That's too bad, Becuase Tom Tancredo said he would nuke Mecca and Medina if any type of terrorist attack cuasing mass casualties happened here. And that is a great Idea, Shoot that what a war is all about, you destroy what is precious to those Cavemen (in Retaliation of course) and see how they like the thought of Jihad afterwards

Yeah, first post

What a Pus...

or should that be Puss? either way... what I'm trying to say is he's a pussy.

What a Pus...
Sure ain't no Truman. More like an Eisenhower, Nixon,Reagan,Bush Republican.

Reality is, no nation will use a nuke in a first strike, for fear of becoming a global pariah.
If not, Putin would haved nuked Chechnya long time ago.
Sorry Hillary, no one believes you would either. Unless it was against an intern.

He's saying what the people want to hear, probably pandering to the way left base. i assume if the USA is in a rough spot and nukes were the way out he'd use them.

At least he said he would send in troops if there were actionable intel about the location of Al Quaeda and Bin Laden if Mushareff refused to do it. For that he was criticized heavily and liars like Joe Scarboroush tried to pretend it was inconsistent with his anti Iraq war stance as if the fight against Al Quaeda is synonymous with the invasion/occupation of Iraq. I think he makes more sense about the war on Al Quaeda than any of the others who think we should just sit and wait for Mushareff to act, cuz he ain't gonna do it.

I must be a little slow, would you explain to me in which circumstance you would use nuclear devices against Al-Queda? Against a country which has used WMD against us or our allies, sure, but against the McDonalds of terrorist organizations?

Isn't that kind of like saying you'd use Nukes against an international corporation?

Tancredo is a tool, using Nukes on Medina and Mecca would not cow the terrorists (hypothetically)using WMD against us and would galvanize a good portion of the Islamic world against us.

"Reality is, no nation will use a nuke in a first strike"

Except he didn't say "in a first strike." He said "under any circumstance." I don't necessarily support the use of nuclear weapons either, but don't try to spin this into something it isn't.

hes an honest guy.

And ya think we got it bad with the Bushies.


Just wait

Good let them "galvanize", then they wiii gather in one spot and it will take less nukes to vaporize them,
Tancredo is NOT a tool, he is awesome, Kinda like your hero Kucinich, says what he means and sticks by it

Cross the Military Industrial Complex, kiss your ass goodbye.

an upcoming terrorist incedent on American soil will be the onset of the next American offensive in Iran.

Mark my words.

and I am holding an Ace and two queens...

you don't let other people see your hand. not a smart political move.

tch tch tch ......

I think Obama's right. You might threaten to use them but you never really would use them.

"an upcoming terrorist incedent on American soil will be the onset of the next American offensive in Iran."

THIS POST HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE F.B.I.

YEAH!

Finally a thread the "right to lifers" can sink their teeth into! Something all extremist "right-wingers" everywhere know allot about ---- the advocating of using WMD against the masses!



And how does their rhetoric here depart from their right wing conservative counterparts over there (in the ME) ---- it doesn't ---- its written by the same policy maker with the same goals in mind! Killing lots and lots of people cause it makes them feel good!

yeah, Im so sure the FBI reads this piece of shit blog.

Waste the taxpayers money investigating moi, meanwhile terrorists are planning to vaporize your sorry ass.

go walk your dog dickweed

It was a joke. Lighten up buddy.

tosser's back! And Eagle. This will be an interesting thread.

:)

You're "right to life" is dependent on your productivity, your contribution to society, your abilty to live among the masses in peace and harmony, as a people if you allow and even celebrate suicide bombers, beheading, shooting women for wearing nail polish, flying palnes into buildings, you frofeit your 'right to life' i don't remember any unborn babies being involved in those activities, can you provide a link to the "fanatical fetuses"

Tancredo is a tool, using Nukes on Medina and Mecca would not cow the terrorists (hypothetically)using WMD against us and would galvanize a good portion of the Islamic world against us.


I think at the point we start launching nukes, our concern for the opinion of islamic peoples will be going far out the window. My first thought in that situation would be to find as many that are galvanized against us as we can, and nuke them too.

