1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Obama Invades Pakistan!

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007.

Page 2 of 4
  1. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bestmapman @ Aug 2 2007, 09:07 AM) [snapback]489209[/snapback]</div>
    I'd do a little more research on Obama first.

    Remember your source. Are you really going to take Berman's interpretation on ANYTHING and believe it?

    This has "out of context" and "spin" plastered all over it.

    Better still....put Berman on ignore. Your whole Priuschat experience will be that much more pleasant.
     
    #21 Godiva, Aug 2, 2007
  2. scargi01

    scargi01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    784
    57
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 2 2007, 09:58 AM) [snapback]489249[/snapback]</div>
    "Unfortunately the current administration of the executive branch of government in the United States of America, as well as a few of the anti-Obama trouble makers here, don't seem to be aware of any way to act on actionable intelligence other than invasion."

    How is it "Neocon spin" to question his phrase where he calls someone that is anti-Obama a troublemaker? Or has "neocon" simply become a perjorative thrown by liberals at those that disagree with them?
     
    #22 scargi01, Aug 2, 2007
  3. Proco

    Proco Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    2,570
    172
    28
    Location:
    The Beautiful NJ Shore
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    III
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 11:08 AM) [snapback]489261[/snapback]</div>
    Questioning his comment isn't spin. Referring to Obama as "Hussein" is.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 10:52 AM) [snapback]489244[/snapback]</div>
     
    #23 Proco, Aug 2, 2007
  4. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Aug 2 2007, 11:00 AM) [snapback]489250[/snapback]</div>
    I do like what he said in general - be aggressive - kill the bad guys - just like we are doing now :p

    but to invade pakistan - he is NUTS - he is DANGEROUS - he should stay far far away from the oval office. they have nukes, not like iran that does not have them yet.

    and its not directed at muslims - unless you are making a case that all terrorists are muslims?

    now answer my question. is invading pakistan a sane idea or should obama sit the heck down?
     
    #24 dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007
  5. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 10:08 AM) [snapback]489261[/snapback]</div>
    It's spin b/c he didn't say that being anti-Obama makes one a troublemaker. One can be anti-Obama and not be a troublemaker. IOW one can choose not to spin intelligent comments on Foreign policy to fight terrorism into a complete lie like "Obama invades Pakistan" and instead comment on what foreign policy actions your candidate prefers and why you feel your candidates plan is superior. That would be intelligent discourse and still be anti-Obama.

    Your spin was to imply that the poster stated that one must be a trouble maker one is anti-Obama...that isn't what he said. Note, also, that one can be a Pro-Obama troublemaker or even an indifferent-to-Obama troublemaker. The issue isn't your stance on Obama but whether or not one is a troublemaker. It is just that this particular post's troublemakers are anti-Obama.


    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:14 AM) [snapback]489265[/snapback]</div>
    Again you ignore my direct and simple questions to you. But I'll add yet another.

    Are you saying it is OK for terrorists and Al Queda to live/train/plot and grow in countries that have nuclear weapons and we should not take military action against them when the host country refuses to do so after our extensive diplomatic efforts. Is that your stance here? If not please clarify.
     
    #25 efusco, Aug 2, 2007
  6. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 2 2007, 11:05 AM) [snapback]489257[/snapback]</div>
    go ahead ignore - it is always easier than face the truth.

    those are his words not mine - no spin.

    so is it a sane idea to invade pakistan under any condition - yes or no. do you want the POTUS do pull the trigger on that concept. heck, you cant even handle invading iraq which is far smaller, more accessible, and NON NUCLEAR.

    is obama ready for prime time or is he totally NUTS? me... he should sit the freak down and do so quickly. DO NOT LET HIM NEAR THE OVAL OFFICE. you cant handle 3,600 American KIA's - imagine how many would die in pakistan. he has NO clue, zero.
     
    #26 dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007
  7. Danny Hamilton

    Danny Hamilton Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    926
    94
    0
    Location:
    Greater Chicagoland Area
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 10:08 AM) [snapback]489261[/snapback]</div>
    And yet I didn't call someone who is anti-Obama a troublemaker. There are pro-Obama troublemakers. There are people who are against Obama for legitamate reasons, but don't make up lies about him.

