president approves covert arming of rebels ?

i won't call them crackheads........but to me they just change the faces, but the policies stay the same......it almost makes you wish you were republican to get rich off the system too....

 

I don't own a crystal ball but I do own a baseball bat to beat some common sense into your ass.

I won't quote myself, quite redundant.

Well yes, all are quite true, except for your opinions on the title, "Leader of the free world." Is it an overly used term? Of course. A Propaganda tool? Without a doubt. However, the leader of the country where modern democracy was founded has earned such a title. Also, you unfortunately fail to make your ultimate point regarding this topic. Try to be a bit more direct.

I stand by my earlier statements. If America must arm the Libyan freedom fighters to help them earn their own independence, well I completely support that effort, regardless of whichever American political groups and agendas may oppose such an effort. Oh, and also those people that aren't even American in the first place and may be at a disability in understanding Democracy in the first place.:smt019

 

Nobody has earned the title of "leader of the free world"...much less a bunch of shit-eating politicians.

They are not leaders.

BTW..

All you know about what's going on in Libya is what you're told.

 

i was meaning to post this before, but you beat me to the punch. I said in another thread that 'advisers' were already there or would be coming there. this is US policy 101, to have boots or spooks on the ground to get a good look at what is going on, especially if our interests are of concern (in this case, removing Gadhafi). The rebels are half-assed, and we know that. They need proper training, planning, arming, etc.

 

half assed ? you are giving them too much credit

 

I think what you are trying to say is that people who aren't born in America may have trouble understanding democracy. I think that has to be a joke, though.

 

New Zealand was the first modern nation to grant universal suffrage in 1893. Direct enough?