But really this tid bit from Obama comes off as crazy? Or makes him a puss?

Well when one of you can step up to the plate and cut your own head off, then I'll believe Obama is in fact a puss due to this.

cjk...do ya ever really add anything to the conversation?

Just like you, no! ;)

I think the point of getting this remark out there isn't that it's dumb not to use nukes, it's that it's dumb to tell all of your enemies that you would never use them "under any circumstances." It's something you should always keep them afraid of, regardless of whether or not you plan to use them.

THIS POST HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE F.B.I.

Posted by JOE at 2007-08-03 02:51 PM

Why are gays so dramatic?

ET's a certfied, bad ass warrior.
He'll cut off his own head just to stuff it down your throat.
It's all good!

Obama is not going places... sure as hell nowhere near the 'White' House.

And what is a "Tancredo"? Sounds like a new name for "Polyester".

Ummm itsme you had a Fruedian slip, and it was a joke.

Good let them "galvanize", then they wiii gather in one spot and it will take less nukes to vaporize them,

Ah, spoken like a true hillbilly...

Deaths in the holocaust?
estimated ~6 million PEOPLE

Direct nuke hit on Tehran?
over 12 million PEOPLE

I respect someone with enough brains to say they would never use nuclear weapons.

Why do all the religion based conservatives consistently ignore the 5 instances in the bible that basically states "thou shalt not kill" when it comes to people AFTER they are born?

Idiot.

I hope we never use them again, but in order to make that happen, one must be ready and willing to do so.

What is the good of having a deterent if one claims they'll never use it.

Idiot.

If there were only two countries you could use nukes in Pakistan but unfortunately Russia, China, India, etc. might have something to say about it.
If you think America would be well served by nuking some area of Pakistan, hoping that Al Quaeda is even really where we think, then I think you are sadly mistaken and probably out of your mind.

""Why do all the religion based conservatives consistently ignore the 5 instances in the bible that basically states "thou shalt not kill" when it comes to people AFTER they are born?""

simple, they just tear out those pages.

Or they could "redact" those passages.

I think the point of getting this remark out there isn't that it's dumb not to use nukes, it's that it's dumb to tell all of your enemies that you would never use them "under any circumstances." It's something you should always keep them afraid of, regardless of whether or not you plan to use them.

I get what you are saying, but let's be realistic, how exactly do you use a nuke against Al-Queda?

""This shit is getting old. At least have the honesty of discussing the complete context of the answer given instead of trying to imply that Obama's stance meant no nukes, nowhere under any circumstance. That isn't what he said.""

Tony, I noticed on TV they are doing the same thing about many of the comments made by Obama and then they follow up with praise for Hillary. It isn't too hard to see who the conservatives want to win the Dem. nomination. I think they are more afraid of Obama than Hillary. Makes me want him more.

Yawn. Tony Roma, right on cue. I wonder if there's anything Obama could do that you wouldn't defend.

Anyone who thinks a nuke in Pakistan wouldn't anger Russia or China needs to imagine what they would think if Russia dropped on in Mexico....
well bad analogy....some of the real haters would applaud that....so how about Canada....ooops...you hate them even more....how about Florida....where I live????

Danni Obama is out polling every Repub by 4 or more, The Hillerbeast is much closer. So the Repubs have to ask "do i want HIll or Barack as my prez, because sure as shit, it's not going to be another pug...."

"Why do all the religion based conservatives consistently ignore the 5 instances in the bible that basically states "thou shalt not kill" when it comes to people AFTER they are born?"

Because they're shitbag hypocrites that don't know dick about their own religion.

No black guy, no woman and no jew, is ever going to be President of the US. "They" won't let it happen. The US is not a parliamentary democracy (no, it really isn't).

I don't care how much some candidate might puff themselves up with fart-air.

WHAT are you all getting excited about? This is a non-issue.

---Anyone who thinks a nuke in Pakistan wouldn't anger Russia or China needs to imagine what they would think if Russia dropped on in Mexico....---



Err... we got nukes of our own, luv.

