Obama Sells Out The USA
Scurvy Dog
would not use its nuclear weapons EVEN IF ATTACKED.
So go ahead Russia, bomb New York - Obama won't do a goddamn thing.
Obama must be impeached and put on trial for what he is - a traitor.
Peter
According to the NY Times, "... the president said in an interview
that he was carving out an exception for “outliers like Iran and North
Korea” that have violated or renounced the (nuclear non-proliferation
treaty) ..." and also, "...the United States is explicitly committing
not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in
compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they
attacked the United States..."
Clearly, the policy change does not change the response to an attack
by a nuclear state.
There may be something in what you say to the extent that it was
formerly policy to avoid discussing specific questions about how
nuclear weapons would be used. I think it is a good policy and he
might have been better advised to say less than he did. Even so, I
see nothing that is traitorous.
Scurvy Dog
"Peter" <w2...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a4ab8cdc-76e1-49e4...@t17g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
> Even so, I see nothing that is traitorous.
He gave aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war.
If that isn't traitorous, what is?
Obama should be impeached before we're all speaking Russian or being forced to
worship Allah.
tony cooper
<scurvydo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Peter" <w2...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:a4ab8cdc-76e1-49e4...@t17g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
>> Even so, I see nothing that is traitorous.
>
>He gave aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war.
An unnecessary war entered into under the false pretenses of web of
lies.
>If that isn't traitorous, what is?
Sending thousands of Americans to die for an unjust cause based on an
irrational response to unsubstantiated intelligence.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 16:16:57 -0400, "Scurvy Dog"
>
I think this is quite a bit beyond my ability to settle with a
sentence or 2. My suggestion would be to take a look at "War and
Decision" by Douglas Feith. If it is offensive to deal with the
participants you might find it at your library. It is a careful
citation of most of what it is possible to document about the war in
Iraq and the planning that preceeded it.
He does not deny mistakes so far as I can see. He merely explains the
points of view that were considered and includes many that were
rejected.