<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="FBT" data-cid="763499" data-time="1466113573">
<div>
In 1986, a military operation was undertaken against Libya in retribution for the bombing of a disco in Berlin.  Before the Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps jets set off to do their business, an advanced warning was issued and communicated throughout the target area.  Civilians were given ample time to vacate the area to avoid being killed.  Someone I know was in a Navy jet during that mission, and he said that there were still people evacuating the area as they were releasing their ordinance.  His mission targeted oil platforms.  He said you could see people jumping from the platforms once they realized the warning wasn't a hoax. 

 

It's not being a sympathizer to offer some advanced warning.  It's what humane nations do in order to avoid unnecessary bloodshed.  Unfortunately, the enemy we fight doesn't share the same value for human life, and equally unfortunate is the fact that at some point this country is going to need to recognize this reality, and act accordingly.  The kind of war we need to fight here cannot be done surgically. 

 

What do you think about the military dropping the pamphlets, as outlined in the link Jaguar Warrior provided? Sounds to me like a similar scenario to the oil wells, as I couldn't find anything saying the truck drivers were ISIS members.


 

I don't have a problem with giving advanced notice that we're going to be bombing an area.


 

As far as Trump calling Obama a traitor, could someone post a link?  I just did a quick Google, and the first three sources that were posted were The Atlantic, Slate, and Washington Post.  When I looked through there, there wasn't a direct quite, just their interpretation running what he said through their very selective filters.  There's a pretty broad interpretation range for what Trump meant by his ACTUAL comment.  We're not talking about the most articulate, or nuanced speaker.  He speaks his mind.  That blunt talk has a way of rubbing some the wrong way, or as in this case, misrepresenting his comments. 

 

Thanks for this. That is why I asked for Trump supporters to ad what they thought he meant about the whole "gets it better than anybody understands" comment, so as not to get replies interpreted by 'left-leaning folks' and then have to sort it out. But like Pirkster did, anyone should feel free to chime in with their interpretation.


 

I think Obama actually believes he gets it better than anyone else.  He's that arrogant.  At the end of the day, I don't think he actually does, and that he's making a lot of assumptions based on his personal experiences with the Muslim mindset. 


 

The funny thing is, if you laid out the case for how Obama has actually handled the war against radical Islamic terrorism, you could very easily come to the conclusion that, while not necessarily sympathetic, his experiences growing up in that environment may very well have created a bias for him.  Not to mention that his closest advisor, Valerie Jarret, is an Iranian born individual who probably has more influence over his policies in the Middle East than anyone else.  There's clearly something going on there, and I think that's really what Trump was getting at.  There's a reason this president jammed an agreement with Iran down our throats that has repeatedly proven to be a bad decision.  It wasn't legacy building.  There's a reason that this administration sat on their hands during the Arab spring and allowed it to spread like a cancer, temporarily giving the Muslim Brotherhood control over Egypt.  There's a reason why this administration encouraged factions of al Qaeda and other terror groups to overthrow Khadaffi in Libya without having a plan for what would happen once they actually did.  There's a reason why the death of an Ambassador and 3 heroes in Benghazi has never been fully investigated because it would uncover just how involved this administration was in running weapons into Syria, using caches confiscated from Libya during the overthrow. 

 

This administration has systematically allowed the caliphate to grow in the middle east while simultaneously ignoring allies in the region. 

 

OK, so what I get from this is that you think that the administration has committed a number of errors in their actions in the Middle East. By bias, do you mean that he might feel they are less hostile towards US interests than is the case? I don't want to do a drill-down on each of these unless you think it is somehow relevant, just trying to see how this links to the  "gets it better than anybody understands" comment Trump made.

 

There's plenty of evidence that supports the questioning of the administration's motives.  I'm not saying Obama is a member of ISIS or even a traitor, but I do think his background, and those he surrounds himself with have a tendency to be more sympathetic to the plight of those who hate the United States and everything we stand for, and have a stated goal of eradicating us and any of our allies from the face of the earth.  .

 

I see from your discussion above that you see plenty of decisions Obama have made that would make you question his tactics or strategy. I am a bit more interested in what you mean by his motives. And who you referring to as "those who hate the United States and everything we stand for". I presume you mean the terrorist groups? 