Or have we forgotten? LOL

Tosser of salad with jelly. If we elected a Pope lover (JFK) and a retard (43) I think America is opening up....

""Err... we got nukes of our own, luv.""

Not even a real consideration considering we could decimate your country in about an hour. You have a few small nukes without the delivery methods while we have subs off your coast that could hit you at any moment. Fear of Pakistan is not a consideration, havoc in the region is. Get real.

And please don't preach to America about tolerance of women, minorities, etc. Your country isn't exactly a celebration of diversity.

Yawn. Tony Roma, right on cue. I wonder if there's anything Obama could do that you wouldn't defend.

What have I "defended" Joe? That the discussion should be about what he actually said instead of your wrong inferences? Did you see me take a position on the issue in my post?

What's wrong, do the facts not sit well with you?

Tony, you know that facts are really just liberal talking points.

---You have a few small nukes without the delivery methods while we have subs off your coast that could hit you at any moment.---



Oooooooo!!!!



---Fear of Pakistan is not a consideration, havoc in the region is. Get real.----



A bunch of loser Arabs bitch-slapped you on 9-11 and you couldn't get a single armed plane in the sky to protect Washington. LOL.

Get real.



---Your country isn't exactly a celebration of diversity.----


Well, we certainly don't think much of dykes, thats true.

However, it is a fact.

No woman.
No Dykes.
No blacks.
No Jews (unfortunately)

Never. You just won't let it happen.

"can you provide a link to the "fanatical fetuses"

Posted by HillBillyJihad at 2007-08-03 02:58 PM


YEAH!

Just look into a mirror!

---And please don't preach to America about tolerance of women,---


Sorry Dyke. We have had an elected Prime Minister twice (she was a crook but that is besides the point).

When is America going to have a woman President?

Never.

When is America going to have a Gay/Lesbian freak as President???

They'll nuke themselves first. LOL

Redneckville

That was a good one. Did your momma come down to the basement and help you with that one

"Nuk'em all, Let Allah sort them out"

And as always "Arise my Hillbilly Brotheren for the Jihad is upon us"

""A bunch of loser Arabs bitch-slapped you on 9-11 and you couldn't get a single armed plane in the sky to protect Washington. LOL.""

Couldn't???
I don't think that is exactly true, I think a certain character from STar Wars ordered them to stand down for reasons still unclear though he wouldn't testify at the 9-11 Commission hearings to explain.
With any other president we would have had planes in the air and probably would have shot down the airliners or even more likely our president would have read his intel and we would have caught the slime that committed that attack before they ever got on an airplane.
But...all that is water under the bridge now.
Hopefully these lunatics running America will be out of office pretty soon without destroying the entire planet. At least we have our fingers crossed.

""Well, we certainly don't think much of dykes, thats true.""

Because most of your country wants to live in the 15th century. Too bad for you. I'm glad I don't live in your country and apparently lots of your fellow Pakistanis feel the same way.

Thankyou for that link, Tonyroma.

Obama is all about change. That Hillary's response talks about "Every President since the Cold War" shows exactly how fearful of embracing change she is. One of Bill Clinton's worst qualities was that in spite of his rhetoric he did far too little to take advantage of the situation at the end of the Cold War with Russia in the years after the break-up of the USSR. We didn't expect a Republican like Bush 41 to do much, but Clinton had a huge opportunity to re-negotiate nuclear weapons and actually make nuclear disarmament possible, and he did little. There were other huge issues, but then his personal life screwed up his second term.

We need Obama and his enlightened supporters to keep the momentum of change in the air, and to fire the imagination of the American people as JFK did for a moment.

Do not fear the future!

It is time!

----I don't think that is exactly true, I think a certain character from STar Wars ordered them to stand down for reasons still unclear though he wouldn't testify at the 9-11 Commission hearings to explain.---



Excuses, excuses. Go ahead if it makes you feel better. Everyone saw, you can't do shit when it really counts.



----Because most of your country wants to live in the 15th century.----


Because we have Asian values. Far better than your dyke-values.


