, for obvious reasons."
This was what French President Nicolas Sarkozy was driving at when his office -- in a communique issued late Tuesday afternoon, describing a call between him and Obama -- stated that the two leaders agreed "on the means of using NATO's command structures to support the coalition."
France, which has been out in front of the crisis, had been making a play for political leadership of the mission and Turkey had objected to NATO taking control.
Meanwhile, Obama vowed closer cooperation Tuesday with the Central American nations where U.S. policies on crime, immigration and other issues have outsize influence on populations that depend heavily on their giant neighbor to the north and impact U.S. society in turn.
Speaking in El Salvador, the final stop on his three-country Latin American tour and the only one in Central America, Obama promised work on increasing trade and economic growth, fighting drug trafficking and creating opportunities so that people can find opportunity in their home countries and "don't feel like they have to head north to provide for their families."
"The United States will do our part" in combating the increasing scourge of drug trafficking, the president said, standing next to El Salvador's president Mauricio Funes, who welcomed Obama's attention to the oft-overlooked region. Obama announced a new $200 million partnership with El Salvador to combat drug wars that have led to a spike in murders here and in other Central American countries.
Yet Obama's five-day visit to Latin America has been overshadowed from the start by the war he's running in faraway Libya, and just before the news conference started the White House said Obama would be cutting his visit short to return earlier to the U.S. on Wednesday.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/22/obama-leave-latin-america-early/#ixzz1HNDK21xt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/2011 07:22PM by dika-dika.
The U.S. and France have effectively reached an agreement in their dispute over who would assume command of the U.N.-backed military campaign against Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi: a NATO-backed entity, a senior State Department official confirmed to Fox News.
President Obama had promised a swift transfer of command, with NATO coordination, once the allies (principally the U.S.) had succeeded in degrading Libyan air assets to the point where they could establish a no-fly zone over the country.
That point has effectively been reached, but France had been insisting that the entity that assumes command of the no-fly zone and other multilateral missions in the Libyan conflict should exist independently of NATO.
The official told Fox News the arrangement will be "something of a hybrid," with NATO's unique command-and-control capabilities fully harnessed to the tasks at hand, but "using that in a broader coalition that doesn't have a big, fat NATO flag on it, for obvious reasons."
This was what French President Nicolas Sarkozy was driving at when his office -- in a communique issued late Tuesday afternoon, describing a call between him and Obama -- stated that the two leaders agreed "on the means of using NATO's command structures to support the coalition."
France, which has been out in front of the crisis, had been making a play for political leadership of the mission and Turkey had objected to NATO taking control.
Meanwhile, Obama vowed closer cooperation Tuesday with the Central American nations where U.S. policies on crime, immigration and other issues have outsize influence on populations that depend heavily on their giant neighbor to the north and impact U.S. society in turn.
Speaking in El Salvador, the final stop on his three-country Latin American tour and the only one in Central America, Obama promised work on increasing trade and economic growth, fighting drug trafficking and creating opportunities so that people can find opportunity in their home countries and "don't feel like they have to head north to provide for their families."
"The United States will do our part" in combating the increasing scourge of drug trafficking, the president said, standing next to El Salvador's president Mauricio Funes, who welcomed Obama's attention to the oft-overlooked region. Obama announced a new $200 million partnership with El Salvador to combat drug wars that have led to a spike in murders here and in other Central American countries.
Yet Obama's five-day visit to Latin America has been overshadowed from the start by the war he's running in faraway Libya, and just before the news conference started the White House said Obama would be cutting his visit short to return earlier to the U.S. on Wednesday.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/22/obama-leave-latin-america-early/#ixzz1HNDK21xt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/2011 07:22PM by dika-dika.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
ThePackLeader
()
Date: March 23, 2011 09:48PM
President Obama is a weak leader no matter how you look at it.
==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).
==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:06AM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
Tell Barney Frank (hardly an O hater) to quit his bitching:
Barney Frank says President Obama’s reasoning for attacking Libya without going to Congress first isn’t good enough.
White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Thursday that Obama “believes that consultations with Congress are important” and that “he has done that” before he gave the order to attack Libya last week.
But in an interview with POLITICO, Frank, the liberal congressman from Massachusetts, said “consultations are no substitute” for seeking Congress’s permission to go to war.
