Demonstration of Obama's incompetence: morning of Paris attacks, Obama claimed "we have contained IS

Batman I suggest you start drinking again. Made you less of a dick.

 

Willing to talk to countries still is true - I don't see how that would change.

Simple - it never existed. This is the lie of the right. Obama never promised to fix the world, he only said it's a better way.

What valid observation did he make?

The ignorance on the right is so sad. You really need to find the facts out. ISIS was established long before the U.S. withdrew - in areas of Iraq that the U.S. nor Iraq had ability to control. It was the right that attacked Obama for not doing enough against Assad and Gaddafi - it was conservatives who wanted regime change and wanted to arm the rebels. And now you walk away from that? What a hypocrite. Support Assad? You guys were attacking Obama for not hitting Assad harder!!! What revisionist history. Do you believe the absolute lies you push out? Can you even acknowledge that you are making stuff up and have no facts?

 

And your goal is to demonize and find ways to attack liberals even if you are making things up.

 

Nobody who is blaming Obama has had a whiff of a concrete proposal, besides the implication that war would make everything right.

Somebody should just spell it out so that there would actually be something to debate.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We're also increasing the number of Syrian and other refugees we admit to the U.S. to 100,000 per year for the next two years.</p>&mdash; President Obama (@POTUS) <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/648543139196743680">September 28, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Think of the cognitive dissonance expressed here.

An attack that killed THREE THOUSAND AMERICAN LIVES actually helped Bush's presidency...

Imagine if 9/11 occurred under Obama's watch. The right wing would have asked for Obama's impeachment immediately and make the tragedy into a political poo flinging contest the day after with months of congressional hearings.

 

So instead of letting them get radicalized in Syria through experiencing war and losing family members who would be prime targets for Jihadist recruitment, why not help them and try to end the cycle of radicalization?

 

That's the sad part. The right would have impeached a democratic president, but the left doesn't do that and instead rallies behind the president when the country needed it.

Shows the difference.

 

Great. The more people who flee from Syria, the better. The more they are welcomed with open arms when needed security checks have been done, the better.

As opposed to a generation that would have grown up witnessing the 1) massive state repression of Assad and 2) the genocidal impulses of madmen

The more people who raise their families here and become an integrated part of American society, the less hope religious ideologists will have and the less people they'll have on thier side.

Look at the last mass migration in American history of the Hmong people: it has only added to America. This wave of migration will too.

 

yes, welcome our destroyers with open arms

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Greece?src=hash">#Greece</a> PublicOrderMin Toskas confirms Paris attacker w Syrian passport was registered as refugee on Leros island in Oct. /via <a href="https://twitter.com/AntennaNews">@AntennaNews</a></p>&mdash; Yannis Koutsomitis (@YanniKouts) <a href="https://twitter.com/YanniKouts/status/665555110467084289">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...hebdo-attackers-kids-france-radicalised-paris

Hate knows no borders, and you cannot stop it with more hate.

With that said, if you have a reasonable set of security policies you want to discuss with regards to a relatively skilled and educated group of migrants wracked by war and destruction we probably can't even fathom, have at it. If you want to propose how people who are willing to drown in the Mediterranean to escape can be stopped by fences (or maybe you want to escalate to bullets?), have at it.

 

I think the OP is out of bounds on this one.

 

Are you arguing that accepting Syrian refugees does not increase the chance of terrorist attacks within our borders, or that the increase is so minuscule that it shouldn't sway us?

 

The increase is so minuscule that it shouldn't sway anybody, and it outweighs the risk of leaving entire families to rot in a hellhole with nowhere to go but war. That will breed resentment and political risk that will last decades, if not centuries.

 

The reason those on the left are freaking out about this thread is because they are upset that it wasn't children dying in a school shooting in America so they could use that tragedy to push a gun control agenda. In this case, the guns and explosives were illegal, it happened in a country with strict gun control laws, and the president that they think is infallible made mistakes that led to the rise of the group that committed the act.

In short, they are butthurt that the crisis doesn't further any of their agendas (Let's not forget Rahm's Rule) so they lash out against those discussing it. It's incredibly transparent what they are doing, and it's pretty pathetic.

 

What? This thread attacked a standing American president for a terrible crime in Paris before most of the facts came in and bodies were still cold on the ground. It would have been the equivalent of condemning President Bush for 9/11 and his laxitude on "Islam" hours after the attacks before A-Q had even claimed responsibility. It tied together a horrible atrocity and tried to use it and tailor it for one purpose: selfish, partisan politics. It tried to take the corpses of Paris to attack an American president without any of the facts on the ground.

If you can't tell why this thread is very poorly considered, I don't think you've been looking very closely. I don't think the swearing was warranted, but I can certainly see why many people see this thread as being in exceptionally bad taste and form, even for this forum.

 

It's a much different world than it was before 9/11, and your boy Obama clearly has made mistakes that led to the rise of ISIS. Talking about his role in the rise of the group that committed the act is very much a relevant topic of discussion.

Again, I know you are upset that it isn't children dead in a US school so that you could create a gun control thread to further a political agenda before their bodies were cold, but you can write it off as being unlucky. As such, you are just going to have to deal with a relevant thread talking about the failures that led to the rise of the group that attacked Paris. If it makes you feel any better Bush has some blame in this as well. Honestly, probably should have led with that, if Bush was in the OP instead of Obama, none of you crazy kids on the left would have had a problem with it.....which is why I have to laugh at the faux outrage.

 

<iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NrOQQkY1bxQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

...I've started threads condemning Obama for mass survaillance, the assassination complex, his mistreatment of whistle-blowers, his irresponsibility in not further condemning those who led the United States to financial ruin. Do you really think he is "my boy"?

I've also never started a thread in this forum about gun control. I recognize you can be an unnuanced thinker at times, but your stereotypical thinking is coming on very strong here.

I'm sorry, but this thread was designed for one purpose, to tarnish Obama. That it was done with such a lack of facts and an ill-consideration of other variables, and that it was done so rapidly after a tragedy showed very bad taste and a very ill-considered grasp of the facts and perspectives that would have made for an interesting discussion. There are much better things you can pin on him (start with him flouting the rule of law in killing American citizens).

With that said, I have been nothing but civil in this thread, and I have debunked illogical jumps to conclusion several times--it's just too bad this thread was designed to be very limited, and filled with illogic, from its inception.

And faux outrage? Where do you see the outrage in me? I just think this is a crappy thread both from a facts/logic/and limited perspective way.

You can strawman somewhere else.

 

Of course it's to discredit Obama. Obviously his UN Czar isn't up to snuff ruling Europe.

Helluva job, Brownie.

Doubtful. They're further away and what Western Europe has witnessed is resentment by the former refugees there for not providing enough. The us will always be criticized for doing too much or not doing enough. Except in this case, there will be disenfranchised people inside our borders experiencing what Americans have and what they don't have.

Integration and assimilation isn't an easy matter, and putting a welcome mat without any solid goals or plans for taking up the traditions of the native country is a short term recipe for disaster.

With our culture of implicit segregation, too much refugees could coalesce into yet another ethnic enclave that's ripe with neglect and subsequent radicalization.

If we want to let them in, we sure as hell better do it right.