    Note that given 2 attributes troublemaker/non-troublemaker and pro-Obama/anti-Obama there are 4 possible combinations. I was simply specifying one of them.

    pro-Obama - troublemaker
    pro-Obama - non-troublemaker
    anti-Obama - troublemaker
    anti-Obama - non-troublemaker

    This should have been obvious from the context of my comments, but then it has already been established that a few commentors here have difficulty with the concept of context.
     
    #27 Danny Hamilton, Aug 2, 2007
  8. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 2 2007, 11:17 AM) [snapback]489266[/snapback]</div>
    try answering my post too.

    i would not invade pakistan under any conditions at this point in time - no way no how. would you?
     
    #28 dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007
  9. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    "The Truth" like "Obama Invades Pakistan" is the truth. I don't think so.

    No, they are your words and your spin. His words have been quoted within this post twice (not by you) but you ignore the actual quotes, comments and ideas he was conveying and single out one line that he states as a last resort to stop terrorism ("take the fight to the terrorist before they can take it to us"--paraphrasing your favored "leader").

    Yes it's sane, in the context he expressed, whether said country is nuclear or not. Even as a nuclear power they are not threat to US soil. BECAUSE they are nuclear it is of utmost importance that we never let terrorist gain control of the government...I repeat, it is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE that terrorists do not gain control of a nuclear powered government. And I have said that there are good conditions where invasion of Iraq would make sense. But that time hasn't come despite your fear mongering comments previously.

    He isn't nuts. Whether he's ready for prime-time is a legitimate question. Would a little more experience in the Senate be of benefit...probably. It might also let him get more entrenched in the BS politics of Washington...to his detriment. Why you fear a man of intelligence, who wants to build bridges and use diplomacy while protecting our country frightens you I can't comprehend. You spend a lot of your time living in fear Dr. B...must be a bit of a miserable life for you.
     
    #29 efusco, Aug 2, 2007
  10. Darwood

    Darwood Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    5,259
    268
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    "but to invade pakistan - he is NUTS - he is DANGEROUS"
    Who's saying we should invade? Oh...right, B Hussein.
    We'll shock and awe all of Pakistan! I guess that's what he proposed...if you say so.

    "and its not directed at muslims - unless you are making a case that all terrorists are muslims?"
    Oh, so you can use hyperbole, simplifications, and generalizations and I can't. Got it. I guess I should have said "Muslim countries", since I am well aware that you work with Muslims and only advocate the downfall of Muslim countries that hate Isreal, not Muslim American co-workers.
     
    #30 Darwood, Aug 2, 2007
  11. Danny Hamilton

    Danny Hamilton Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    926
    94
    0
    Location:
    Greater Chicagoland Area
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    I'm sure there are some conditions under which even you would advocate for invading Pakistan.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    Only under conditions that make it necessary.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    I'm not sure who the "you" is that you are referring to here, but whomever they are, perhaps they don't feel that it was necessary.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    He hasn't done or said anything yet that indicates to me that he isn't ready.


    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    That's a trick question. Personally, I think anyone who chooses to subject themselves to the scrutiny and the slander, and the spin, and the hate that so sadly seem to be requirements to run for public office is totally nuts.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489269[/snapback]</div>
    I think psychologists refer to this as projection.
     
    #31 Danny Hamilton, Aug 2, 2007
  12. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:19 AM) [snapback]489272[/snapback]</div>
    I'm sorry, I try to answer each and every one of your pertainant questions. I quote, line by line and explain my answers as completely as possible in complete sentences providing pertainant links and quotes when appropriate.

    If I've missed a specific question please point it out as I'd honor the opportunity to address it.

    And yes, hell yes, absolutely I would support and invasion of Pakistan to strike specific terrorist targets before they developed to a point where they could attack the US or our allies and before they could gain enough power to take over the control of the government of Pakistan along with their nuclear weapons. I do not want to see another "Taliban in Afganistan" like occurance in Pakistan...a situation that would be even worse than Afganistan and would put nuclear weapons directly into the hands of Al Queda.

    Again, this would be ONLY after diplomatic efforts, as Obama described in the quotes above, failed or it became clear that Pakistan would never act against the terrorists that you proclaim to fear and proclaim to be the justification invading Iraq.
     