“Consultations, schmonsultations,” Frank said.
Frank also didn’t buy Carney’s argument on Thursday that Obama couldn’t ask Congress to go to war because doing so would have given Muammar Qadhafi time to slaughter Libyans in Benghazi. “They should have asked earlier,” Frank argued, also suggesting that publicizing a request for war could have even spooked Qadhafi.
Still, Frank said, Obama can make some amends by asking Congress to approve further attacks in Libya before authorizing them. “I wish he had done it differently, and it’s not too late for him to do it differently,” he said.
-------------------------------------------------------
> So which is it? Was Obama dithering for taking too
> long? Or did he act too hastily by not getting
> Congress to declare war, first?
>
> Face it. There's nothing Obama could do that you
> would have approved of. So quit your bitching.
Tell Barney Frank (hardly an O hater) to quit his bitching:
Barney Frank says President Obama’s reasoning for attacking Libya without going to Congress first isn’t good enough.
White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Thursday that Obama “believes that consultations with Congress are important” and that “he has done that” before he gave the order to attack Libya last week.
But in an interview with POLITICO, Frank, the liberal congressman from Massachusetts, said “consultations are no substitute” for seeking Congress’s permission to go to war.
“Consultations, schmonsultations,” Frank said.
Frank also didn’t buy Carney’s argument on Thursday that Obama couldn’t ask Congress to go to war because doing so would have given Muammar Qadhafi time to slaughter Libyans in Benghazi. “They should have asked earlier,” Frank argued, also suggesting that publicizing a request for war could have even spooked Qadhafi.
Still, Frank said, Obama can make some amends by asking Congress to approve further attacks in Libya before authorizing them. “I wish he had done it differently, and it’s not too late for him to do it differently,” he said.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:14AM
Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails again?" Did I say Democrats aren't going to be critical of this? My remarks were aimed at the OP, dumbshit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:21AM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails again?"
> Did I say Democrats aren't going to be critical of
> this? My remarks were aimed at the OP, dumbshit.
Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop defending it and stop acting like you knew what you were talking about.
You clearly underestimated your own party's opposition to Obama's potentially unconstitutional (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding Libya by painting all opposition to Obama's shortsighted stupid "kinetic military action" as typical griping from those that constantly oppose everything Obama. You were wrong.
Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes on......
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails again?"
> Did I say Democrats aren't going to be critical of
> this? My remarks were aimed at the OP, dumbshit.
Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop defending it and stop acting like you knew what you were talking about.
You clearly underestimated your own party's opposition to Obama's potentially unconstitutional (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding Libya by painting all opposition to Obama's shortsighted stupid "kinetic military action" as typical griping from those that constantly oppose everything Obama. You were wrong.
Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes on......
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:25AM
WTL fails again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails again?"
> > Did I say Democrats aren't going to be critical
> of
> > this? My remarks were aimed at the OP,
> dumbshit.
>
> Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop
> defending it and stop acting like you knew what
> you were talking about.
>
> You clearly underestimated your own party's
> opposition to Obama's potentially unconstitutional
> (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding Libya
> by painting all opposition to Obama's shortsighted
> stupid "kinetic military action" as typical
> griping from those that constantly oppose
> everything Obama. You were wrong.
>
> Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes on......
Sorry, but you are just wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails again?"
> > Did I say Democrats aren't going to be critical
> of
> > this? My remarks were aimed at the OP,
> dumbshit.
>
> Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop
> defending it and stop acting like you knew what
> you were talking about.
>
> You clearly underestimated your own party's
> opposition to Obama's potentially unconstitutional
> (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding Libya
> by painting all opposition to Obama's shortsighted
> stupid "kinetic military action" as typical
> griping from those that constantly oppose
> everything Obama. You were wrong.
>
> Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes on......
Sorry, but you are just wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:30AM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails
> again?"
> > > Did I say Democrats aren't going to be
> critical
> > of
> > > this? My remarks were aimed at the OP,
> > dumbshit.
> >
> > Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop
> > defending it and stop acting like you knew what
> > you were talking about.
> >
> > You clearly underestimated your own party's
> > opposition to Obama's potentially
> unconstitutional
> > (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding
> Libya
> > by painting all opposition to Obama's
> shortsighted
> > stupid "kinetic military action" as typical
> > griping from those that constantly oppose
> > everything Obama. You were wrong.
