Obama-Romney Debate 3 - In 3D - Page 9

WallyWager · #81 (**permalink**) 10-24-2012, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 40yearfan

That's your only complaint. Guess you must agree with the rest of it.

Well I have several complaints, but that one stuck out like sore thumb on a swollen hand.

BridgetRose · #82 (**permalink**) 10-24-2012, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Or how about this guy?

Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States - YouTube

OK so Obama went to 57 states, Had one more to go to so that's 58 states he visited and two Alaska and Hawaii he didn't visit so that makes a total of 60 states?

My pic's for the other ten states:

1.Mexico, they might as well be a state most of the country is here anyway

2.Puerto, Rico We could use another pretty Island.

3.Israel, we defend them anyway.

4.Canada (they will never know the difference)

5.Haiti, they could use the help right now.

6. France, they will surrender immediately and they have some good food and drink.

7.Poland for $h!ts and giggles

8.Brazil, they have carnivale and hot women.

9.Cuba,Castro doesn't have much longer.

10. Coloumbia, because... why the hell not.

AZRWinger · #83 (**permalink**) 10-24-2012, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WallyWager

Well you would be blind to the truth, you would see nothing where facts lay, you are voting for Romney after all .

Shoot, look up how he came up with the 12 million jobs promise, it involves triple-counting studies that have relatively little to do with his policy plans.

The president is way ahead of you at least on the former, we've already begun to increase our presence in the South Pacific, but you knew that already as I can see.

US to station troops in northern Australia as fears of China's Pacific presence grow - Telegraph

Your assessment is entirely untrue in light of the facts, military spending has grown under Obama, and at the very worst these spending cuts from Congress may end up only delaying further increases in the defense budget. The president's understanding for a need for diplomacy is far away from your assertion that he believe only his charms will win the day. The Constitution calls for a national defense (Rightly so.), and we should maintain our strength (Rightly so, again.), but that doesn't mean we have a green-light for unlimited military spending.

Obama's answer to Romney's idiocy was wholly appropriate, you cannot compare the US Navy in 1916 to that of today without looking like a damned fool. When Mitt is that dense and clueless about our military capabilities, no amount of fact is going to penetrate his skull.

Stationing troops in Australia is a factor arguing against shrinking the size of our navy unless you believe our troops shouldn't be supported by naval power. It is part of the OA's pivot away from the ME to Asia, reallocating forces which emboldens ME terrorists like those in Libya. But you knew that already.

Please explain how under Obama's incredible shrinking navy we can deploy a given aircraft carrier task force to the ME and Asia at the same time. We cannot. The only context where this makes sense is under Obama's fantasy that killing Osama, the Arab spring, withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, and sanctions against Iran along with Obama's explaining US blunders in the past, apologies, has resulted in there being no need for naval power in the ME. Reality tells a different story as the ME descends into jihadist turmoil in the face of Obama's projected weakness.

Did you notice that Obama promised the defense sequestration cuts were not going to happen? Naturally he did not mention how he expects to pay for it his tax increases on the rich being assigned to education and infrastructure spending as well as deficit reduction, talk about the math not adding up.

Mikeyy · #84 (**permalink**) 10-24-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [QUOTE

AZRWinger;489287]Stationing troops in Australia is a factor arguing against shrinking the size of our navy unless you believe our troops shouldn't be supported by naval power. It is part of the OA's pivot away from the ME to Asia, reallocating forces which emboldens ME terrorists like those in Libya. But you knew that already.

Yeah, Because we really make a big difference in terrorism with our military

Quote:

Please explain how under Obama's incredible shrinking navy we can deploy a given aircraft carrier task force to the ME and Asia at the same time. We cannot. The only context where this makes sense is under Obama's fantasy that killing Osama, the Arab spring, withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, and sanctions against Iran along with Obama's explaining US blunders in the past, apologies, has resulted in there being no need for naval power in the ME. Reality tells a different story as the ME descends into jihadist turmoil in the face of Obama's projected weakness.

I see you speak for the bad guys now. Why is it only the right sees Obama as weak. Nobody else in the world does except partisan Americans.

Quote:

Did you notice that Obama promised the defense sequestration cuts were not going to happen? Naturally he did not mention how he expects to pay for it his tax increases on the rich being assigned to education and infrastructure spending as well as deficit reduction, talk about the math not adding up.

[/QUOTE]Yet you trust Romney's math that nobody has been able to add up.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode