As for Reagan, I guess you would have to know a little of his history to understand Villas comment. One day the horror that was Reagan will be clear.
The font has something to do with quoting. I've been having trouble with it for some time.
by Sam Whiskey 81 Replies latest jw friends
As for Reagan, I guess you would have to know a little of his history to understand Villas comment. One day the horror that was Reagan will be clear.
The font has something to do with quoting. I've been having trouble with it for some time.
Beks, you have a pm.
Villabolo
Kristol and McCain brazenly admit “humanitarian mission” in Libya is about neo-colonial regime change
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, March 21, 2011
While applauding Barack Obama’s involvement of U.S. forces in air strikes, influential neo-con Bill Kristol told Fox News that America should go further than merely bombarding Libya and send in ground troops as “peacekeepers,” embroiling the bankrupt United States in yet another foreign occupation while enabling Muslim extremists fighting Gaddafi to rise to power.
Video courtesy of Raw Story.
An Air National Guard unit based out of Illinois is heading to Libya to help fight against Colonel Gaddafi.
"I am proud that the National Guard is able to play a part in curbing the atrocious violence against Libyan civilians by their own government,” said Maj. Gen. William L. Enyart, the Adjutant General of the Illinois National Guard, in a statement........
freydo, your copy and paste does not mean any shit!
FUTURE TSA AGENTS
Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment that could be more damaging than after the Abu Ghraib scandal
Freydo,
This is not Iraq. And we will not put troops on the ground in Libya. At least, that's what they're saying now. We'll see though.
The only measure that the resolution excludes is the deployment of "a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory." The Libyan rebels have said they want no such force, few if any foreign governments are inclined to send one, and Obama clarified today that he would not order any ground troops to Libya. Still, it's good to have the restriction stated explicitly, in order to avert a) the most slippery slope of escalation and b) charges (and not just from Qaddafi) that the U.N. action is a cover for Western imperialism.
How much different is this than the actions of Hitler at the start of WWII?
Who said this 4 years ago, and what is he doing now?
Question: In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress?
The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
More tomahawks fired than any Nobel Prize winner in history.
Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment that could be more damaging than after the Abu Ghraib scandal
I WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS STORY TIL I SEE IT FROM CNN!