    #32 efusco, Aug 2, 2007
  13. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 2 2007, 11:29 AM) [snapback]489283[/snapback]</div>
    and you are for the war in iraq too since we are killing tons of al-qaeda there now. and you are for preventing iran from going nuclear.

    invading pakistan is nuts - destabilizing, dangerous, how do you see us doing that with our military? how do you prevent them from using their nukes, how do you prevent making new terrorists, how do you support these troops. you are not respecting a sovereign nations borders? what if mushariff is overthrown?

    why is not obama for killing the bad guys that are now in iraq? or why is he not for getting it on with iran now since they are assisting the bad guys in iraq?
     
    #33 dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007
  14. scargi01

    scargi01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    784
    57
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Aug 2 2007, 10:13 AM) [snapback]489264[/snapback]</div>
    How is referring to him by his name "spin"? Oh, maybe you mean the way the democrats for a time continually used "George Herbert Walker Bush III" when talking about W's father. Would that be it? Yeah, you are right. We shouldn't be doing that and calling people "neocons" and such. Should we?

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 2 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]489266[/snapback]</div>
    That is why I asked the question, with a question mark "?" I didn't make a statement.
     
    #34 scargi01, Aug 2, 2007
  15. dbermanmd

    dbermanmd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    8,553
    18
    0
    Location:
    manhattan
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    imagine if President Bush said what Obama said - he would be will to invade Pakistan...
     
    #35 dbermanmd, Aug 2, 2007
  16. Danny Hamilton

    Danny Hamilton Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    926
    94
    0
    Location:
    Greater Chicagoland Area
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 10:42 AM) [snapback]489287[/snapback]</div>
    And yet it is entirely possible to make a statement with a question.

    For instance, if I ask:

    "Have you quit that bad habit you told me about yet?"

    While it is a question, it also makes a statement that you have a bad habit that you told me about.

    This really isn't so difficult to understand for the average person, I'm a bit surprised you are struggling with it so much.
     
    #36 Danny Hamilton, Aug 2, 2007
  17. Darwood

    Darwood Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    5,259
    268
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    The arguments you are making against this mythical invasion of Pakistan that no one has proposed, work very well against your arguments on why we SHOULD attack Iran.

    Lets turn around your original post and jump in the way back machine, shall we?

    1. How does he invade a sovereign country without that countries permission?
    2. Iraq's/Iran's <strike>mountain</strike> desert ranges where the bad guys are located are some of the most vast and inhospitable in the world.
    3. Iraq/Iran HAS <strike>NUCLEAR</strike> WMD WEAPONS - they could use them if they want to.
    4. Imagine all the local tribes there rallying against us - talk about creating NEW enemies and terrorists
    5. How do you supply such a force? The logistics are virtually IMPOSSIBLE
    6. The current Iraqi/Iran President would be toast, and you would invite more radical elements to take over - and then they would have their fingers on the nuclear trigger!
    7. Iraq/Iran has a real military - now you would be fighting them and all the tribes and the terrorists.
    8. What a magnet that would be for the "bad guys" who currently enjoy going to Afghanistan to aid their cause.

    Lets trot out the familiar old lines with the table turned now.
    "You're either with us or against us!"
    "The defeatoblicans WANT us to lose"
    "Why do you hate America?"
    "Would you rather fight them here in America?"
     
    #37 Darwood, Aug 2, 2007
  18. Danny Hamilton

    Danny Hamilton Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    926
    94
    0
    Location:
    Greater Chicagoland Area
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 2 2007, 10:48 AM) [snapback]489290[/snapback]</div>
    I think I'd probably faint from shock if President Bush said anything half as intelligent as what Obama said, unless it was written for him by someone else.

    And I'm not sure why I bother to keep repeating this, but Obama did not say anything about invading Pakistan.
     
    #38 Danny Hamilton, Aug 2, 2007
  19. scargi01

    scargi01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    784
    57
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny Hamilton @ Aug 2 2007, 10:49 AM) [snapback]489291[/snapback]</div>
    Maybe the problem is your sensitivity to the question led you to believe I was making a statement when I was really asking for a clarification. Why would you be surprised that I am struggling to understand your misconception of my question?
     
    #39 scargi01, Aug 2, 2007
  20. Darwood

    Darwood Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    5,259
    268
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    "Derned weak willed wussie deafotocrats..They want us to lose..."

    "What?! a democrat wishes he could kill Osama?

    "Derned crazy demoncrat is DANGEROUS. Don't he know you can't just invade and occupy a soverign country?"
     
    #40 Darwood, Aug 2, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 4