----I'm glad I don't live in your country and apparently lots of your fellow Pakistanis feel the same way.----


And how many Americans want to leave... and have left... for Canada, Mexico, etc? LOL

----We need Obama-----


As if he has a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected.... LOL

Why even try? Is he stupid enough to believe the myth that America was made for everyone? That it is a "democracy"?

Get rid of your electoral college first. Then maybe blacks and gays might have a chance.... LOL

Tosser, I wish you would tell us what you think of Imran Khan, the potential return of Benahzir Bhutto, and if there is a possibility of democracy in Pakistan.

The US State Department denounced Friday a lawmaker's suggestion to threaten an attack on Islamic holy sites in order to deter a nuclear attack on American soil, saying the idea is "absolutely crazy."
"Let me just say that it is absolutely outrageous and reprehensible for anyone to suggest attacks on holy sites -- whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish or those of any other religion," Tom Casey, a spokesman for the department, told reporters.
Tom Tancredo, a Republican presidential hopeful, was reported to have said that the best way he could think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States was to threaten to retaliate by bombing Islamic holy sites.


YEAH!

How does this extremist rhetoric differentiate Tancredo and those like him from Iran's Ahmadinejad?

It doesn't!

It's the same batshit crazy and don't think for a minute the 80% "liberal Bush Haters" don't see this comparison as well!

I used to think that people who said" Yeah, let's nuke 'em back to the Stone Age. Turn their country into a parking lot" were just right-wing nutjobs that you could ignore. Then Bush and Cheney got to be President and VP and suddenly pre-emptive use was no longer unthinkable. Seriously guys, how long do you think you would last after America used nuclear weapons pre-emptively on someone? One year? Five? Sooner or later we'd be hit with WMD ourselves and it would not necessarily be nuclear. Plenty of extremely nasty bioweapons out there.

Thank God we've got at least one serious presidential candidate with a brain. If other nations think we will go nuclear, they might pre-empt us instead. Reason #87 we should never have allowed Bush and Cheney anywhere near the White House. As for Hillary, her problem is that she has to prove to these nutjobs -- God knows why --that a physical lack of testicles doesn't mean that she has no balls.

"What have I "defended" Joe? That the discussion should be about what he actually said instead of your wrong inferences? Did you see me take a position on the issue in my post"

Please. The fact that you immediately felt the need to correct everyone as to what they should be arguing about, coupled with your previous comments in just about every Obama thread is enough to show where you stand.

If you don't agree with his comments, then now's your time to say so. If you don't, then I was correct anyways.

Joe...

One thing is absolutely certain: You're never right with anything you say or think about me.

Stick to speaking for yourself and let me speak for me. Believe it or not, I've never needed you to define anything that I say or do and I never will.

LOL. Okay, bye, Tony.

You're "right to life" is dependent on your productivity, your contribution to society, your abilty to live among the masses in peace and harmony, as a people if you allow and even celebrate suicide bombers, beheading, shooting women for wearing nail polish, flying palnes into buildings, you frofeit your 'right to life'

So what should be done about Bush then? He has killed, maimed more people than Ahameinjad, binLaden, Hussein, Putin, Amin.....and that's just for starters. His squandering of our resources and corrupt political practices have made us a laughing stock. What has been made abundantly clear to the rest of the world, is that all our high tech weapons of mass destruction are useless against impoverished popular nationalism. Tough spot for a NeoCon or their American servants to be in. So tough that they are refusing to admit the obvious so they can blame the next President for their failings. Trillions of dollars flushed down the toilet by the Military Industrial Complex on useless bells and whistles. Nothing worked: not Norad, not the CIA, not the FBI, not INS, not the Patriot Missile, not the Army, not the Navy, not the Air Force. But you still must pay.

If Obama were a Republican candidate, the media would insist that the men in the white suits come a lock him up. Once again we see the double standard.

Would anyone really expect Barak Hussein Obama to use nukes against Arab Muslims?

I never thought I'd say this but I'm glad Hillary is going to get the DNC nomination.

