goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: pike on March 22, 2011, 07:19:59 PM
-
Cruise missiles:
Each costs about $600,000 U.S.D.
bombs away
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile
-
Hanging out with "GWB is a war monger" libs :dunno:
-
Cruise missiles:
Each costs about $600,000 U.S.D.
bombs away
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile
I have LCMIQ, but I'm guessing we have a pretty solid stockpile built up. :dunno: We probably aren't building new ones that cost $600k right now. Could be wrong though.
-
I heard it wasn't cost effective to protest a measly $600,000 in government spending. Those tea party folks are very bottom line oriented.
:zzz:
-
I heard it wasn't cost effective to protest a measly $600,000 in government spending. Those tea party folks are very bottom line oriented.
:zzz:
True. This is one of the least expensive policies Obama has taken on.
-
we have a crap ton of cruise missiles and it probably isn't a bad idea to get rid of some of the older ones anyway. Sure beats sending ground troops in or risking the loss of a multimillion dollar aircraft or 2. Anybody see the wreckage of that F-15 that went down? The article I read said it was American but I was under the impression that all the air support was provided by the French. :dunno:
-
we have a crap ton of cruise missiles and it probably isn't a bad idea to get rid of some of the older ones anyway. Sure beats sending ground troops in or risking the loss of a multimillion dollar aircraft or 2. Anybody see the wreckage of that F-15 that went down? The article I read said it was American but I was under the impression that all the air support was provided by the French. :dunno:
It can't be ours, cuz this isn't a war, they said so.
-
we have a cac ton of cruise missiles and it probably isn't a bad idea to get rid of some of the older ones anyway. Sure beats sending ground troops in or risking the loss of a multimillion dollar aircraft or 2. Anybody see the wreckage of that F-15 that went down? The article I read said it was American but I was under the impression that all the air support was provided by the French. :dunno:
It can't be ours, cuz this isn't a war, they said so.
It's a "Kinetic Military Operation", according to the Obama Administration. Don't know what the hell that means, but it's definately not a war.
-
Only $43 million on that F-15E.
Thing is, Moo-Mar, like every Mideast dictator can finance a small, well equipped army on his own for years.
-
Not a tea partier, but this little excursion is a complete waste of time and money.
a month ago? Not a waste, it would be worth it to get the Colonel out of power. However, now that the rebels are getting spanked? Seems like a waste of Libyan lives and American dollars.
-
Only $43 million on that F-15E.
Thing is, Moo-Mar, like every Mideast dictator can finance a small, well equipped army on his own for years.
:facepalm:
-
Time for you to do some spinning 06.
-
Let's start with your definition of a well-equipped army. So RPGs and AK-47s now make for a well equipped army?
-
Let's start with your definition of a well-equipped army. So RPGs and AK-47s now make for a well equipped army?
Let's start with defining who they are fighting right now. It ain't exactly the 82nd Airborne. But knowing your hero Obama, it might soon be.
-
Let's start with your definition of a well-equipped army. So RPGs and AK-47s now make for a well equipped army?
Let's start with defining who they are fighting right now. It ain't exactly the 82nd Airborne. But knowing your hero Obama, it might soon be.
No, I want your explanation of how Ghaddafi will personally finance a well-equipped army of any size for "years to come".
-
Do you understand how much money he has 06, apparently you don't.
It's a Kleptocracy . . . let's try the Libyan Investment Authority for starters. 3 guesses who controls it. Estimated net worth of LIA . . . $70 Billion under family control . . . personal net worth of Mo-Mar is estimated to be at $32 billion. $32 billion buys a lot of AK-47 carrying guns for hire 06.
-
Do you understand how much money he has 06, apparently you don't.
It's a Kleptocracy . . . let's try the Libyan Investment Authority for starters. 3 guesses who controls it. Estimated net worth of LIA . . . $70 Billion under family control . . . personal net worth of Mo-Mar is estimated to be at $32 billion. $32 billion buys a lot of AK-47 carrying guns for hire 06.
And they have all that money in cash right. Just have a garage full of benjamins sitting there.
Nope
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/02/2011228105035282376.html (http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/02/2011228105035282376.html)
That's not saying that he doesn't have some money, or that he doesn't have the ties to acquire military hardware, but he isn't going to be personally financing anything for years to come and have it be well-equipped.