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

I think Obama's motives have been crystal clear since the day he took office.  His goal has been to fundamentally change this country, and to create one that better suits his vision.  He was raised in an environment that looked upon the United States as an imperialistic bully that needed to be brought down a notch.  He surrounded himself with people from a very early age who supported that narrative, and he studied others who were instrumental in the movements of the 1960s.  He has always tried to align with radicals.  He was raised by absentee parents, communist grandparents, and a communist father figure.  All you have to do is read Saul Alinski's Rules For Radicals to understand his motives.  That's his handbook.  The "great unifier" has been anything but that from almost the day he took office.  He has spent nearly 8 years creating issues that compartmentalize and split this country into factions.  Pick a topic.  He's always taken the position that would most polarize it.  Guns?  Check.  Race?  Check.  Economy?  Check.  National security?  Check.  Foreign policy?  Check.  Immigration?  You bet.  You can take pretty much any issue and if he gets involved, his sole intent is to create an adversarial role.  All to support his vision for what the country SHOULD be. 

 

Terrorist groups.  Nations that have sworn allegiance to destroying this country.  But it's not just other nations.  He has stoked racial tensions to the point where any progress that was made leading up to electing an African American president has been completely lost.  He has made statements that create a hostile environment toward all police.  The list goes on and on.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I think Obama's motives have been crystal clear since the day he took office.  His goal has been to fundamentally change this country, and to create one that better suits his vision.  He was raised in an environment that looked upon the United States as an imperialistic bully that needed to be brought down a notch.  He surrounded himself with people from a very early age who supported that narrative, and he studied others who were instrumental in the movements of the 1960s.  He has always tried to align with radicals.  He was raised by absentee parents, communist grandparents, and a communist father figure.  All you have to do is read Saul Alinski's Rules For Radicals to understand his motives.  That's his handbook.  The "great unifier" has been anything but that from almost the day he took office.  He has spent nearly 8 years creating issues that compartmentalize and split this country into factions.  Pick a topic.  He's always taken the position that would most polarize it.  Guns?  Check.  Race?  Check.  Economy?  Check.  National security?  Check.  Foreign policy?  Check.  Immigration?  You bet.  You can take pretty much any issue and if he gets involved, his sole intent is to create an adversarial role.  All to support his vision for what the country SHOULD be. 

 

Terrorist groups.  Nations that have sworn allegiance to destroying this country.  But it's not just other nations.  He has stoked racial tensions to the point where any progress that was made leading up to electing an African American president has been completely lost.  He has made statements that create a hostile environment toward all police.  The list goes on and on.

 

Ok, thanks. I will just add one point before addressing your quite above as, I don't want to copy a big wall of text if unnecessary. You said "I think Obama actually believes he gets it better than anyone else.  He's that arrogant.  At the end of the day, I don't think he actually does, and that he's making a lot of assumptions based on his personal experiences with the Muslim mindset. " I certainly get that is what you think. Is what you mean that Trump was trying to say “[Obama] doesn’t get it, or he (thinks he)my words gets it better than anybody understands,”? 

Regarding your comments above, I get that you are not a big fan of many of his policies, to put it lightly. But I think that also answers that when you talked about questioning his motives, you were again, questioning his policies and judgement, not implying that he was in any way dedicated to destroying America, as some have thought Trump was stating. 

---

<p class="bbc_left">Education is the cheap defense of nations. - Edmund Burke

<p class="bbc_left"> 

<p class="bbc_left">Or is it from Burke? I tried finding the source, and looked through some of his writings, no luck. Anybody with google-fu got a citation of the source?

Dangit Drifter, you took everyone off topic on the real issue.

 

Yes, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are compromised politicians who almost assuredly are bought and controlled by foreign interests. However, until the MSM starts to acknowledge these obvious connections, normal Americans will remain oblivious to these facts.

 

20% of Hillary Clinton's campaign donations are from the House of Saud. Why is that not a headline story rampaging across every media outlet? Why? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYY? One of you liberals tell me why.

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-13...nce-claims

Well, i guess because from what I understand, it was an item on a website that claimed to be hacked, and most journalists might want to get a bit more confirmation. I imagine that if anything develops we will hear about it, especially given that the guy who was reported to have grabbed the info from Petra has made appearances on Fox, CBS, CNN , etc. and has been critical of the Saudi royals in the past. And since the Supreme Court says it is a no-no, that would lead me to believe that any of the major outlets would be interested. Kind of a big story if it pans out.

---

<p class="bbc_left">Education is the cheap defense of nations. - Edmund Burke

<p class="bbc_left"> 

<p class="bbc_left">Or is it from Burke? I tried finding the source, and looked through some of his writings, no luck. Anybody with google-fu got a citation of the source?

I disagree.

