I know that if I was attacked by robots, top priority would be bringing the hurt home to those in control. Which leads to a vicious circle of convenient military idiocy: Fight wars with minimal civilian awareness, instigate terrorism, respond to terrorism by fighting more wars with minimal civilian awareness. Obama seems to think that public engagement isn't something that separates a 'smart' war from a 'dumb' one. I think that the ACA will be a feather in Obama's hat, but not for at least another decade. The mandate didn't address a large number of problems, but will be a catalyst that causes many of them to be addressed. That said, as long as the House remains red, it's going to be slow going. I would guess that he would like to be more than the first black President; however, if that is all that he is, as flagamuffin said, it's enough.And if a UAV pilot at Creech AFB should happen to fire a Hellfire missile at an ISIS tank in a legitimate combat engagement, is the car bomb set off in the Walmart parking lot in Indian Springs NV any less legitimate?
What is this idiocy you talk about? That's a business model, son. If you look at the PNAC as a business plan it all makes perfect sense. All you've gotta do is forget that brown people are people and it's wine and roses. As far as Obama, I think people aren't quite realizing that Bush set us back 40 years. If Obama can get us all the way to 1988 he'll be a goddamn miracle worker.I know that if I was attacked by robots, top priority would be bringing the hurt home to those in control.
And that had fuck all to do with bush, and everything to do with the events surrounding the president. Do you think anyone else would have acted differently? Would a democrate stood by without going to war in the middle east? Would a democrat not have approved of the same economic muckery that bush did in order to boost the economy? Bush didn't set us back forty years. We did.
I don't know why we're even having this debate in 2014, 12 years after the push to invade Iraq. No president since LBJ save for Bush has had the audacity to lie through his teeth to start a war (or escalate in LBJ's case).Do you think anyone else would have acted differently? Would a democrate stood by without going to war in the middle east?
Because you still seem to think it is the fault of Bush for what happened in his term. We have had only a single president since Bush, Obama, who still has yet to go to war in Iraq even after all the things to have happened there with ISIL/ISIS/DumbFucks. Secondly, the conversation is not about LBJ setting the US back fourty years, it is about bush.I don't know why we're even having this debate in 2014, 12 years after the push to invade Iraq.
No president since LBJ save for Bush has had the audacity to lie through his teeth to start a war (or escalate in LBJ's case).