-
I didn't say he had all the money in cash 06 . . . but it's more than enough money to pay for hired guns to keep fighting the rag tag bunch of "freedom fighters" for years to come. Why is this even a matter for debate?? What kind of fantasy land do you live in that actually believes there isn't 1000's of ways around these so called "Freezes"?? Remember when all the Western countries "froze" Saddam's assets and had the embargo, in terms of Saddam and his family itself, it was akin to a little kick to the shin.
-
I didn't say he had all the money in cash 06 . . . but it's more than enough money to pay for hired guns to keep fighting the rag tag bunch of "freedom fighters" for years to come. Why is this even a matter for debate?? What kind of fantasy land do you live in that actually believes there isn't 1000's of ways around these so called "Freezes"?? Remember when all the Western countries "froze" Saddam's assets and had the embargo, in terms of Saddam and his family itself, it was akin to a little kick to the shin.
Did you not hear the news? The U.S. is apparently bombing the crap out of Libya now. Going to be expensive to fix some of the crap we're breaking over there. Good thing he's got plenty of money in the bank and still has total control over the means by which he acquired that money.
-
Good to see you fully cheerleading Obama/Clinton War Mongering 06.
Of course, as of right now it's turned into a complete clusterfuck. But again, you're comparing the guy financing a military to take on a rag tag bunch of rebels (and he's currently kicking their ass all to hell) to fighting NATO/US/Obama Hegemony.
Try to differentiate between the two will ya.
-
I do not in any way support this conflict.
However, I will say that I think it's hilarious that people who support the war in Iraq are butt hurt about this.
-
I do not in any way support this conflict.
However, I will say that I think it's hilarious that people who support the war in Iraq are butt hurt about this.
At least we had a decent sized coalition in Iraq, this cowboy Obama is going into Libya with only a small number of allies.
-
Good to see you fully cheerleading Obama/Clinton War Mongering 06.
Of course, as of right now it's turned into a complete clusterfuck. But again, you're comparing the guy financing a military to take on a rag tag bunch of rebels (and he's currently kicking their ass all to hell) to fighting NATO/US/Obama Hegemony.
Try to differentiate between the two will ya.
So pointing out the fact we're bombing the crap out of him is somehow cheerleading?
Also, you're rough ridin' delusional if you're counting what remains of the Libyan armed forces fighting for Gahddafi as something he's personally financed. Dude isn't going to waste his personal fortune on this either. That's what Russia and China are for.
-
I do not in any way support this conflict.
However, I will say that I think it's hilarious that people who support the war in Iraq are butt hurt about this.
Yeah, but the same can be said about the ones butthurt about going into Iraq, falling in love with obama over this.
-
I do not in any way support this conflict.
However, I will say that I think it's hilarious that people who support the war in Iraq are butt hurt about this.
Yeah, but the same can be said about the ones butthurt about going into Iraq, falling in love with obama over this.
Wrong, Iraq is a war, this isn't. Obama said so, it's fine.
-
google ads that show up when visiting any thread in this forum? You guessed it, Goldline.com and Townhall.com :lol:
-
Good to see you fully cheerleading Obama/Clinton War Mongering 06.
Of course, as of right now it's turned into a complete clusterfuck. But again, you're comparing the guy financing a military to take on a rag tag bunch of rebels (and he's currently kicking their ass all to hell) to fighting NATO/US/Obama Hegemony.
Try to differentiate between the two will ya.
So pointing out the fact we're bombing the crap out of him is somehow cheerleading?
Also, you're rough ridin' delusional if you're counting what remains of the Libyan armed forces fighting for Gahddafi as something he's personally financed. Dude isn't going to waste his personal fortune on this either. That's what Russia and China are for.
Look up the word "capability" some time 06.
Plus in a Kleptocracy like Libya, he is pretty much financing it, albeit in a round about fashion.
But it's good to see the Nobel Peace Prize winner engaging the United States both conventionally and covertly in another war. Remember when all you Obamabot types used to yell and scream and piss your pants whenever the words Central Intelligence Agency were uttered?? Well, your hero has the CIA running all over the place in the world and doing a lot of killing while their at it. But then again, U.S. hegemony never rests, even under Hope and Change.
-
I do not in any way support this conflict.
However, I will say that I think it's hilarious that people who support the war in Iraq are butt hurt about this.