 

Obama was raised in an environment where he was the son of an Islamist, and whose step father was a Muslim.  He attended Muslim schools in Jakarta, and took advanced classes in the Quiran, learning the book in Arabic. He also attended mosque in Jakarta. That info all comes from his own book, Audacity of Hope.  Whether he converted to Christianity or not, his foundation in faith development was very much Muslim-centric.  In fact, he has said in recent years that the prettiest sound on earth in his estimation was the call to prayer.  I've heard it.  I'd never call it the prettiest sound. 

 

Do I think he's a Muslim today?  He says otherwise.  I'll take his word for it.  But, that doesn't diminish the fact that he more than likely does allow his background to influence his decision making now.

 

Sorry you misunderstood.  I only meant that if you look at what Obama SAYS you might conclude he is not Muslim, but if you look at what he DOES, you would think he is clearly Muslim.  In fact half of your answer noted what he has done rather than said. 

---

Sorry you misunderstood.  I only meant that if you look at what Obama SAYS you might conclude he is not Muslim, but if you look at what he DOES, you would think he is clearly Muslim.  In fact half of your answer noted what he has done rather than said. 

Yeah, I misread.  Gotcha now, and we are in agreement. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I love how politics talk is always two sides disagreeing about how unfit someone is to hold office.

Always an argument. Every fact or opinion debated with another.

Amidst a ton of rhetoric.

 

Anyone old enough to remember when things were actually different based on who was in office?

I mean really truly.

 

Who was the last president to spend less money on military and more money improving the American infrastructure?

Does it matter that Trump is a racist?

No... not really.

---

Ok, thanks. I will just add one point before addressing your quite above as, I don't want to copy a big wall of text if unnecessary. You said "I think Obama actually believes he gets it better than anyone else.  He's that arrogant.  At the end of the day, I don't think he actually does, and that he's making a lot of assumptions based on his personal experiences with the Muslim mindset. " I certainly get that is what you think. Is what you mean that Trump was trying to say “[Obama] doesn’t get it, or he (thinks he)my words gets it better than anybody understands,”? 

Regarding your comments above, I get that you are not a big fan of many of his policies, to put it lightly. But I think that also answers that when you talked about questioning his motives, you were again, questioning his policies and judgement, not implying that he was in any way dedicated to destroying America, as some have thought Trump was stating. 

First off, I honestly don't care what Trump was saying.  I was expressing my opinion. 

 

My questioning Obama's motives is tied directly to his policies and judgment.  Read "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinski.  It's not a difficult or very long read.  Once you've done so, you'll understand completely where the community organizer is coming from.  The common themes will seem all too familiar with the world today.

 

His motives are infused in every policy decision he makes, whether it's Obamacare, immigration, gay marriage, or any host of issues that he's passionate about.  In each instance, the ultimate goal of his policies is to de-Americanize America.  Hence the global apology tour, or the repeated assaults on law enforcement (the police acted stupidly), or the dismantling of the military in a way that may destroy it for good.  Pick an issue that the hippies were protesting in the 1960s, and he is the fulfillment of their dreams int he 2000's.  Obama came in claiming to be a unifying force, but if you listen to his rhetoric, the community organizer in him can't help but through the inflammatory stuff out there to divide people.  It's far easier to fulfill his radical views by turning people against each other than it is to have them working together. 

 

Obama envisions himself to be this global ruler, probably reigning over the UN as some sort of Earth Ruler.  The presidency, at least in his head, is somewhat beneath his "gifts."  People have been telling him how brilliant he is for his entire life, so he's believing the press.  However, I tend to think he's about as smart as your average garbage man, tow truck driver, street sweeper, etc..  He simply had the gift of being good at reading the words other people write and put on his teleprompter.  You want to see the "genius" turn into a quivering pile of goo?  Turn the teleprompter off and watch what happens. 

 

I think Obama has surrounded himself with those who share radical ideologies, and has done so his entire life starting with his parents, his communist grand parents, his communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, his closest advisor, Iranian born Valerie Jarrett, and 1960's radicals and domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.  The list goes on and on.  You merge his upbringing in a very Muslim environment with his exposure to radicals throughout his life, and you get someone who doesn't see the world through the same prism as most Americans do.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

First off, I honestly don't care what Trump was saying.  I was expressing my opinion. 

 

My questioning Obama's motives is tied directly to his policies and judgment.  Read "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinski.  It's not a difficult or very long read.  Once you've done so, you'll understand completely where the community organizer is coming from.  The common themes will seem all too familiar with the world today.

