Replies

"Uh, those despots survived because they had no opposition or rebels fighting back, champ."

You're doubling down. Terrific. Let me guess, public school?

Everyone of those men, excluding Kim Jong-Il, faced armed resistance to their tyranny at least once, many faced armed resistance several times or even continually.

Amin, Mugabe, Pol Pot & Duvalier (and several other Haitian dictators including Aristide) all put down insurrections that could only be described as civil wars.

Hussein's record, of course, speaks for itself as the only guy who (as far as we know) actually used WMD on "his people".

So yes, they did have "opposition or rebels fighting back".

Your welcome.

None of those tyrants you listed faced the resistance on the scale of what's happened in Libya, Yemen, and Egypt. C'mon, bouncers at a bar could have put down insurrections from those countries you stated.

I'm reminded of the dog froths at the mouth as he chases down the street hoping to catch the elusive car

The only one that's frothing is you. You're the one that's all over this thread, trying to create a narrative that doesn't exist. For the record, I'm against ANY involvement in Libya, but all Palin did was call for a no-fly zone that would have gave the rebels a fighting chance to overthrow Gaddafi. Which meant that the rebels would have fought for their own freedom instead of risking American lives. All she's pointing out is how ineffective Obama is rather than arguing the points of the policy itself (which stems directly from Obama's ineffectiveness).

Now I'm going to watch the Badgers kick some ass.