Yeah, but the same can be said about the ones butthurt about going into Iraq, falling in love with obama over this.
Wrong, Iraq is a war, this isn't. Obama said so, it's fine.
Sarcasm taken, but Iraq isn't a "war" either...........well, it is....but it isn't. Because some group didn't call it one.
-
Good to see you fully cheerleading Obama/Clinton War Mongering 06.
Of course, as of right now it's turned into a complete clusterfuck. But again, you're comparing the guy financing a military to take on a rag tag bunch of rebels (and he's currently kicking their ass all to hell) to fighting NATO/US/Obama Hegemony.
Try to differentiate between the two will ya.
So pointing out the fact we're bombing the crap out of him is somehow cheerleading?
Also, you're rough ridin' delusional if you're counting what remains of the Libyan armed forces fighting for Gahddafi as something he's personally financed. Dude isn't going to waste his personal fortune on this either. That's what Russia and China are for.
Look up the word "capability" some time 06.
Plus in a Kleptocracy like Libya, he is pretty much financing it, albeit in a round about fashion.
But it's good to see the Nobel Peace Prize winner engaging the United States both conventionally and covertly in another war. Remember when all you Obamabot types used to yell and scream and piss your pants whenever the words Central Intelligence Agency were uttered?? Well, your hero has the CIA running all over the place in the world and doing a lot of killing while their at it. But then again, U.S. hegemony never rests, even under Hope and Change.
It's like you just started paying attention to foreign policy yesterday. Seriously, if you're not stating what's been completely obvious for decades, you're trotting out the same rough ridin' talking point over and over hoping this will be the day Glen Beck notices it and you get to be on his show.
Sorry that the current president, who I didn't vote for, doesn't live up to the ideals of your savior, GWB. You'll get over your butthurt of a black president some day.
-
Good to see you fully cheerleading Obama/Clinton War Mongering 06.
Of course, as of right now it's turned into a complete clusterfuck. But again, you're comparing the guy financing a military to take on a rag tag bunch of rebels (and he's currently kicking their ass all to hell) to fighting NATO/US/Obama Hegemony.
Try to differentiate between the two will ya.
So pointing out the fact we're bombing the crap out of him is somehow cheerleading?
Also, you're rough ridin' delusional if you're counting what remains of the Libyan armed forces fighting for Gahddafi as something he's personally financed. Dude isn't going to waste his personal fortune on this either. That's what Russia and China are for.
Look up the word "capability" some time 06.
Plus in a Kleptocracy like Libya, he is pretty much financing it, albeit in a round about fashion.
But it's good to see the Nobel Peace Prize winner engaging the United States both conventionally and covertly in another war. Remember when all you Obamabot types used to yell and scream and piss your pants whenever the words Central Intelligence Agency were uttered?? Well, your hero has the CIA running all over the place in the world and doing a lot of killing while their at it. But then again, U.S. hegemony never rests, even under Hope and Change.
It's like you just started paying attention to foreign policy yesterday. Seriously, if you're not stating what's been completely obvious for decades, you're trotting out the same rough ridin' talking point over and over hoping this will be the day Glen Beck notices it and you get to be on his show.
Sorry that the current president, who I didn't vote for, doesn't live up to the ideals of your savior, GWB. You'll get over your butthurt of a black president some day.
:that'sracistblackkid:
You lose.
-
And 06 you keep adding $hit into my posts that I never said . . . and no, my savior wasn't GWB, and yes I like the fact that most Obamabots are now understanding that Barry W. Obama is just other edge of the same side of the coin, and that the left/right paradigm in the U.S. is a joke.
I'll just chalk this up to you never getting it . . . per usual.
-
And 06 you keep adding $hit into my posts that I never said . . . and no, my savior wasn't GWB, and yes I like the fact that most Obamabots are now understanding that Barry W. Obama is just other edge of the same side of the coin, and that the left/right paradigm in the U.S. is a joke.
I'll just chalk this up to you never getting it . . . per usual.
Most people are have a mental block sewed into their cognitive thought that won't let them understand the right/left paradigm.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.infowars.com%2F2011%2F03%2Fi%2Fgeneral%2Foffon.jpg&hash=30b3782a92afa94c18b06589e5ad026f2efa950d)
-
And 06 you keep adding $hit into my posts that I never said . . . and no, my savior wasn't GWB, and yes I like the fact that most Obamabots are now understanding that Barry W. Obama is just other edge of the same side of the coin, and that the left/right paradigm in the U.S. is a joke.
