Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    Obama is making my point....Netanyahu asked to meet Obama when he is in town for UN meetings....Obama won't make time for him.
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    Guess who failed to attend his Presidential Daily Briefings for the week leading up to the 9/11 anniversary and the attacks on two of our embassies????

    Who has a guess??? 

    On a lighter note, Obama is going to be on David Letterman soon!!!

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:




    There is a marked difference between not doing enough and doing absolutely nothing.

    If baby-Bush had even just issued a security alert to the airlines that would be something.

    If he had issued alerts to the airports about what they knew it would be something.


    But he did absolutely nothing.


    I do find it curious that baby-Bush was so perplexed in the classroom after he was told of the attacks. It's was if he had completely forgotten that security brief only a month earlier .

     



    Haha...a security alert huh? Tell airlines what? Hey...we think there might be a hijacking. No idea when or where exactly. So spend extra money and resources planning and watching out for...well we have no idea what EXACTLY to watch for but...well just do it anyone. For how long? Well, we don't know that either. So I guess do it indefinitely. You airlines have a magical pot of gold to pull from for resources right? Go get em!


     




    Hahaha

    We don't know for sure that Iraq has wmd but we are going to send the entire country into an unnecessar, interminble war because my VP came up with this cool 1% doctrine.

     




Get your fact straight.  Iraq had many of the weapon systems that were banned. 

The week before the invasion, 20 SCUDs were found and destroyed. 

A couple of days before the invasion, Iraq fired two missles into a shopping mall in kuwait, WAY beyond the missle limit.

Saddam fired at plans in the no-fly zone every single day.

550 tons of yellowcake were seized in the first days of the war.

And that's just the partial list.  The liberals have played the "yah, but" for too long on this.

The problem with the no WMD found argument is that they were found. 

 

http://caseyhendrickson.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/wmds-in-iraq-are-irrefutable/

 

 
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    Who else wonders whether or not the threats against the US Consulate in Libya showed up in the Presidential Daily Briefing that Obama didn't attend on the days before 9/11, on 9/11 and the days following.

    Obama lives in the same building as his job....what possible excuse can he have for not attending meetings that are specifically held for the purpose of protecting Americans at home and abroad???

     

     

     

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    LIBYAN OFFICIAL WARNED USA '3 DAYS BEFORE ATTACK'...

     

    Libyan president: 'No doubt' was 'preplanned' starting months ago...

     

    Israel: America ignored Arab wrath...

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    Israel can pout and we can fret, but as long as we keep them out of the spotlight, it's still a war among their enemies, and that's not all bad.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    A strategy that might have been followed in 2006-2007 when we presided over a civil war between Sunni and Shiite in Iraq, and all we could do - apparently - was keep shouting, "Hey! Over here! We're the enemy!" Likewise, how it was projected here.  To keep the money flowing to the ravenous Blackwater, Halliburton etc.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    ...might better have been followed...

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    Um well...if one doesn't know WHEN or WHERE the attack will be then what would be the point of having the alert for say a week? You don't think AQ would hold off on their plan knowing there was an alert that was only going to be for a short time?
    You just don't think much do you?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Oh you mean like those color-coded threat alerts that baby-Bush started which were INDEFINITE!


    You're caught up on how long a security 'heads up' would last.

    How about doing it first and then adjusting it as more intel comes in.
    It could be a day, a week, a month but ya could start it sometime and go from there.
    Especially when the lives of so many innocents are concerned.
    Better to err on the side of safety.




    Serious question, Angry:  Why is your entire context always what Bush did?  Cannot Obama's policy stand on its own, or must it always be in context of Bush?

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to macnh1's comment:

    Obama is making my point....Netanyahu asked to meet Obama when he is in town for UN meetings....Obama won't make time for him.



    Funny how the people responsible for Israel's security don't agree with your, *ahem*, biased observation.


    Israel's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense Ehud Barak said the Obama White House has been the most supportive administration throughout the two countries' diplomatic relations on matters of Israeli security, in an interview to air Monday on "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer."



    "I think that from my point of view as defense minister they are extremely good, extremely deep and profound. I can see long years, um, administrations of both sides of political aisle deeply supporting the state of Israeli and I believe that reflects a profound feeling among the American people," said Barak. "But I should tell you honestly that this administration under President Obama is doing in regard to our security more than anything that I can remember in the past."

     




    Grabbing an old post and using it to support the current situation is not really a good way to make your argument.  Might I suggest focusing on why Bebe requested the meeting, and why Obama rejected the meeting.  That is what is important here.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:



    Get your fact straight.  Iraq had many of the weapon systems that were banned. 

    The week before the invasion, 20 SCUDs were found and destroyed. 

    A couple of days before the invasion, Iraq fired two missles into a shopping mall in kuwait, WAY beyond the missle limit.

    Saddam fired at plans in the no-fly zone every single day.

    550 tons of yellowcake were seized in the first days of the war.

    And that's just the partial list.  The liberals have played the "yah, but" for too long on this.

    The problem with the no WMD found argument is that they were found. 

     

    http://caseyhendrickson.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/wmds-in-iraq-are-irrefutable/

     

     




     

    That's your source?

    Some whacko wingnut in his mom's basement posting to a free wehosting site.

     

    Oh gawd, skeeter that is just pathetic.

    Even you can do better than that.

     

    Or maybe it is you. The details fit...mom's basement, free website...

     




    You can't attack the facts, so you attack the source.  I get it, it is what lawyers do when they are losing.

    WMD was not the only, not even the major reason for going into Iraq.  there was an extensive list of cease fire violations over the ten years preceding the second invasion.

    I can tell you that all the conditions of the cease fire where violated, and WMD was only one of a myriad of reasons we went to war.

    But, even considering that, WMD's were found, and precursors were found as well.  That they were not found in the quantity that the progressives find worthy is the only issue.


    You can keep focusing on your view of WMD all you want, but it doesn't make you right, anymore than trying to disclaim the source.  So, here is another:

     

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM

    and here from the defense dept.:

    http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918

    And, from this:

     

    http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/hgop_iraq_resolution.shtml

    this:

    "Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait.  The current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people.  Additionally, the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.  Furthermore, members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.  Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens."

     

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

     

    Skeeter - WDYWN is correct...the main theme was WMDs 

    (take note WDYWN)

     




    Well, no, it wasn't.  It made the most news, but there were several reasons.  As our government stated in seeking permission from the U.N.:

    "The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world".[1] Additional reasons have been suggested: "to change the Middle East so as to deny support for militant Islam by pressuring or transforming the nations and transnational systems that support it."[2] For the invasion of Iraq the rationale was "the United States relied on the authority of UN Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 to use all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with its international obligations".[3]"

     

    It was certainly the most critical from a potential threat standpoint once we engaged, but it was far from the sole reason why we invaded.  We would be invading about 212 countries if WMD was the prime reason, would we not?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Obama avoids daily intelligence briefing 57% of the time!!!!

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

     

    Skeeter - WDYWN is correct...the main theme was WMDs 

    (take note WDYWN)

     




    Here's the full list from the congressional resolution:

     

     

    • Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
    • Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
    • Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
    • Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
    • Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
    • Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
    • Iraq's "continuing to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
    • Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
    • The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, including the September 11th, 2001 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them.
    • The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
    • The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
    • Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.
     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share