Critics: Obama admin hyping terrorist nuclear risk/ Obama has been reading V for Vend

[OrangeEmpire]

Critics: Obama admin hyping terrorist nuclear risk - Washington Times

The Obama administration is warning that the danger of a terrorist attack with nuclear weapons is increasing, but U.S. officials say the claim is not based on new intelligence and questioned whether the threat is being overstated.
President Obama said in a speech before the 47-nation Nuclear Security Summit, which concluded Tuesday, that "the risk of a nuclear confrontation between nations has gone down, but the risk of nuclear attack has gone up."
The two-day meeting concluded with an agreement by participants to take steps to prevent non-state actors like al Qaeda from obtaining nuclear weapons, either through theft of existing weapons or through making their own with pilfered nuclear material.

Hmmm............ Obama will bomb his own country to secure power!

Outstanding!

:crazy:

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Nuclear blast victims would have to wait - USATODAY.com

 

[lawgator1]

The GOP simply have no maneuvering room on this. These are the same people who championed Bush's war on terrorism to prevent Saddam from using weapons of mass destruction against us, including nuclear weapons. These are the same people who support missile shields against rogue nuclear attack, like North Korea.

Sorry. The GOP simply cannot be critical of the President for this. Saw Buchanan on tv last night and he was supporting Obama's actions on this, as he should.

 

[droski]

what's the story here?

 

[BigPapaVol]

The GOP simply have no maneuvering room on this. These are the same people who championed Bush's war on terrorism to prevent Saddam from using weapons of mass destruction against us, including nuclear weapons. These are the same people who support missile shields against rogue nuclear attack, like North Korea.

Sorry. The GOP simply cannot be critical of the President for this. Saw Buchanan on tv last night and he was supporting Obama's actions on this, as he should.

Why does the right even enter the discussion about our chief being disinegenuous? How about Americans being critical?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[volinbham]

The GOP simply have no maneuvering room on this. These are the same people who championed Bush's war on terrorism to prevent Saddam from using weapons of mass destruction against us, including nuclear weapons. These are the same people who support missile shields against rogue nuclear attack, like North Korea.

Sorry. The GOP simply cannot be critical of the President for this. Saw Buchanan on tv last night and he was supporting Obama's actions on this, as he should.

Help me out here. Did you ever criticize Bush for overhyping terrorist threats? If so, you should be doing the same about your guy. Pretty simple really.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

what's the story here?

I created it for one person only........

Only took 9 minutes....

 

[Vol Mania 21]

lulz

 

[volinbham]

For a party that doesn't use fear we sure are getting a pantload full (terrorists have nukes, Wall Street will steal your money, doctors will give you unecessary operations, insurance companies just plain suck, Toyotas will kill you, the Earth is dying, big business is run amok, management is screwing workers so we must unionize, etc. etc. etc.)

 

[OrangeEmpire]

It cracks me up he does exactly what he supposedly hates.....

 

[KB5252]

It cracks me up he does exactly what he supposedly hates.....

Every time, and he doesn't even realize it.

 

[MG1968]

Imagine that, another news story with "Obama" and "hype" in the headline

 

[lawgator1]

Why does the right even enter the discussion about our chief being disinegenuous? How about Americans being critical?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Sure, and I've no problem with people being critical of POTUS if they think he's lying. I'm just saying that the elected members of the GOP, on the whole, have been running around sounding this alarm for the better part of a decade and so they have cornered themselves and cannot now be heard to say that the risk is low.

Help me out here. Did you ever criticize Bush for overhyping terrorist threats? If so, you should be doing the same about your guy. Pretty simple really.

Big difference.

I said: 1) Terror threat real, but let's not go overboard thinking all Muslims are terrorists, and 2) Bush targeted wrong country and people in War on Terror, and 3) neocons using scare tactics of terrorism threat to justify poor treatment of all Muslim and/or Arabic countries, to justify dubious energy independence policies, etc.

I don't ever recall saying we shouldn't reduce world stockpiles of nuclear material because the threat of terrorists getting some was too low to justify it.

I am not now saying that Obama is right or wrong as to the level of the threat. What I am saying is that the elected members of the GOP would look like idiots if they took a position in contravention of what Obama is saying because he is saying what they've been saying and is doing something about it.

 

[droski]

" let's not go overboard thinking all Muslims are terrorists"

please link where bush said or implied that all muslims are terrorists

and please explain who we should be targeting instead of the people blowing things up.

much thanks

 

[OrangeEmpire]

" let's not go overboard thinking all Muslims are terrorists"

please link where bush said or implied that all muslims are terrorists

and please explain who we should be targeting instead of the people blowing things up.

much thanks

I can answer this, whatever the democratic talking points say.

 

[volinbham]

OE set the trap successfully

 

[BigPapaVol]

Sure, and I've no problem with people being critical of POTUS if they think he's lying. I'm just saying that the elected members of the GOP, on the whole, have been running around sounding this alarm for the better part of a decade and so they have cornered themselves and cannot now be heard to say that the risk is low.





Big difference.

I said: 1) Terror threat real, but let's not go overboard thinking all Muslims are terrorists, and 2) Bush targeted wrong country and people in War on Terror, and 3) neocons using scare tactics of terrorism threat to justify poor treatment of all Muslim and/or Arabic countries, to justify dubious energy independence policies, etc.

I don't ever recall saying we shouldn't reduce world stockpiles of nuclear material because the threat of terrorists getting some was too low to justify it.

I am not now saying that Obama is right or wrong as to the level of the threat. What I am saying is that the elected members of the GOP would look like idiots if they took a position in contravention of what Obama is saying because he is saying what they've been saying and is doing something about it.

targeted the wrong people? Wasn't Bush's intention to preclude Hussein's proliferation? Was Hussein not proliferating?