> >
> > Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes
> on......
>
>
> Sorry, but you are just wrong.
Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
Besides, even if you were just talking about the OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30 seconds to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at the GOP.
Enjoy being wrong?
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Please clarify how this is a "WTL fails
> again?"
> > > Did I say Democrats aren't going to be
> critical
> > of
> > > this? My remarks were aimed at the OP,
> > dumbshit.
> >
> > Bullshit. You know it is bullshit, so stop
> > defending it and stop acting like you knew what
> > you were talking about.
> >
> > You clearly underestimated your own party's
> > opposition to Obama's potentially
> unconstitutional
> > (not my words, Dem words) actions regarding
> Libya
> > by painting all opposition to Obama's
> shortsighted
> > stupid "kinetic military action" as typical
> > griping from those that constantly oppose
> > everything Obama. You were wrong.
> >
> > Kucinich, Frank, Webb.......the list goes
> on......
>
>
> Sorry, but you are just wrong.
Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
Besides, even if you were just talking about the OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30 seconds to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at the GOP.
Enjoy being wrong?
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:35AM
WTL fails again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
>
> Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
>
> Besides, even if you were just talking about the
> OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30 seconds
> to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an
> Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at the
> GOP.
>
> Enjoy being wrong?
I'm not going to get into an argument with someone who doesn't understand the logical disconnect that you are positing. There's no point because you are incapable of even the most basic understanding of making an argument.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
>
> Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
>
> Besides, even if you were just talking about the
> OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30 seconds
> to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an
> Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at the
> GOP.
>
> Enjoy being wrong?
I'm not going to get into an argument with someone who doesn't understand the logical disconnect that you are positing. There's no point because you are incapable of even the most basic understanding of making an argument.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:41AM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > >
> > > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
> >
> > Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
> >
> > Besides, even if you were just talking about
> the
> > OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30
> seconds
> > to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an
> > Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at
> the
> > GOP.
> >
> > Enjoy being wrong?
>
>
> I'm not going to get into an argument with someone
> who doesn't understand the logical disconnect that
> you are positing. There's no point because you are
> incapable of even the most basic understanding of
> making an argument.
Says the moron who got it wrong to begin with and is still getting it wrong. As has been pointed out, there was no logical disconnect. You simply got it wrong. You were wrong about the OP, you were wrong about everything else after that.
I am not going to get into an argument with someone who is so stubbornly stupid to not admit you were wrong. There is no point because your argument will continue to be wrong.
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > >
> > > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
> >
> > Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
> >
> > Besides, even if you were just talking about
> the
> > OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30
> seconds
> > to read any of his other posts, he is hardly an
> > Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at
> the
> > GOP.
> >
> > Enjoy being wrong?
>
>
> I'm not going to get into an argument with someone
> who doesn't understand the logical disconnect that
> you are positing. There's no point because you are
> incapable of even the most basic understanding of
> making an argument.
Says the moron who got it wrong to begin with and is still getting it wrong. As has been pointed out, there was no logical disconnect. You simply got it wrong. You were wrong about the OP, you were wrong about everything else after that.
I am not going to get into an argument with someone who is so stubbornly stupid to not admit you were wrong. There is no point because your argument will continue to be wrong.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Simple simon
()
Date: March 25, 2011 11:48AM
WTL fails again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
> > >
> > > Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
> > >
> > > Besides, even if you were just talking about
> > the
> > > OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30
> > seconds
> > > to read any of his other posts, he is hardly
> an
> > > Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at
> > the
> > > GOP.
> > >
> > > Enjoy being wrong?
> >
> >
> > I'm not going to get into an argument with
> someone
> > who doesn't understand the logical disconnect
> that
> > you are positing. There's no point because you
> are
> > incapable of even the most basic understanding
> of
> > making an argument.
>
> Says the moron who got it wrong to begin with and
> is still getting it wrong. As has been pointed
> out, there was no logical disconnect. You simply
> got it wrong. You were wrong about the OP, you
> were wrong about everything else after that.
>
> I am not going to get into an argument with
> someone who is so stubbornly stupid to not admit
> you were wrong. There is no point because your
> argument will continue to be wrong.
Sure WTL is wrong, dead wrong, his argument is an embarrasment to common sense and reason. So the prudent thing to do is just let the baby have his bottle and move on.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, but you are just wrong.