I'll just chalk this up to you never getting it . . . per usual.
You might be surprised by this, but people smarter than yourself can figure this out faster than the 7 years it took you. But you go ahead and repeat it for the next 7 years since you're so proud of your "original" thought.
If you don't think you'll hurt yourself, try a little critical thinking and explain why U.S./Western intervention in Libya could be a bad thing. Maybe link it to some relatively recent events involving a couple Republican presidents and maybe a Democratic one as well. I'll expect a reply in 14-21 years since this requires connecting more than 2 dots.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.infowars.com%2F2011%2F03%2Fi%2Fgeneral%2Foffon.jpg&hash=30b3782a92afa94c18b06589e5ad026f2efa950d)
The foreign policy or Obama and Bush is incredibly similar. 10 to 15 years from now it may be difficult to differentiate between the two.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.infowars.com%2F2011%2F03%2Fi%2Fgeneral%2Foffon.jpg&hash=30b3782a92afa94c18b06589e5ad026f2efa950d)
The foreign policy or Obama and Bush is incredibly similar. 10 to 15 years from now it may be difficult to differentiate between the two.
I think that was the point of the picture.
-
At least Bush said what he wanted to do and/or told the American people what his actions were that day rather than waiting a week to see what results have happened before talking about it.
-
Airstrike kills 13 "rebels"
messiah lied people died?
Silence
-
I'm against the Iraq War, Afghanistan War, Libyan "War" or whatever it is and any other occupation in the Middle East in which the people over there can't figure things out on their own so they call the U.S.'s red phone for help. Happens every time.
so where do you point the hypocrite finger? Seems like that's the #1 goal..root out and find they hypocrites. Yeah, that's what is most important. :jerk:
-
How can you support him? He's a MURDERER!!!!!!!!
-
This is insanely bad judgement on Obama's part. Like I can hardly fathom it. Are there really CIA in Libya? Are there really military forces training the rebels?
Really lose-lose at this point. Bay of Pigs or a third occupation.
-
gis adorable. leave him alone.
-
This is insanely bad judgement on Obama's part. Like I can hardly fathom it. Are there really CIA in Libya? Are there really military forces training the rebels?
Really lose-lose at this point. Bay of Pigs or a third occupation.
Watching fox news and they just asked Geraldo "Have you seen any CIA operatives in Libya"......"Of course not!!"
:lol:
-
MURDERER
-
At least Bush said what he wanted to do and/or told the American people what his actions were that day rather than waiting a week to see what results have happened before talking about it.
Really? What did Bush want to do?
-
I think it's awesome that all libs can do at this point is attempt to distinguish Obama from Bush. The same Bush they all said was the worst president ever.
:lol:
-
At least Bush said what he wanted to do and/or told the American people what his actions were that day rather than waiting a week to see what results have happened before talking about it.
Really? What did Bush want to do?
Talked about his desire to invade Iraq for months. Talked to the people about his decisions w/in 24 hours, not a week.
-
At least Bush said what he wanted to do and/or told the American people what his actions were that day rather than waiting a week to see what results have happened before talking about it.
Really? What did Bush want to do?
Talked about his desire to invade Iraq for months. Talked to the people about his decisions w/in 24 hours, not a week.
Maybe he should have waited another week.
-
I think it's awesome that all libs can do at this point is attempt to distinguish Obama from Bush. The same Bush they all said was the worst president ever.
:lol:
Bush was a horrible president. Obama isn't much better. He might be even worse, if given enough time. What is your point?
-
I think it's awesome that all libs can do at this point is attempt to distinguish Obama from Bush. The same Bush they all said was the worst president ever.
:lol:
Bush was a horrible president. Obama isn't much better. He might be even worse, if given enough time. What is your point?
The point is they thought he was different.
A "messiah" if you will.
But now they're silent, not wanting to admit to the proof of their gullibility.
-
I think it's awesome that all libs can do at this point is attempt to distinguish Obama from Bush. The same Bush they all said was the worst president ever.
:lol:
Bush was a horrible president. Obama isn't much better. He might be even worse, if given enough time. What is your point?