 

His motives are infused in every policy decision he makes, whether it's Obamacare, immigration, gay marriage, or any host of issues that he's passionate about.  In each instance, the ultimate goal of his policies is to de-Americanize America.  Hence the global apology tour, or the repeated assaults on law enforcement (the police acted stupidly), or the dismantling of the military in a way that may destroy it for good.  Pick an issue that the hippies were protesting in the 1960s, and he is the fulfillment of their dreams int he 2000's.  Obama came in claiming to be a unifying force, but if you listen to his rhetoric, the community organizer in him can't help but through the inflammatory stuff out there to divide people.  It's far easier to fulfill his radical views by turning people against each other than it is to have them working together. 

 

Obama envisions himself to be this global ruler, probably reigning over the UN as some sort of Earth Ruler.  The presidency, at least in his head, is somewhat beneath his "gifts."  People have been telling him how brilliant he is for his entire life, so he's believing the press.  However, I tend to think he's about as smart as your average garbage man, tow truck driver, street sweeper, etc..  He simply had the gift of being good at reading the words other people write and put on his teleprompter.  You want to see the "genius" turn into a quivering pile of goo?  Turn the teleprompter off and watch what happens. 

 

I think Obama has surrounded himself with those who share radical ideologies, and has done so his entire life starting with his parents, his communist grand parents, his communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, his closest advisor, Iranian born Valerie Jarrett, and 1960's radicals and domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.  The list goes on and on.  You merge his upbringing in a very Muslim environment with his exposure to radicals throughout his life, and you get someone who doesn't see the world through the same prism as most Americans do.

 

Wow, you really channeled your inner Trump, didn't you? And like Donbo you blow a lot of hot air without saying much. But I don't doubt that you believe it.

 

I've not voted for Obama either time, but  much of what is said about him just reflects ignorance and a lack of an alternate political philosophy (other than anti-Obamaism.)

 

De-Americanize America? What does that mean? He's failed to take us back to 1954? It's a drag when time moves on, isn't it?

 

Give me an example of his "repeated assaults on law enforcement". Move Trumpian bloviating. 

 

Dismantling the military? Hyperbole. And oh, by the way - Congress passes the budget for the military. Be sure to contact your gated community Congressperson.

 

And I love the "Iranian born Valerie Jarrett". You have a real future as a Trump speech writer. Did you previously work for Sarah Palin?

 

Demonizing a political opponent is standard stuff (you do a lot of it re H. Clinton), but it's no substitute for valid political arguments. It just comes across as being a sore loser.

 

What in the world will some right-wingers do when they don't have a black, communist, Muslim, community organizer in the White House? Oh wait - a woman is running? Get out all the pants suit jokes.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Wow... He couldn't respond to a single point... Great post FBT

---

Wow... He couldn't respond to a single point... Great post FBT

 

When you're looking to FBT to back up ... what exactly? Are you just bummed because you got turned down by Sarah Palin's staff?

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

You mad bruh?

---

You mad bruh?

 

Just at the "conservatives" who have sold out to the likes of Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity and end up with a blathering idiot like Donald Trump.

 

Of course I've always suspected that Rush and Hannity really want Hillary to win. I think FBT is in that group as well. All responsibility can be avoided while they pretend to have a clue and speak for the "common man." They speak for the stupid man.

 

But hey, at least you'll get to act holier than thou. That's got to worth something, right?

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Just at the "conservatives" who have sold out to the likes of Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity and end up with a blathering idiot like Donald Trump.


Of course I've always suspected that Rush and Hannity really want Hillary to win. I think FBT is in that group as well. All responsibility can be avoided while they pretend to have a clue and speak for the "common man." They speak for the stupid man.


But hey, at least you'll get to act holier than thou. That's got to worth something, right?

Hannity and Cain practically drive the Trump train but I'm not sure Rush is even on board the trump train.

---

Hannity and Cain practically drive the Trump train but I'm not sure Rush is even on board the trump train.

 

I like the way Hannity does his interviews with Trump from his knees.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Hi, jj. Maybe I am a bit biased, as I used to be a truck driver. But unless their qualcomms are a lot better than ours, I imagine they pick up a load and drop it off, without having a pop-up say anything else. Whereas JW sees these drivers as ISIS members, Based on the article and the comments made by Col. Warren, they were just, well, truck drivers. Maybe ISIS got a cut of the oil, or something else, and that was why it was a strategic target, but I didn't see anything remotely identifying these guys as terrorists. So I guess my question is, what info do you have that these guys delivering oil are terrorists. And in my example, the terrorist was explicitly delivering a bomb component as opposed to oil. Are you saying a bomb component delivered to a terrorist in the US is somehow less of a direct threat to the US than crude oil in Syria?

Did you seriously just confuse JIB with J-Dub? lolololol

---