Unbelievable.

Rovin, do you know anyone who writes for the Onion? I think you’ve got a great idea there ”

– kd

This story really ticks me off because it hits close to home for me. Biden is such a scumbag. I’ve tried to stay respectful when speaking of all candidates, but this is too much. This is not a “stretching” of the truth or an oversight. This is a flat out LIE. Once again, I notice nothing on the CNN Political Ticker about Joe being a filthy LIAR!

If Barry O. had his way, Saddam would still be skirting U.N. “sanctions” making millions for oil, and it would just be a matter of time before he got around the sanctions to continue his WMD program. Saddam would still be financing terror if these two idiots were in charge. Oh, wait, that’s right, Biden was practically a cheerleader for the war when it was in his best interest. It wasn’t until things got tough that the dems began deserting.

However, if Biden did have his way we would have bailed out on Iraq back in 2004 at the height of the violence. Iraq would have become an absolute disaster with hundreds of thousands of people dying and Al Qaeda setting up a power base in Baghdad.

Or Biden’s brilliant plan of carving up Iraq into three separate “states”. If this is the kind of foreign policy experience that Biden brings to the table then….may I be excused from the table please????

Has anyone asked Obama his position on the “Bush Doctrine” or whatever one wants to call the right of self defense these days? Prior to 911, collectively as a nation we would sift through the rubble after an attack and identify the culprits. We could bring our outrage to the United Nations and pass resolutions. News flash for some- all 19 directly responsible for the 9-11 attacks are dead.
After the attack there were some who wanted to continue this approach . Perhaps they would go into the caves with lawyers and delegations to sit down and negotiate with the terrorists.
Some, conceivably a sizable majority, wanted to be protected BEFORE any blast took additional lives. Our leaders, acting on the available intelligence, made a political decision to protect American lives by bringing the conflict closer to the terrorist bases. That strategy was voted by congress and carried out by our military at great risk to themselves. As the intelligence was less than perfect, some chose to use hindsight to question the value of the strategy. People who voted to protect American lives now claim they were mislead by the intelligence that was available at the time. They act as if they knew all along that taking the war to the enemy was a bad choice. But they offer no reasonable alternative.
The choice at the time was to continue business as usual or take on the terrorists in their home territory. As the terrorists were not an identifiable state, another choice had to be made and nations were expected to uphold international law and arrest terrorists or face the consequences. Those who harbored terrorists, or supported them would be at risk. Against that background, our leaders chose to take the fight to the desert where our military had the best chance to survive, rather than to the caves and mountains that gave a distinct advantage to the terrorists. Even those who oppose the war recognize there has not been additional attacks on American soil.
If someone claims he/ she would act upon actionable intelligence, the next question would be the standard to attach to the intelligence. Is it ” reasonable cause to believe ( the standard used by police in this country?) or “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” ( the standard by juries)? That is a question of judgment!

If Biden is going to be this stupid, let the media hear it as satire and make sure Sarah Palin has this ammo in the upcoming debate.