W/o troops on the ground. Apples and Oranges.

If we had done the same in Iraq, I may have felt different, but I have not supported Obama on Lybia here either...

As near as I can tell we have accomplished nothing in Lybia. Nothing.

Apples and Oranges

That's a terrible analogy. What exactly was Bush "right" about? Shifting focus away from Al Qaeda and onto Iraq based on shoddy, manufactured "evidence" and then thrusting us into a Trillion Dollar war that accomplished literally nothing of value for the long-term safety of the American people?

Or was he right about the part where he helped progress this country to a point where Americans are forced to live in a Police state where granny will get diddled while trying to get on a plane because her fake hip set of a metal detector.

But hey, at least he got the guy who "tried to kill [his] daddy."

First, we havene't accomplished much in Iraq. I would have rather they handled it like the seals just did with OBL. Samy with Ghaddafi.

Second, you made the bleeping comparision when you brought up Lybia as 'another war started'

And the guy who had made it his life mission to kill you and your family. Patriot Act, Gitmo, enhanced interrogation,military tribunals...all Bush policies that Obama either kept or added too.

It's not a"trillion dollar war"....get your talking points from a more reliable source.

I think there is a very good argument that Bush policies led to the unrest and action in the mid-east today. Bush's actions also led to OBL living in seclusion for over 5 years, his influence greatly reduced.

This doesn't make any sense, unless you think the CIA and our Armed Forces are completely incompetent. Reality is that there are a lot of very effective and legal methods to get information that the experts seem to think work quite well.

You just don't seem to be able to accept the fact that Obama get's to take credit for authorizing this mission.

-spence

Iraq? By some accounts could total 3 trillion more than the 50-60B offered by the Bush Admin at the time...

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/f...stiglitz200804

I believe the Iraq war is at about 800B today and will certainly pass a trillion dollars by the time the bulk of troops are out...best case.

-spence

vanity fair?????????????? it has gotten bad:rotf2:

I can't qoute any woman's magazines or anything, but from what I understand, since Obama's second day in office(when he banned enhanced interrogation) the information we get is not the same as we used to get. It worked.

I credit Obama with making the right choice and using the information to kill UBL. I have never said anything negative about that.

You however are in severe denial.

Ah yes, there's the issue.:rotf2:

On what is your understanding based?

Hey....I read! I also have listened to alot of what the peopel involved in all this are saying. Including many in the current administration.

You will just figure it's from Rush's show though.

I would think that the "people involved in all this" wouldn't be saying much about classified information gathered from classified interrogations. That is why I asked. Wouldn't have thought of Rush, if you hadn't brought it up. Apparently on your conscience?

The head of the CIA can't seem to keep his mouth shut:biglaugh:

Not really a womans magazine, but it was the first link that popped up. There's plenty of others...

If you want to question this being a trillion dollar war just count the Congressional appropriations on record (around 900B) and the fact that we still have tens of thousands of troops and contractors as taxpayer liabilities. Obviously, this doesn't factor in the even more dramatic soft costs.

As for the quality of intel changing dramatically the day after Obama took office...I call bull#^&#^&#^&#^&. You're either completely off your rocker or just making things up.

As for the head of the CIA not keeping his mouth shut, did he say anything else or are you going to hinge your entire argument on one statement you're simply reading into what you want to hear?

-spence

You would think that but instead - WAY too many people are flapping their gums. Every 5 minutes there is a Breaking News new details revealed, after a break from our sponsor...

YouTube it Spence. It comes right from his mouth.

Ladies Home Journal
Teen Beat
Vogue

you should go back to comedy shows for links and info :)

you are missing the part where the administration sent a lackey right out to explain that what came out of his mouth, didn't come out of his mouth...let me be clear aaaaaand don't spike the football

What comes from his mouth? Please be more specific...

-spence

NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams: News and videos from the evening broadcast- msnbc.com

Watch please

Intelligence garnered from waterboarded detainees was used to track down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and kill him, CIA Chief Leon Panetta told NBC News on Tuesday.
"Enhanced interrogation techniques" were used to extract information that led to the mission's success, Panetta said during an interview with anchor Brian Williams. Those techniques included waterboarding, he acknowledged.

$4 a gallon gas.... Check.

Billions of dollars in contracts for halliburton..... Check.

Bush and chenney accomplished what THEY wanted.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:rotf2::rotf2: Ya, that's why we went in.

I thought it was because Saddam tried to kill his daddy?????

I thought we had discussed this already.

Before you can assert that waterboarding "works" you'd first want to establish if it played a signifigant part in the operation. By Panetta's own words, the information gained from detainees who had at some time (I believe years previously) been subjected to EIT's was a small piece of a large network of intel and arguably could have been gained by other means.

To give waterboarding credit for the mission success in this light doesn't seem to pass a simple logic test, and is contrary to what we do know as fact, that the primary reason we found OBL was through many years of hard work by the intelligence community.

I don't have a problem with some who believe torture is morally justified, but to use this instance as affirmation of its effectiveness is a different issue and one that doesn't seem to be supported by the known facts or the CIA Director.

-spence

"Enhanced interrogation techniques" were used to extract information that led to the mission's success, Panetta said

Your logic that the information would be handed over anyway or was not usefull is contrary to what the head of the CIA believes. This is not a moral issue Spence. This is life or death.

This is a NBC report......not the evil Fox network

Panetta is not denying that EIT's were in the mix at some point, but he in no way is crediting them as a substantial contributor...he actually goes pretty far to make this point clear.

For you to say that water boarding "worked" means they were able to get intel from it they wouldn't have got otherwise, and that this intel aided substantially in the hunt for Bin Laden. Cause and effect. I've yet to see anything that indicates this is the case...at all.

I did also notice that on the Sunday shows the intel people were very careful on this point...hell, even #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney danced around it...

And usually Cheney doesn't dance around anything :hihi:

-spence

Actually he's been on ice for years. Obama brought him out of the freezer to move the nation away from his fake birth certificate



Red Alert: Government Had Osama bin Laden Frozen for Years Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!