Here's some hypocrisy for you:
Guess Which Company Paid $0 in Taxes (on $14.2 Billion in Profits)? Hint: Its CEO Works for Obama
link
Libya
- Thread starter 777 fixer
- Start date
Here's some hypocrisy for you:
Guess Which Company Paid $0 in Taxes (on $14.2 Billion in Profits)? Hint: Its CEO Works for Obama
link
xUT
Veteran
That's OK, if he gets sick, we'll let him go... :unsure: :angry: :blink:
"Responsibility to Protect" - The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Why Did U.S. President Barack Obama order a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress - as he is constitutionally obliged to do?
Glenn Beck has explained President Obama's decision to attack Libya in terms of the United Nations' "Responsibility to Protect Doctrine"
Mr Beck is right.
In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government's behavior, and that government's leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attackeded militarily.
"Responsibility to Protect" means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state's legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed "rogue" nation - does Israel spring to mind?
"Responsibility to Protect" - three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world.
More.......
“Reorganizing the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system and involve the United Nations, especially membership of the Security Council,’ he wrote. ‘That process needs to be initiated by the US, but China and other developing countries ought to participate as equals.” Soros emphasized that point, that this needs to be a global solution, making America one among many. “The rising powers must be present at the creation of this new system in order to ensure that they will be active supporters.”
Why Did U.S. President Barack Obama order a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress - as he is constitutionally obliged to do?
Glenn Beck has explained President Obama's decision to attack Libya in terms of the United Nations' "Responsibility to Protect Doctrine"
Mr Beck is right.
In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government's behavior, and that government's leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attackeded militarily.
"Responsibility to Protect" means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state's legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed "rogue" nation - does Israel spring to mind?
"Responsibility to Protect" - three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world.
More.......
“Reorganizing the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system and involve the United Nations, especially membership of the Security Council,’ he wrote. ‘That process needs to be initiated by the US, but China and other developing countries ought to participate as equals.” Soros emphasized that point, that this needs to be a global solution, making America one among many. “The rising powers must be present at the creation of this new system in order to ensure that they will be active supporters.”
777 fixer
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,792
- Reaction score
- 900
The Predator drone strikes you are probably thinking of happened in Yemen. The SEAL team taking out pirates happened off Somolia. Both cases had little to do with making anyone free other than the Captain of that ship.
777 fixer
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,792
- Reaction score
- 900
There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around. Whether it's the president who at one time said the president needs congressional approval before undertaking military action. Or the GOP congressman who all of a sudden have this new found concern about the comitment of US forces, the nature of the mission, the duration of it and the cost. Things they were not so concerend about when it came to Iraq. Which cost a WHOLE lot more than Libya has so far in terms of money and lives.
777 fixer
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,792
- Reaction score
- 900
Gleen Beck? Could'nt you have found someone, to put it mildly, not so ignorant?
dapoes
Veteran
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 3,543
- Reaction score
- 2,716
Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader".
Lovely, just lovely....
In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader".
Lovely, just lovely....
"Responsibility to Protect" - The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Why Did U.S. President Barack Obama order a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress - as he is constitutionally obliged to do?
Glenn Beck has explained President Obama's decision to attack Libya in terms of the United Nations' "Responsibility to Protect Doctrine"
Mr Beck is right.
In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government's behavior, and that government's leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attackeded militarily.
"Responsibility to Protect" means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state's legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed "rogue" nation - does Israel spring to mind?
"Responsibility to Protect" - three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world.
More.......
“Reorganizing the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system and involve the United Nations, especially membership of the Security Council,’ he wrote. ‘That process needs to be initiated by the US, but China and other developing countries ought to participate as equals.” Soros emphasized that point, that this needs to be a global solution, making America one among many. “The rising powers must be present at the creation of this new system in order to ensure that they will be active supporters.”
So then its ok for the UN to crap all over nations in the interest of 'responsibility to protect?
Never happen here...... :blink:
