FTFA: In one of the most prominent criticisms so far, Jordan's King Abdullah said on Monday that if he were in Mr ______'s position he would step down.

"Whenever you exert violence on your own people it is never going to end well," he told the BBC.


Is King Abdullah referring to the recent and sometimes violent removal of OWS protesters across the US?

2wolves: Irregardless:


Is King Abdullah referring to the recent and sometimes violent removal of OWS protesters across the US?

Yes.

King Abdullah is the 1%.

How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Somebody want to explain to me how the rationale for intervening in Libya doesn't also compel intervention in Syria?

/note that I oppose both

They are totally Syrial

Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions with anything more than words and turds?

They're willing to fight... just not for you.

Aaaaaaannnnd I read that as Skyrim....

NATO didn't step into Lybia formally until there was a revolution in progress, with the eastern half of the nation in rebel hands.

Somebody want to explain to me how the rationale for intervening in Libya doesn't also compel intervention in Syria?

/note that I oppose both

Well, how many years after Lockerbie did we finally punch Ghadaffis ticket? All things in due time. We are slowly applying our noose of influence around the neck of the middle-east bit by bit.

/note that I am all for it!
//military and will be involved
///again

YixilTesiphon: Somebody want to explain to me how the rationale for intervening in Libya doesn't also compel intervention in Syria?

/note that I oppose both

BP has oil interests in Libya. BP bought Obama.

YixilTesiphon: Somebody want to explain to me how the rationale for intervening in Libya doesn't also compel intervention in Syria?

/note that I oppose both

Oil - exports: 263,000 bbl/day (2009 est.)
Oil - exports: 1.385 million bbl/day (2009 est.)

I wonder if you can tell which nation is which...

Somebody is doing a great job of managing middle east revolution.

Headso: They are totally Syrial

They're Super Syria

MrCheeks: Aaaaaaannnnd I read that as Skyrim....

Not sure if Syria...

Army defectors in Syria. I like the sound of that.

AverageAmericanGuy: Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions with anything more than words and turds?

Were you born stupid or did you sustain a head injury?

Jake Havechek: AverageAmericanGuy: Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions with anything more than words and turds?

Were you born stupid or did you sustain a head injury?

he must be posting in the wrong thread this has fark all to do with OWS.

nekom: Oh a coup.

Bless you...

Irregardless: FTFA: In one of the most prominent criticisms so far, Jordan's King Abdullah said on Monday that if he were in Mr ______'s position he would step down.

"Whenever you exert violence on your own people it is never going to end well," he told the BBC.


Is King Abdullah referring to the recent and sometimes violent removal of OWS protesters across the US?

No, if I had to guess he's referring to the various Arab Spring revolutions, specifically Libya.

King Abdullah has likely heard of OWS, but he has far more pressing matters in his own country to give it much thought.

And really the violence employed against the OWS crowed is a tiny fraction of what's been seen in the Arab Spring. To date there has been exactly 7 deaths connected with OWS, and to my knowledge none of them have been the direct result of a formal police action. In Libya on the other hand, there civil war likely had over 30,000 fatalities. It's a completely different scale.

AverageAmericanGuy: Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions with anything more than words and turds?

Second Amendment Solutions are more of a tea bagger thing. Seeing what the police have gotten up to in Oakland, Portland, and New York while the protests have been peaceful can you imagine what the police response would be if OWS even thought of using violence?

AverageAmericanGuy: Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions with anything more than words and turds?

That was....beautiful. So simple, so awesome.

Assad is a punk, and he needs to be taken down a notch, but we'll see how this rolls.

Headso: Jake Havechek: AverageAmericanGuy: Memo to OWS: When are you going to back up your actions?

Were you born stupid or did you sustain a head injury?

he must be posting in the wrong thread this has fark all to do with OWS.

Every rebellion starts with protests. This could be our country in a few more years.

Nemo's Brother: YixilTesiphon: Somebody want to explain to me how the rationale for intervening in Libya doesn't also compel intervention in Syria?

/note that I oppose both

BP has oil interests in Libya. BP bought Obama.

Typical right wing propoganda. It is impossible for a Democrat president to have a war for oil.

Near Damascus? No taint.

make me some tea: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Well, you know that sorta requires a UN resolution and NATO to get together on the thing first.

No it doesn't. Obama failed to get the legal authorization to intervene in Libya, but that was a matter of US law. And apparently nobody minds illegal wars for oil when it's a Democrat in charge of the killing...

lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Unlike dipshiat Dubya, Obama likes to think things through and get allies on board before he acts.

Wenchmaster: If Assad isn't careful, he's going to end up like Ghadaffi.

One less ruthless despot in the world would be a good thing, but the butcher's bill in Syria is likely to be very, very high.

We say this, but revolutions don't always work out that way. Look at Egypt. The army is already starting to become as bad as Mubarak.

YixilTesiphon: make me some tea: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Well, you know that sorta requires a UN resolution and NATO to get together on the thing first.

No it doesn't. Obama failed to get the legal authorization to intervene in Libya, but that was a matter of US law. And apparently nobody minds illegal wars for oil when it's a Democrat in charge of the killing...

It tickles me how Obama inexplicably turns you asswipes into pacifists.

Obama should make a publicly support the rebels then we can all LOL at the GOP as they support Assad.

make me some tea: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Well, you know that sorta requires a UN resolution and NATO to get together on the thing first.

Which because of their minimal amount of oil there won't be a huge rush to do...

make me some tea: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Well, you know that sorta requires a UN resolution and NATO to get together on the thing first.

Eh. He's a troll account, he doesn't care.

But on topic: Libya army was in open revolt. At the point of Nato getting involved, over half of the regular army was either joining the rebels or just staying home or in their barracks.

YixilTesiphon: And apparently nobody minds illegal wars for oil when it's a Democrat in charge of the killing

yes the only difference between the unique air power assets we provided NATO in Libya for weeks and the decade long ground occupation of Iraq was that a doodoo head democrap was in charge for one and not the other.

haws83: Of course, there is complete parity between the reports of a few injured protestors in the US and the slaughter of hundreds in Syria, Lybia, Egypt, etc. Let's look at it in the proper perspective.


/Don't let me get in the way of the "99%" pity party though. Carry on.

Certainly there isn't parity in terms of the casualties, but the root social problems that are causing the Arab Spring and OWS are very similar. High unemployment among young people, a sense that they will not even have a chance to better themselves no matter how hard they try, extreme income inequality, and a government that won't listen are all reasons for both protests. It's true that it has been more reasonable and less violent here, but that's because the situation of the American 99% isn't as desperate (yet) as that of the Arab 99%.

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: NATO didn't step into Lybia formally until there was a revolution in progress, with the eastern half of the nation in rebel hands.

Of course not. You see, Libya had a little something called oil that every country in NATO had been after ever since Ghadaffi gave up his WMD and became a reformed friend of the west. NATO didn't step in until they made sure that the rebels were the real deal, because It would just have been really embarrassing trying to negotiate a business deal with Ghadaffi to get some of that oil had they supported a failed rebellion.

YixilTesiphon: make me some tea: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Well, you know that sorta requires a UN resolution and NATO to get together on the thing first.

No it doesn't. Obama failed to get the legal authorization to intervene in Libya, but that was a matter of US law. And apparently nobody minds illegal wars for oil when it's a Democrat in charge of the killing...

youre an idiot and a troll.

HMS_Blinkin: haws83: Of course, there is complete parity between the reports of a few injured protestors in the US and the slaughter of hundreds in Syria, Lybia, Egypt, etc. Let's look at it in the proper perspective.


/Don't let me get in the way of the "99%" pity party though. Carry on.

Certainly there isn't parity in terms of the casualties, but the root social problems that are causing the Arab Spring and OWS are very similar. High unemployment among young people, a sense that they will not even have a chance to better themselves no matter how hard they try, extreme income inequality, and a government that won't listen are all reasons for both protests. It's true that it has been more reasonable and less violent here, but that's because the situation of the American 99% isn't as desperate (yet) as that of the Arab 99%.

I've been to Syria.

You have no farking idea what you're talking about, and how absolutely pathetic this level of whining makes you.

Jake Havechek: lordaction: How come Obama isn't bombing these people like he did Libya?

Unlike dipshiat Dubya, Obama likes to think things through and get allies on board before he acts.

Ding ding ding ding!!

The Demotard answer is always: C) Bush

Hey, look, blindly comparing Iraq and Libya just to get in a dig about those mean ol' democrats. I'm just glad the situation provided itself because it allows retards to have a new talking point or one-off comment to throw out that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I was worried for a while because the teleprompter and 57 states thing was getting stale. Thank god for Libya.