The UN, thats where you send the bill for UN work, though I think you may find they might like you to pay what you owe first;)

Actually I believe I have. This isn't our party, we don't need to formally declare war because we're just another participant in this U.N. action, the US couldn't have acted sooner as Libya isn't a serious threat to U.S. interests in the region and the U.N. is the lead on this, and as much as dislike Barry and his politics I think he acted correctly- say as little as possible, let Libya's neighbors dictate our response time, and let them play 'world police'. I don't mind one bit that we supply the muscle for this but I DO have a big problem with this apparent push to remove Ghadafi under the guise of a U.N. no fly zone. We pulled this crap in Iraq and see where that got us ? If we can keep Castro bottled up 90 miles off our shore for 40+ years why can't we do the same with Libya with his enemies help ?

I personally think we should have kept our hands clear of this, but since we're already there we need to make certain that we do ONLY what the U.N. says we can do, and NOTHING more.

I dont understand why Americans feel the need to turn every subject into an american issue.

Every one agreed this should be a European led operation with the US playing a secondary role.

We now have a European led operation where European nations will provide the bulk of the forces and funding. The US played a secondary (but vital) role of taking out the Libyan air defences, since they are the ones best equipped for that task.

If American choose to impeach President Obama over this (as some have asked), then you deserve what you get: President Joe Biden. :dead:

+1 indeed !

Watch it Alex.

The UN? Oh you mean the League of Nations baby brother.

The UN is crap, and it's worse than DC. The fact of the matter is the guy needs to go and the time is now. I'm tired of the same nonsense coming from the these radicals, and the same nonsense from the rest of the world.

If we let the world dictate what we need the world would be in sorry shape.

Cry "Lockerbie!" and let slip the... no, that isn't how that goes. :hmmm:

Cry "Vengeance!" and let sli... :-?:damn:

Cry "Screw you, world!" and bomb the crap out of a weaker... :huh: No, much too close to the truth. :shifty:



Why don't we just admit that we feel inadequate as a nation because we have to wear a dorky hat? :D

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=1878


No offense to Canada, and especially not the moose or bears of Canada. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...pictureid=2388

Is there any reason why anyone should take you seriously?

I suppose yet again you take issue with something I've said? Try as I might you and I just don't get along do we?

Tell me, why should I take your seriously?

On another note that drawing is hilarious what is that from?

Scandanavia and the World. :) Here's the comic that I got that from:

http://satwcomic.com/merry-christmas

:) that's pretty good I'll have to read more of those!

I like this one, even though its not PC:

http://satwcomic.com/not-a-yahtzee

:D

That's a good one - and the reason why we call the game "Kniffel" here...:O:

I see what you really said there.
One good shot deserves another Frenchy:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zp0h1YAc0C...rench_frog.jpg

It is of course funny that both the President and VP were both against any "unilateral" action on the part of the Executive branch (and unilateral in the clear terms of the question and answer back then meant Congress vs Executive, it had nothing at all to do with other nations).

I'm willing to cut them some slack on their weak action (clearly the time to "act!" was earlier rather than later), but they should explicitly apologize to the Bush Administration for their smack-talk.

Can be low-key, they can say at a press conf, "Ya know, back in 200X (whatever year it was), I talked some smack from the cheap seats about the President acting without the permission of congress. Now that I really understand what executive decision making is about, it turns out me earlier statements were rash."

I think that the power of Congress to declare war, is a very specific wording and separate from allowing military action. OTOH, back in the day, there was no standing army, so to do military action, the President needed to first raise an army. Even the early USN ships were not ready to sail at all times to save money—though some were usually ready with masts stepped, yards crossed, etc.

Giving the current president exactly what he gave the previous one is sorta funny. You know the dems would do it were the tables turned (since we have the Biden and Obama quotes to prove it). Calling him to the carpet for HIS hypocrisy is totally legit, though I think it's a Commander in Chief decision to make and won't attack him on having the power to make it.