President's speech today on national security

#1
A

allvol123

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
50,174
Likes
50,299
#1
Just listened to some if it, this is what I gathered.

He has ordered the following:

Banned all forms of EIT by the US. Not sure what the definition of a EIT is. Anyone know?
He ordered Gitmo closed.
He ordered review of all pending cases against detainees at Gitmo.
Basically said these guys will be coming to a supermax near you.

Also said he would not stand for fear mongering or politicizing of this issue. This was stated just moments after he said the opening of Gitmo created more terrorists than it ever housed and made the US weaker. But no more fear mongering. I hate this guy.

Also said the Bush policies to fight terrorism were ineffective in keeping the US safe. Not sure how he can make this claim. This is not a pro-Bush point I am making. I just don't know how he can claim the policies were ineffective. But no more politicizing.
 
#2
#2
what an idiot. bringing them here won't create more attacks or plans of attacks? this guy has got to go. t minus 4 years til this retard is out(hopefully)
 
#3
#3
At least he isn't politicizing the issue. It needed to be aired out on TV for him to make his point to the military to do what he says.

EIT is what the CIA calls certain interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. If the idiot is trying to ban all of them, he is simply politicizing something that he knows absolutely nothing about. Astounding that he would be hypocritical or disingenuous.
 
#4
#4
He is truly the "Whiner in Chief". I watched and he repeatedly went back to "I didn't do it but I have to fix it". More annoying is his trashing of Congress, the press, etc (basically anyone that questions his moves on Gitmo, releasing memos, etc.) then laments that some are "playing politics".

I wonder when people will finally call him on this stuff.
 
#6
#6
If his supporters and/or the press would approach him with 1/2 the skepticism they applied to Bush, he would be exposed pretty quickly.
 
#7
#7
volinbham said:
He is truly the "Whiner in Chief". I watched and he repeatedly went back to "I didn't do it but I have to fix it". More annoying is his trashing of Congress, the press, etc (basically anyone that questions his moves on Gitmo, releasing memos, etc.) then laments that some are "playing politics".

I wonder when people will finally call him on this stuff.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Aside from his politics and ideaologies, I just don't like this guy as a person. What a schmuck.
 
#10
#10
allvol123 said:
Just listened to some if it, this is what I gathered.

He has ordered the following:

Banned all forms of EIT by the US. Not sure what the definition of a EIT is. Anyone know?
He ordered Gitmo closed.
He ordered review of all pending cases against detainees at Gitmo.
Basically said these guys will be coming to a supermax near you.

Also said he would not stand for fear mongering or politicizing of this issue. This was stated just moments after he said the opening of Gitmo created more terrorists than it ever housed and made the US weaker. But no more fear mongering. I hate this guy.

Also said the Bush policies to fight terrorism were ineffective in keeping the US safe. Not sure how he can make this claim. This is not a pro-Bush point I am making. I just don't know how he can claim the policies were ineffective. But no more politicizing.
Click to expand...

he is a pathetic leader. at least congress the senate is against him on the closing.

please explain to me how bush's policies did not keep us safe? we have not have anymore attacks, he killed a dictator, libyia gave up their nukes. hussein is total moron.

and if you libs say that we caused more terrorist to be recruited, that's bull too. they've been teaching the destruction of America for years.
 
#11
#11
I love how he orders Gitmo closed and the dems that backed his decision are now saying close it but don't send them to my state. They know that if they accept Gitmo detainees, they will lose their next election.

Foreign countries also want Gitmo closed but they say they will not accept them in their countries.

What is Obama to do:crazy:
 
#12
#12
vols4sure said:
I love how he orders Gitmo closed and the dems that backed his decision are now saying close it but don't send them to my state. They know that if they accept Gitmo detainees, they will lose their next election.

Foreign countries also want Gitmo closed but they say they will not accept them in their countries.

What is Obama to do:crazy:
Click to expand...

be a p***y and apologize
 
#13
#13
Okay for the second time today he's said we are not going to back and re-examine the past eight years or play the blame game. However, his entire speech was about how F'd up things are because of Bush and how he had NOTHING to do with it.
 
#14
#14
volinbham said:
He's showing more and more amateurism.
Click to expand...
the hollow ideologue that he is has to be visible now to even his most ardent supporters.

Wonder why LG doesn't come here any more to do anything other than focus attention on the talking heads?
 
#16
#16
Vol Mania 21 said:
be a p***y and apologize
Click to expand...

I really think Gitmo is going to really come back and bite him in the butt. He ordered the closing way too early and is now stuck in no mans land. He can't say he is not going to close it but he will never be able to come up with an acceptable plan to close it. This thing is going to drag on for a long time.
 
#22
#22
allvol123 said:
Not necessarily. In fact, decisions have consequences. You can want the two to not connect, but that does not make it accurate.
Click to expand...


Oh, I am absolutely correct. His argument was purely within the definition of that logical fallacy.

I am not saying his conclusion is wrong. I'm saying his math is. You know, a "Next time show your work" kind of a thing.
 
#23
#23
lawgator1 said:
Oh, I am absolutely correct. His argument was purely within the definition of that logical fallacy.

I am not saying his conclusion is wrong. I'm saying his math is. You know, a "Next time show your work" kind of a thing.
Click to expand...

i think it speaks for itself, have we had any more attacks?
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
Oh, I am absolutely correct. His argument was purely within the definition of that logical fallacy.

I am not saying his conclusion is wrong. I'm saying his math is. You know, a "Next time show your work" kind of a thing.
Click to expand...

ok, technically you are correct using his statement. So what is your point? Had no commentary on the thread topic? Just needed to poke your little head in for that tidbit?

Did you bring out the same fallacy in regards to Obama saying Bush's policies made us weaker and created more terrorists? Or since the second part is not provable there is no way to even propose the fallacy in the first place? Obama do his homework?
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top