Let's see ---

Obama will not use nukes in either Pakistan or Afganistan -- two countries that would never be able to use nukes on us here in the U.S. -- and that is bad?

Obama would actually go into Pakistan after bin Ladin and other al-Qaeda members -- who, unlike Iraq, actually did attack us on 9-11 -- if it were known they were hiding in Pakistan and were being given sanctuary by the Pakistanis and that is bad?

Obama would talk to the leaders of of perceived enemies [which is a title given to anyone who doesn't like Bush] and would seek a peaceful settlement of issues before using military options opposed to the Bush "nuke 'em first" pre-emptive foreign policy and that is bad?

Obama sounds like he has more foreign policy skills in his little finger than the 'nuke 'em first' crowd found in both political parties.
Obama sounds pretty rational to me.

Yawn. Tony Roma, right on cue. I wonder if there's anything Obama could do that you wouldn't defend.

Posted by JOE


LOL... Let's try this again...

Hey TonyRoma, what was your reaction to the OJ Simspon verdict?

And how many Americans want to leave... and have left... for Canada, Mexico, etc? LOL

Posted by Tosser at 2007-08-03 04:25 PM | Reply

Won't do them much good to leave since Bush plans to merge us with Canada and Mexico anyway as he proceeds on fast track for the NAU.

I am not aware of the OJ Simspon case. Do enlighten us.

A-Hole

Obama would actually go into Pakistan after bin Ladin and other al-Qaeda members

Sure Barack Hussein Obama would... reminds me of the promises Fritz Von Douchelhoffer made to carpet bomb Berlin when he was running for president in 1940...

Won't do them much good to leave since Bush plans to merge us with Canada and Mexico anyway as he proceeds on fast track for the NAU.

Posted by CalifChris


Tin-foil hat on extra tight tonight...

Obama is all about appeasement--he is worse than Carter.

He wants to cuddle up with the dictators of the world--so he and thelibs can feeeelllll good...

And no I not saying we have to nuke somebody--but he takes it off the table--what a boob!

Murphy

Oh, and I also support Obama, I like his foreign policy plans.

That is smart for You see How can You condemn Iran for wanting Nukes at the same time You threaten to use nukes on another Country. I find that Hypocritical to say the very least.

Larry

It is also a necessary step if you look at the Project for a New American Century

Oh wow... PNAC?!?! Thank you for the link... nobody here at this liberal blog has ever linked to PNAC. Thank you for this public service...

Hey everyone!!! Have you heard of this Project For A New American Century? Kev posted the link above if you've never heard of PNAC before... I know I never had heard of it before. Shocking stuff... shocking, shocking, shocking!

I am astounded that there is anyone out there that thinks we would have to use nuclear weapons to kill Al Qaeda in Afghanistan or Pakistan.

That said, if terrorist ever exploded a nuclear weapon in the US and it was determined that some government had been their sponsor, I would nuke the hell out of them in retaliation.

But to use nuclear weapons against a bunch of determined, creative goat herders is way over the top. The use of nuclear weapons to root out Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan would be an admission of failure.

PNAC...is a term the libs use...to say our government is a nazi style government....but no lib would ever overthrow a murderous government in our country....nope no coup by the party (DEMS)that says they have Americas back....boy are we safe

if i really beileved that PNAC was true...boy i would not only raise a militia....but i would bring civil unrest to America.....im glad the people who believe in PNAC are a bunch of pussies or we would be in trouble...if they even believe in PNAC at all

I am astounded that there is anyone out there that thinks we would have to use nuclear weapons to kill Al Qaeda in Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Have to? No... we don't have to... we should want to. If not to send a powerful message to the entire Middle East, then to at least just kill a bunch of terrorists, and make that land uninhabitable for a while.

If they get pissed... fuck it... nuke em again.

Eventually your dog stops pissing on the carpet if you smack his ass enough times...

One of the more famous members of PNAC... Dan Quayle...

Clearly if this diabolical evil genious is involved then our worst fears of PNAC must be true.

