President Obama and Dick Cheney Debate over terrorism!

My views on two speeches on terrorism giving by the president and former VP Dick Cheney.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Commentary
• Politics
• President Obama
• Limbaugh
• AEI
• Washington DC
• Terrorism
• News
• Debate
• Religion
• Abortion
• Constitution
• God
• Muslim
• Hannity
• Waterboarding
• Pelosi

[Fallstorm777]

Obama has taken a stance on terrorism his stance is that some American Policies incite terrorism. I think anyone who has an understanding U.S. history in the Middle East could see that. To go with Dick and say the only thing to do is keep killing without regard to the underlying problem is like giving someone with stomach cancer an antacid tablet yeah, it might help with the nausea but it doesn't address the underlying issue contributing to the greater problem.

[jediwill1974two]

You have a good point, but what the former VP is saying is that once they have been established as terrorists it is full hardy to expect that they will just give and go away because you are being nice to them like BO wants to do. If you find you have an enemy and you don't take care of them now you will have to deal with an even more powerful enemy later that is something BO doesn't understand.

[JustinBiebsFan14]

i believe that dogs have rights!!!  this is just cruel!!!

[sciencemunk]

aight you just lost me. Dick Cheney is one of the worst things that ever happened to this country. Damn Bush did not keep us safe for no 8 years 911 happened under Bush and Cheney maybe you meant 6 years or something like that. not for obama. but Bush and Cheney are the worst thing that's ever happened you're buggin on that one

[BABABABA5555]

And to second that, you said a very true statement that the government was using those tools we gave them to "battle terror" and turning them against american people.

Fear mongering is an EXCELLENT way for the government to gain more power and control.

I do not deny that there are crazy islamists out there, but constantly giving up our own freedoms to our own rulers may be an even bigger threat, especially when actions of our rulers in the past are what helped create the enemies to beginwith.

[BABABABA5555]

JediWill,

I would disagree with you a bit on this video. There is definitely two sides to the terrorist issue, if not many more.

The term blowback comes to mind. The US trained Osama, sold WMDs to Saddam, and helped overthrow the democratically elected leader of Iran to reinstate the shah, which helped spur the Iranian revolution.

If you go blast the shit out of a village and kill a bunch of civilians, you just created a wad of enemies, no matter if you managed to kill a few terrorists.

[xaviermorris]

dude,please let me know how i can inform myself on these political issues as much as you

[ExtacyLove1985]

Obamas sadly another puppet just like bush was

we need to stop looking at whos left and right and realise that there both working for the same power elite that never put themself on show

rockefellers

rothschilds

berzinski ---> ( the guy behind obama who was funding the cia accet osama bin laden in the 80s)

911 inside job!

[Fallstorm777]

The fault by and large rests in the private sector. Some gov't sponsored institutions were involved. It should be noted those sponsored groups had some lax laws on what they were allowed to do with their monies. Gov't control over private industry including healthcare can result in nothing but decreased corruption & more equitable access to said service, which is not to say corruption won't exist I just I trust the gov't more than private industry & I think history supports that hypothesis.

[Infantry9]

It wasn't just the real estate industries and the banks but also the govt. sponsored institutions Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae which encouraged sub-prime mortgages by buying as many of them as they could. Some politicians like McCain tried to push for better regulation on Freddie & Fannie to help prevent economic meltdown but the proposed legislation was shot down. Had the legislation passed, the economic problems we have today would not be so bad.

[Fallstorm777]

You had a real estate industry that new the practices it was engaging in would go belly up but them & the bankds craved immediate profit at the expense of the economy..why because of no regulation. The various companys like Worldcom, Enron, etc that snatched their workers nest eggs. Segregation was ended because of the Feds not because private industry & the stsates had a change of heart. So, yeah both Gov't & priv. Industry can be corrupt but if I had to go with 1 I would chose the gov't.