> > >
> > > Sorry, saying that doesn't make it so.
> > >
> > > Besides, even if you were just talking about
> > the
> > > OP, he supported Obama and if you took 30
> > seconds
> > > to read any of his other posts, he is hardly
> an
> > > Obama basher and has taken a few popshots at
> > the
> > > GOP.
> > >
> > > Enjoy being wrong?
> >
> >
> > I'm not going to get into an argument with
> someone
> > who doesn't understand the logical disconnect
> that
> > you are positing. There's no point because you
> are
> > incapable of even the most basic understanding
> of
> > making an argument.
>
> Says the moron who got it wrong to begin with and
> is still getting it wrong. As has been pointed
> out, there was no logical disconnect. You simply
> got it wrong. You were wrong about the OP, you
> were wrong about everything else after that.
>
> I am not going to get into an argument with
> someone who is so stubbornly stupid to not admit
> you were wrong. There is no point because your
> argument will continue to be wrong.
Sure WTL is wrong, dead wrong, his argument is an embarrasment to common sense and reason. So the prudent thing to do is just let the baby have his bottle and move on.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:11PM
Let me explain this to the moron(s) out there.
Y says X is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
Z says he is unhappy with Situation A.
That does not mean that Y is wrong about saying X is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
Does that clarify things?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Y says X is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
Z says he is unhappy with Situation A.
That does not mean that Y is wrong about saying X is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
Does that clarify things?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
mcsmack
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:21PM
I'm sorry but the WTL fails again shit is freeking hilarious. Dude you can't win with these guys. Not sure why. I guarantee you could be a card carrying member of the Tea Party and it wouldn't matter. I read your first response to the WTL fails again post and laughed for 10 minutes.
The fact is there are idiots on my side of the isle that knee jerk like one of Pavlov's Dogs. It is somewhat hypocritical of Obama for his war powers action to be sure but that doesn't mean he is wrong by authorizing action in Libya. He is not going about it the way I would but at least he's doing something.
Anyway you didn't fail again but it is fucking bust nut funny. I'm still laughing.
The fact is there are idiots on my side of the isle that knee jerk like one of Pavlov's Dogs. It is somewhat hypocritical of Obama for his war powers action to be sure but that doesn't mean he is wrong by authorizing action in Libya. He is not going about it the way I would but at least he's doing something.
Anyway you didn't fail again but it is fucking bust nut funny. I'm still laughing.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
Registered Voter
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:35PM
Putting this guy in charge of the operation is essentially leaving the Americans in charge.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110325/ap_on_re_ca/cn_canada_libya_nato
...Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Friday that Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard has been designated to lead the alliance's military campaign in Libya.
Bouchard is stationed in Naples, Italy, at the Allied Joint Force Command.
Bouchard's recent job was deputy commander of NORAD, reporting to an American general.
"He will be commander of the NATO operations, yet to be fully defined NATO operations," MacKay said....
I mean, it sounds good - but seriously, Canada is going to lead the operation (under NATO of course)? LOL
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110325/ap_on_re_ca/cn_canada_libya_nato
...Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Friday that Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard has been designated to lead the alliance's military campaign in Libya.
Bouchard is stationed in Naples, Italy, at the Allied Joint Force Command.
Bouchard's recent job was deputy commander of NORAD, reporting to an American general.
"He will be commander of the NATO operations, yet to be fully defined NATO operations," MacKay said....
I mean, it sounds good - but seriously, Canada is going to lead the operation (under NATO of course)? LOL
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:44PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me explain this to the moron(s) out there.
>
> Y says X is unhappy with situation A or situation
> B.
>
> Z says he is unhappy with Situation A.
>
> That does not mean that Y is wrong about saying X
> is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
>
> Does that clarify things?
Sure, if only that were the way things played out here.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me explain this to the moron(s) out there.
>
> Y says X is unhappy with situation A or situation
> B.
>
> Z says he is unhappy with Situation A.
>
> That does not mean that Y is wrong about saying X
> is unhappy with situation A or situation B.
>
> Does that clarify things?
Sure, if only that were the way things played out here.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:51PM
Y (WTL) says X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with situation A (Intervention in Libya) or situation B (Non-Intervention in Libya).