Nice foreign policy Rob, kill everyone that may oppose us. You can't honestly expect for America to use a nuke and survive on the world stage for very long.

Also Cheney was part of the PNAC, so it very well COULD have had an influence on things such as going to war in Iraq, which was for WMDs that were never found. I wouldn't call myself Liberal either, I try to stay in the middle. Its just hard to deny that a think tank Cheney was a part of had no influence on him, and that the Vice President can have no influence on the President.

I think it had at least a part in going to war with Iraq.

Nice foreign policy Rob, kill everyone that may oppose us.

You're an idiot... barely worth talking to, but I have 20 minutes to kill so I'll have some fun.

Did I say "everyone that may oppose us" or did I limit it to the middle east? Everyone who opposes us, would also include countries like North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, China, etc... if you think they're in the ME, buy a new globe.

Other signatories:
Jeb Bush
Richard B. Cheney
Steve Forbes
Donald Rumsfeld
Caspar Weinberger
Paul Wolfowitz

***GASP*** They must be controlling the world... you're right... I can see the puppet strings on Bush now... my eyes are finally open.

douchebag...

So Rob, you have to resort to calling me an idiot? You also ignored my other points.

Oh and Rob, if you think the above countries (and Russia) would be fine with us nuking a nation near them, and them possibly getting some of the fallout, then you are the person not worth talking to.

"
Eventually your dog stops pissing on the carpet if you smack his ass enough times...
"

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

Of course if you have a fucking microscopic clue how to raise animals your dog would never even think of such a thing.

Oh and Rob, if you think the above countries (and Russia) would be fine with us nuking a nation near them, and them possibly getting some of the fallout, then you are the person not worth talking to.

Posted by kev3056

If you think russia or china would start a nuclear WWIII over a small nuke in a small area of Pakistan, then I take back calling you an idiot earlier... cuz you shouldn't call retards idiots.

unfortunately its time to go... later tards...

Well Rob, your doing better. You addressed my point this time. I didn't say they would start a nuclear war, but they certainly wouldn't be happy and the future would simply not look good for the US. There is no way to look at a nation using a nuke as the "good" nation in a specific situation.

Again with the insults. I like how you occasionally seem to address the points, while always trying to put the person disagreeing with you down.

I also have to leave, later all.

Obama is wimp. With his statements on nukes, he just made sure that he will NEVER become president of the United States and just handed the Democrat nomination to Hillary on a silver platter. Even Kennedy was set to use them during the Cuban Missle Crisis. Obama pandered to the liberal wack fringe and lost it all. Giving money to Obama now is like flushing it down the toilet.

Let me get this straight. Saying he would go after terrorists in Pakistan is reckless, but saying that ''I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,'' in Afghanistan or Pakistan is wimpy.

Got it.

second time ever I agreed with ROB: he's a puss.

Ya gotta love the right and their whacked out ways.

They act as though a nuke is simply a slightly bigger boom.

"There's supposed to be a big kaboom"

Simpletons.

Good for Obama. I don't want some hick faux cowboy with masculinity issues he currently working out with his finger on the button. Shrub the college Cheerleader is all of those.

p.s. Since when does NOT wanting to nuke everything make you weak?

Tell me warmongers. Enlighten us with your wisdom.

Obama is wimp. With his statements on nukes, he just made sure that he will NEVER become president of the United States and just handed the Democrat nomination to Hillary on a silver platter. Even Kennedy was set to use them during the Cuban Missle Crisis. Obama pandered to the liberal wack fringe and lost it all. Giving money to Obama now is like flushing it down the toilet.

Posted by utastaff at 2007-08-03 09:19 PM | Reply | Flag:


???????????

Huh?

He was set to invade Cuba if necessary, not to go lobbing nukes skyward.

Obama lost it all?

Really? Hmmmm....you may want to call and let him know that as you seem to be the only one (besides Rush Limpblob) that seems to know this.

Giving money to Obama now is like flushing it down the toilet

Quite to the contrary. Up until now, I hadn't considered contributing to his campaign but now I will. It is obvious that Obama is not couching his speech in the old political calculus. He doesn't know how because he hasn't been on the national stage that long. Most other democratic candidates have been around quite some time and as a consequence know the nuances associated with current political dialogue.

