No blood for oil
 

On 20/03/2011 3:34 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

wonder if he knows we dont buy libyan oil

oh well...

Probably does not. Seems ike Obama has surounded himself with fools.
Can't have anyone smarter than the head chimp.

Todays good guy, is good only so long as he doesn't tick off the hidden
masters of US-UN-France-Saudi. If you do, they then haul up all the
dirt they have, send in a few hundred people to stir up the pot and toss
you out. Then maybe get you lynched as dead people tell no stories.

Obama knows he is a front man puppet. If he doesn't realize it, then he
must be one real dumb chimp. Because even this chimp knows it.
Americans might not see it, but US either follows or leads with other
countries in unison. Take Ottawa, US jumps, so does Canada. It is
coordianted. US nor Caanda is run by domesic voters, Obama jumps to
hidden masters. Big money types.

Bet if Osama Bin Laddens brother called up Obama on an urgent financial
or politial reason Obama would answer. Or if the head of
Harvard...Oxford....Bilderbergs.

No blood for oil
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Bush didn't put troops on the ground for over 2 years, lets see how it
goes in Libya before we start patting ourselves on the back.

Two years? From when he decided to go after Saddam, perhaps. Other
that you're just rewriting the facts.

No blood for oil
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:02:46 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:44:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya?s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Obama gave the order to shoot around 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles
at targets in Libya. Therefore Obama attacked Libya. You may say that
the UN gave Obama permission to shoot the cruise missiles but that is
just political cover for Obama attacking Libya.


Point well taken. You are correct, yet we have no troops on the
ground. Sense any difference from Bush????

Obama hasn't mobilized half our military force around Libya in
anticipation of a campaign.

No blood for oil
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:59:05 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:35:11 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:02:46 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:44:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya?s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Obama gave the order to shoot around 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles
at targets in Libya. Therefore Obama attacked Libya. You may say that
the UN gave Obama permission to shoot the cruise missiles but that is
just political cover for Obama attacking Libya.


Point well taken. You are correct, yet we have no troops on the
ground. Sense any difference from Bush????

Obama didn't lie to the UN or the US about WMDs.

I've posted an number of responses... and I've received few
rebuttals...

not that Obama has received a pass, but he has been forthcoming....

a shame Bush didn't take the same path...

Bush is an excuse maker. Spoiled child who never learned to take
responsibility for his actions.

No blood for oil
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:35:11 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:02:46 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:44:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya?s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Obama gave the order to shoot around 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles
at targets in Libya. Therefore Obama attacked Libya. You may say that
the UN gave Obama permission to shoot the cruise missiles but that is
just political cover for Obama attacking Libya.


Point well taken. You are correct, yet we have no troops on the
ground. Sense any difference from Bush????

Obama didn't lie to the UN or the US about WMDs.

I've posted an number of responses... and I've received few
rebuttals...

not that Obama has received a pass, but he has been forthcoming....

a shame Bush didn't take the same path...

A UN agency said that Iraq had WMD's.

No blood for oil
 

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Is Obama done with Libya? Cruise missiles and bombers are the same as we saw
over Baghdad on day one.

What is his objective?

Hey Gene, this is pointless. You will support your guy, even if he changed his
name to Bush. You can have him.

I see a hell of a lot of hypocrisy in the liberals today.

Here, do some reading. It's interesting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-b..._b_838049.html

I'll just sit back and watch. You and the plume can do your thing.

No blood for oil
 

On 21/03/2011 11:39 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:14:00 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Bush didn't put troops on the ground for over 2 years, lets see how it
goes in Libya before we start patting ourselves on the back.

Two years? From when he decided to go after Saddam, perhaps. Other
that you're just rewriting the facts.

Two years of no fly zones, following 8 years under Clinton and over a
year with GHWB.

The question is, what is our exit strategy in Libya?

We don't seem to have one for any of our other military adventures and
we are still in all of them.

Obama is going to use this as an excuse with Congress to continue his
out of control debt-spending. Nothing worse than a liberla-debtor in
debtors denial. Congress should just say balanced budget, you run out
of money you are closed down.

Then the real steps toward recovery will occur.

No blood for oil
 

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:39:33 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:14:00 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Bush didn't put troops on the ground for over 2 years, lets see how it
goes in Libya before we start patting ourselves on the back.

Two years? From when he decided to go after Saddam, perhaps. Other
that you're just rewriting the facts.

Two years of no fly zones, following 8 years under Clinton and over a
year with GHWB.

The question is, what is our exit strategy in Libya?

We don't seem to have one for any of our other military adventures and
we are still in all of them.

So, because Bush couldn't tell the truth or plan that means Obama is
going to commit us to an endless war? Perhaps you should read the news
instead of relying on Fox.

No blood for oil
 

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:09:57 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 21/03/2011 11:39 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:14:00 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Bush didn't put troops on the ground for over 2 years, lets see how it
goes in Libya before we start patting ourselves on the back.

Two years? From when he decided to go after Saddam, perhaps. Other
that you're just rewriting the facts.

Two years of no fly zones, following 8 years under Clinton and over a
year with GHWB.

The question is, what is our exit strategy in Libya?

We don't seem to have one for any of our other military adventures and
we are still in all of them.

Obama is going to use this as an excuse with Congress to continue his
out of control debt-spending. Nothing worse than a liberla-debtor in
debtors denial. Congress should just say balanced budget, you run out
of money you are closed down.

Then the real steps toward recovery will occur.

So, when Obama called for PayGo and the Republicans said no, I guess
that makes it Obama's fault in your tiny brain.

No blood for oil
 

On 21/03/2011 12:40 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:09:57 -0600,
wrote:

On 21/03/2011 11:39 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:14:00 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:01:19 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:56:05 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:39:06 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Is Obama about to attack Libya simply to steal their oil for George
Soros? It makes sense considering that Obama gave US taxpayer money
to Soros for drilling offshore Brazil. Remember, this is an admin
that thinks the Egyptian dictator Mubarek was a good guy (Remember
what Biden said about Mubarek not being a dictator). France is just
doing what they always do, backing whoever will supply them with oil
as most of Libya’s oil goes thru France.

Let's take the first question. Is Obama attacking Libya?

Yes. Maybe you've been out fishing for the last couple days.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s...fense-targets/

Of course, if you define 'attack' in certain ways, you could say that Bush
didn't attack Iraq either.

Did Bush put troops on the ground? How is this the same?

Bush didn't put troops on the ground for over 2 years, lets see how it
goes in Libya before we start patting ourselves on the back.

Two years? From when he decided to go after Saddam, perhaps. Other
that you're just rewriting the facts.

Two years of no fly zones, following 8 years under Clinton and over a
year with GHWB.

The question is, what is our exit strategy in Libya?

We don't seem to have one for any of our other military adventures and
we are still in all of them.

Obama is going to use this as an excuse with Congress to continue his
out of control debt-spending. Nothing worse than a liberla-debtor in
debtors denial. Congress should just say balanced budget, you run out
of money you are closed down.

Then the real steps toward recovery will occur.

So, when Obama called for PayGo and the Republicans said no, I guess
that makes it Obama's fault in your tiny brain.

Obama, pay as you go? Who are you kidding?

PAYGO is meaningless other than the name only. You verspend $ 1.6
trillion a year and you call that pay as you go? Geez....I could sell
you a pile of common rocks and call them diamonds....

Pay as you go as opposed to Obama's lips a moving means you spend at or
less that what you take in. Obama lies. The fleabagger ways, lie, lie,
lie, then deny. And when that doesn't work make exuses.

Watch, Obama will be over budget shortly and he will either deny or make
excuses.