Yeah Willard
send those 5 boys of yours at the front of the line...
Nope.
It was wrong when Obama did it in Libya, and it’ll be just as wrong if Romney does it in Iran.
He better thank God that his opponent is the most pathetic democrat evah.
Some times ya just need to keep ur mouth shut.
Fact is, he could, legally. Problem is, political correctness has eaten up the national will to go on. Even our military forces are full of it (DADT, feminism, etc.).
He could, but I strongly suggest that he NOT. Saying so was stupid.
Having said that; if we start up another war in the Middle East, we may very well run out of soldiers and armament.
I say let those people over there argue over whose god is the real god and which zombies and prophets are right about the universe until they wipe each other out.
I personally would not care if the entire Middle East was reduced to a sea of glass with no inhabitants.
Oh great. Now we have our own candidate to be king.
Now some folks can run him on the ‘My king is better than your king” platform.
Armour and chain mail will be handed out at the jousting tournaments this fall.
Maybe we could cooperate with the other side to make sure their two armors are oppositely charged. The first time they make a pass, they’ll merge into one big glob of king juice and we can start over.
If Iran is threatening to make good on its plans to destroy Israel or another ally in the region, the case for military action exists. Not on the line of Iraq or Afghanistan, but if all else fails, military action is the only remaining option. But NOTHING without Congressional consent.
Anyone remember the “Star Trek curse” where the odd-numbered Trek movies were almost certain to be flops? You just knew they were going to blow it...
Why does that come to mind?
That’s not the same thing as what the headline implied. But it is from the 0bamatrons at the Atlantic.
whether his position is defendable or not is a secondary issue. My question is why he felt compelled to take such an unnecessary stand. He could have just said he would take effective action etc and when asked what he meant state that he would not get into specifics of what he might or might do etc etc.
Unnecessary tactical mistake by our risk-adverse RINO IMO ... unless he is a few steps ahead of me and purposefully wants to suck Obama into this debate for some other reason
Milt Romney IS Obama.
Same Tyrant.
Same Egotism.
Same Backstabbing.
Same antiConstitutionalism.
Same Ineptness.
Same RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE.
Same TARP
Same Ineligibility.
Same Soros.
Same Global Warming.
Same HATRED OF CONSERVATIVES.
NO TO ROMNEY.
NO TO RINOs
Keep in mind, folks, this is very likely for Iran’s consumption. It’s to draw a distinction between himself and the simpering, appeasing little POS in the WH now.
Where is dicator wannabe going to get the money for his war, I wonder. Dumb as a box of rocks.
The Romney statement is one more example of egotistical proclivity for presidential FIAT, where the people’s representatives are circumvented entirely and their support assumed in order to justify a strike on another nation with our husbands, sons and relatives used at the tip of the spear.
Yes, there are events that may deserve a strike, but if it is so deserving and obvious and justified, then Congress needs its own voice to offer or reject their support.
Romney and Obama have entirely too much already in common and records to prove it. This is one more insight into the psychology of privilege, for unfettered power.
The gaggle who will vote for these two deserve them both and will be reaping exactly what they sew.
God, be with us. We are finished and in danger.
And he would be correct....