I agree with Obama, it is time to "turn the page" and get rid of these tired old politicans that have been in office way to long and have to many grudges to settle with each other. While they spend their time pissing on each other, none of the people's business is getting done!

If Obama doesn't get the nomination, an independent candidacy would be extremely appealing. It would doom the chances of the Democrat nominee as well as his political future.

Obama's political future is in the court of public opinion with the conservative media doing its best to intentionally misrepresent his remarks and make him look foolish. I think that it is beginning to backfire on the conservatives though because Obama is pretty clear to anyone who actually listens to his words instead of the words of some pundit telling us what he said. Don't let the media tell you what he says, listen to it yourself. Make up your own mind.

"Obama's political future is in the court of public opinion with the conservative media doing its best to intentionally misrepresent his remarks and make him look foolish."

"Conservative media," Danni? Are you sure it's not the same liberal media as ever, which seeks a Hillary nomination, that is all over Obama? The Clinton machine is just now gearing up. She WILL be the nominee, bet on it.

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons ''in any circumstance'' to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, drawing criticism from Hillary Rodham Clinton and other Democratic rivals.

It is so comforting to know that after "President Obama" invades pakistan looking for Bin-Laden, and Pakistan retaliates with a nuclear attack on us, that he will refrain from defending America with our own nukes.

LOL

BOWA is as dishonest as the right wing pundits (hell, he probably worships them). Obama said he would not use nuclear weapons to FIGHT TERRORISM. He never said or hinted that he would not use nuclear weapons to respond to a nuclear attack.
BOWA, that was a really pathetic attempt. Do you idiots think that everyone in America is so stupid that they would really not be able to see the difference between fighting terrorism and a nuclear war??? Maybe you are, the rest of us aren't.

Obama must really scare the right wing lunatics because they sure are lying their asses off about him lately.

Obama is a threat to the power structure. The same power structure that is beholden to special interests. Because of his success at fund raising and the breadth of his funding base, he has the potential of being the first non billionaire president that isn't beholden to special interests. Neither Democrats nor Republicans want this to happen because the currency of political discourse would no longer be money; it would be ideas that help America and Americans.

My political mantra these days is:

If you are not for Americans, then you are not for America

Damn, no nukes - thank goodness he did not rule out biological and chemical weapons!

It is reassuring to know that at least one American politician is rationale.

We in the Arab world have great hope that Senator Obama may lead America to a time of understanding and true friendship with others.

When Obama said he would never use Nukes under any circumstance, he proves he knows NOTHING about foreign policy and just handed the Democrat nomination to Hillary.

The whole idea behind mutually assured destruction is that no country will launch a first strike because they in turn will suffer nuclear annihilation in a counter-attack. That principle works. Even most educated Liberals get this basic principle. However, when a nuclear power knows they have a gutless and stupid Obama in the White House there is no disincentive to NOT launching a nulcear first strike because there will be no nuclear counterattack and if there is anyone alive in the U.S. after suffering a nuclear strike, a large scale conventional military counter-attack would be impossible. When we lose our flag we lose our freedom. Obama is just too much a liberal whack job to be considered a serious leader for this great nation. As a Republican, I pray that Hillary gets the Democrat nomination!

obama my ass...

did any of you hear rommny kicking his ass this morning on the abc debate..

rommny said that obama wanted to talk to our enemies and attack our allies...
what a great line about a largley overated candidate......

When Obama said he would never use Nukes under any circumstance, he proves he knows NOTHING about foreign policy and just handed the Democrat nomination to Hillary.

UTASTAFF - he did not say that. You are proof that people can be completely taken in by what somebody says Obama said, not what Obama said. That is sad.

gee thats strange because today on one of the news shows they played a tape of him saying something about nukes never being on the table......

so tell us what he really meant then.

Like You would know nor understand what was said BLT.

Larry

"saying something about nukes never being on the table" - well BLT, you sure cleared that up.