Z (Frank) says he is unhappy with Situation A (Intervention in Libya).
That does not mean that Y (WTL) is wrong about saying X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with situation A (Intervention in Libya) or situation B (Non-Intervention in Libya).
Is that clear D? (Dumbass)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Z (Frank) says he is unhappy with Situation A (Intervention in Libya).
That does not mean that Y (WTL) is wrong about saying X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with situation A (Intervention in Libya) or situation B (Non-Intervention in Libya).
Is that clear D? (Dumbass)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 01:56PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Y (WTL) says X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with
> situation A (Intervention in Libya) or situation B
> (Non-Intervention in Libya).
>
> Z (Frank) says he is unhappy with Situation A
> (Intervention in Libya).
>
> That does not mean that Y (WTL) is wrong about
> saying X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with situation A
> (Intervention in Libya) or situation B
> (Non-Intervention in Libya).
>
>
> Is that clear D? (Dumbass)
Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you still ignore all relevant issues surrounding your original premise. OP and GOP are not interchangable.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Y (WTL) says X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with
> situation A (Intervention in Libya) or situation B
> (Non-Intervention in Libya).
>
> Z (Frank) says he is unhappy with Situation A
> (Intervention in Libya).
>
> That does not mean that Y (WTL) is wrong about
> saying X (OP, or GOP) is unhappy with situation A
> (Intervention in Libya) or situation B
> (Non-Intervention in Libya).
>
>
> Is that clear D? (Dumbass)
Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you still ignore all relevant issues surrounding your original premise. OP and GOP are not interchangable.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
I HATE MATH !!!!!
()
Date: March 25, 2011 02:15PM
WHAT'S WITH ALL THIS ALGEBRA ?
I GOT AS FAR AS 'WTL' BEING A DUMASS,
BUT I KINDA GOT LOST THERE.
I GOT AS FAR AS 'WTL' BEING A DUMASS,
BUT I KINDA GOT LOST THERE.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 02:46PM
WTL fails again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you
> still ignore all relevant issues surrounding your
> original premise.
What relevant issues? The made up ones in your mind?
> OP and GOP are not
> interchangable.
Regardless, either situation results in you being a dumbass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you
> still ignore all relevant issues surrounding your
> original premise.
What relevant issues? The made up ones in your mind?
> OP and GOP are not
> interchangable.
Regardless, either situation results in you being a dumbass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 02:52PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you
> > still ignore all relevant issues surrounding
> your
> > original premise.
>
> What relevant issues? The made up ones in your
> mind?
>
> > OP and GOP are not
> > interchangable.
>
> Regardless, either situation results in you being
> a dumbass.
Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong. Sorry, it just isn't working.
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Again, that isn't the situation here. And, you
> > still ignore all relevant issues surrounding
> your
> > original premise.
>
> What relevant issues? The made up ones in your
> mind?
>
> > OP and GOP are not
> > interchangable.
>
> Regardless, either situation results in you being
> a dumbass.
Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong. Sorry, it just isn't working.
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WashingTone-Locian
()
Date: March 25, 2011 03:01PM
WTL fails again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong.
> Sorry, it just isn't working.
Well, that's what I get for trying to explain things to an idiot. I suppose I should have gone with my first instinct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong.
> Sorry, it just isn't working.
Well, that's what I get for trying to explain things to an idiot. I suppose I should have gone with my first instinct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Re: Rebellion crushed in Tripoli
Posted by:
WTL fails again
()
Date: March 25, 2011 03:09PM
WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> >
> > Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong.
> > Sorry, it just isn't working.
>
>
> Well, that's what I get for trying to explain
> things to an idiot. I suppose I should have gone
> with my first instinct.
Yeah, you keep saying that. Unfortunately, the more you say, the more retarded you look. You simply are wrong. It is really difficult to comprehend how you can't see that. I suppose your ignorance is bliss.
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTL fails again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> >
> > Keep dreaming up a way out of you being wrong.
> > Sorry, it just isn't working.
>
>
> Well, that's what I get for trying to explain
> things to an idiot. I suppose I should have gone
> with my first instinct.
Yeah, you keep saying that. Unfortunately, the more you say, the more retarded you look. You simply are wrong. It is really difficult to comprehend how you can't see that. I suppose your ignorance is bliss.