[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Obama Wars Title: 0bama Shakes Hands With Libya's Qaddafi - Gesture Signals Repairing Bush's Damage to US "Cowboy Diplomacy"? (2009) President Obama shook hands with Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi Thursday, a sign that relations have improved considerably between the U.S. and the North African nation. The two met as they posed for pictures ahead of a G-8 summit dinner hosted by Italian President Giorgio Napolitano. Obama's diplomatic gesture was his latest effort to reach out to controversial world leaders in an attempt to improve the United States' standing around the world, which he says was damaged by former President Bush's unilateral diplomacy. [snip] Obama also shook hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in April at the Summit of Americas, where Chavez gave Obama a book critical of U.S. foreign policy. In Italy, Obama posed for a photo, standing between Napolitano and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and then socialized with others, including U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan.
Despite improved international relations, Qaddafi remains a controversial figure. He criticized the U.S.-led war in Iraq during a speech last month to the Italian Senate. "Iraq was a fortress against terrorism. With Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda could not get in, but now thanks to the United States it is an open arena and this benefits Al Qaeda," [Qaddafi] said. He also compared the U.S. air strike on Tripoli in 1986, in which one of his daughters was killed, to an Al Qaeda attack. [Qaddafi]: "What difference is there between the American attack on our homes in 1986 and bin Laden's terrorist actions?" he asked. "If bin Laden has no state and is an outlaw, America is a state with international rules." Poster Comment: Bwaahaa!! Notice 0bama's two-handed handshake for Qaddafi.... The day Qaddafi is the voice of reason and truth, and calls out both Bush and 0bama, is the day 0bama and his fellow warmongers assassinate him. Can't make this stuff up. Oh....NICE "diplomacy" from the Assassinator-in-Chief!(1 image) Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest In this photo, 0bama appears to be leaning inward toward Kaddafi, indicating his usual deference and subservience - even to this future assassinated fellow Muslim leader.
#2. To: Liberator (#1) (Edited) Gaddafi accomplished one of history's great diplomatic turnarounds when Secretary of State Condeleezza Rice announced that the U.S. was restoring full diplomatic relations with Libya and held up the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya as "a model" for others to follow. Rice attributed the ending of the U.S.'s long break in diplomatic relations to Gaddafi's historic decision in 2003 to dismantle weapons of mass destruction and renounce terrorism as well as Libya's "excellent cooperation in response to common global threats faced by the civilized world since September 11, 2001." Libya`s Gaddafi Speaks To Bush; Son To Visit U.S. In a further sign of warming ties, U.S. President George W. Bush called Libyan leader Col. Muammar Gaddafi on Monday to voice satisfaction at a U.S.-Libya deal to compensate victims of terrorism, the White House said. A senior official said there were no records of any previous U.S. president speaking to Gaddafi, who seized power in a 1969 military coup. Rights groups say Gaddafi's reign has been marked by human rights abuses and restrictions on freedom of expression. Tagline for sale - inquire within #3. To: go65 (#2) Yeah, how about that? LOL Except to their credit, Rice and Bush must have recognized the stability a trained, well-behaved Kaddafi brought to the Middle East. With his assassination, your ilk and 0bama have now created yet one more unstable, volatile situation in the Middle East. JUST what's needed for your Commie Revolution, eh? Congratulations.
#4. To: Liberator (#3) Except to their credit, Rice and Bush must have recognized the stability a trained, well-behaved Kaddafi Who killed hundreds of Americans. Tagline for sale - inquire within #5. To: Liberator (#3) From Rick Perry: Tagline for sale - inquire within #6. To: All (#3)
Next? Or despite 0bama saying he would meet with 0bama and presumably shaking HIS hand?
(Gotta listen to 0bama's entire BS as well as Hitlery claiming NOT to be a "propaganda tool" but stressing "diplomacy.") Bwaahaa!!
#7. To: go65 (#4) Who killed hundreds of Americans. Fine. Then go ahead and petition the UN to put Kaddafi on trial instead of illegally assassinating him. The clock is now ticking on 25 years and counting.... Huh? What's that? You can't because Kaddafi's now dead? Convenient.
#8. To: Liberator (#6) From Rick Perry:
“The death of Muammar el-Qaddafi is good news for the people of Libya. It should bring the end of conflict there, and help them move closer to elections and a real democracy.
“The United States should work closely with Libya to ensure the transition is successful, and that a stable, peaceful nation emerges.
“The U.S. must also take an active role in ensuring the security of any remaining stockpiles of Qaddafi's weapons. These weapons pose a real danger to the United States and our allies, and we cannot help secure them through simple observation.” And from Mitt Romney, via Kay Henderson:
“I think it’s about time...Gaddafi — terrible tyrant that killed his own people and murdered Americans and others in the tragedy at Lockerbie.. The world is a better place with Gaddafi gone.” Tagline for sale - inquire within #9. To: go65 (#5) Does the endorsement of RINOs Perry and Romney suddenly make assassinations of international leaders any more legal? When do 0bama and the US Government begin assassinating "tyrants" like Castro? Kim Jong-il? Ahmadinejad?
#10. To: go65 (#4) Who killed hundreds of Americans. 25 years ago. This is NOT "justice" at this point. Kaddafi was no longer a threat to Americans OR the region. THE BIG PICTURE: h0bama's assassination and destroying Kaddafi's secular-like government is risking THOUSANDS of lives - including American servicemen - on order to usher in a radical, hostile Muslim governance. What right have we to interfere in a situation that did NOT affect US security?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|