The real problem is he is MUCH worse than Bush for the country. Not only is he continuing most of the Bush policies, he is spending us into bankruptcy. HE IS Bush on steroids, but the libs just follow blindly and silently.
-
the libs just follow blindly and silently.
no we don't. I don't like Obama....haven't decided on voting for him again.
Your point?
-
don't really support the action in Libya or "military Operations" in Iraq however they were not exactly created equally
1. our actions in Libya have been to impose a no fly zone to meet a UN Resolution to stop violence against civilians in Libya. acting as a member of NATO with capabilities in the region we repositioned part of the 5th fleet and strategically bombed anti-air targets and used limited air support to control airspace. these actions marked the begining of interventions that we are supposed to be turning over to NATO allies including Turkey with widespread support from the arab league
2. Iraq - we went in all cowboy with the "shock" and the "awe" cause that nutless U.N. wasn't gun do nuthin and let that crazy ass Sadam kill our babies with mustard gas and nukes through his numerous connections to terrorsim
* if we are still in Libya in 10 years i will apologize for my sarcasm
-
don't really support the action in Libya or "military Operations" in Iraq however they were not exactly created equally
1. our actions in Libya have been to impose a no fly zone to meet a UN Resolution to stop violence against civilians in Libya. acting as a member of NATO with capabilities in the region we repositioned part of the 5th fleet and strategically bombed anti-air targets and used limited air support to control airspace. these actions marked the begining of interventions that we are supposed to be turning over to NATO allies including Turkey with widespread support from the arab league
2. Iraq - we went in all cowboy with the "shock" and the "awe" cause that nutless U.N. wasn't gun do nuthin and let that crazy ass Sadam kill our babies with mustard gas and nukes through his numerous connections to terrorsim
* if we are still in Libya in 10 years i will apologize for my sarcasm
Iraq had a 40 country coalition, only 15 countries have taken part in Libya.
-
don't really support the action in Libya or "military Operations" in Iraq however they were not exactly created equally
1. our actions in Libya have been to impose a no fly zone to meet a UN Resolution to stop violence against civilians in Libya. acting as a member of NATO with capabilities in the region we repositioned part of the 5th fleet and strategically bombed anti-air targets and used limited air support to control airspace. these actions marked the begining of interventions that we are supposed to be turning over to NATO allies including Turkey with widespread support from the arab league
2. Iraq - we went in all cowboy with the "shock" and the "awe" cause that nutless U.N. wasn't gun do nuthin and let that crazy ass Sadam kill our babies with mustard gas and nukes through his numerous connections to terrorsim
* if we are still in Libya in 10 years i will apologize for my sarcasm
Would not bet against this
-
don't really support the action in Libya or "military Operations" in Iraq however they were not exactly created equally
1. our actions in Libya have been to impose a no fly zone to meet a UN Resolution to stop violence against civilians in Libya. acting as a member of NATO with capabilities in the region we repositioned part of the 5th fleet and strategically bombed anti-air targets and used limited air support to control airspace. these actions marked the begining of interventions that we are supposed to be turning over to NATO allies including Turkey with widespread support from the arab league
2. Iraq - we went in all cowboy with the "shock" and the "awe" cause that nutless U.N. wasn't gun do nuthin and let that crazy ass Sadam kill our babies with mustard gas and nukes through his numerous connections to terrorsim
* if we are still in Libya in 10 years i will apologize for my sarcasm
Iraq had a 40 country coalition, only 15 countries have taken part in Libya.
Irrelevant. The US is providing support in Libya. We drove the war in Iraq. Plus, we spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. Do you really think support or lack thereof would make any difference to the outcome of any war the US chooses to throw money away on?
-
Irrelevant. The US is providing support in Libya. We drove the war in Iraq.
This is an exercise in semantics and you know it.
Bush was a horrible president. Obama isn't much better. He might be even worse, if given enough time. What is your point?
Two years ago he was the "smartest man ever to take office", "someone who could change the face of Washington", "the messiah", "our savior". I guess as it turns out, Bush was basically UberSuperGod.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12983054
stopping the widespread slaughter of civilians and either stealing oil or settling a petty pissing contest are about the same i guess :thumbsup:
-
You realize that Hussein was much worse than Qaddafi don't you?
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12983054
stopping the widespread slaughter of civilians and either stealing oil or settling a petty pissing contest are about the same i guess :thumbsup:
Good use of semantics
-
thank you :blush: