only a racist would question Obama's integrity

I thought it was because they were chasing oil. Or was it to destroy Islam? Or help Israel?

The objectives are separate to the method in which they gained acceptance of their decision to go to war.

which method would you prefer? congress approval or the UNSC which the US control?

-PB

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-14/australia-to-deploy-military-force-to-uae/5742498

protest Abbott but Shorten would've done exactly the same thing

Except he isn't the current PM so ofc that protest would not be forthcoming.

Basic logic.

-PB

Logic is lost on ricey Paul ;)

basic logic says it wouldnt make a difference who was PM
none of you people complained when Gillard backed the US airstrikes in Libya which has resulted in that country turning into a terrorists amusement park

none of you people complained about Gillard/Rudd extending the commitment of Australian troops in Afghanistan

Is that you wamakie??

are you going to turn another thread into litter meltdown boy?
do i need to remind you of your bandwidth episode and my conversation with your brother?

Don't think I was posting in this thread when that was happening but I was against it when the extended stay in Afghanistan when it happened (friends/family were being deployed).

-PB

Brother ? I don't have a brother . It's my bro in law dude . Or shall I remind you that a peasant like you isn't worth my time or shall I retort on it bombing your ass

if you're against it then you have to realise this is far bigger than an ALP/Liberal issue
their total support for US foreign policy is bipartisan

petty political point-scoring merely divides people into red and blue camps rabidly supporting political parties like football teams

its pathetic and nothing is ever resolved

so you're threatening me with violence

again, i'll advise you to seek help

Threatening you ? I said ip bomb you . I learnt some tricks from my bro in law . Someone can't stand it when people stand up to him and make him look like a buffoon

Hey Paul and MVFCArsenal16.8,

Would you say it's possible Shorten's stance is because due to the fear campaign that's going on at the moment, if he was to come out against it and the highly unlikely event that something actually happens he'd be ruined politically?

Not a position I agree with but for someone trying to capture the middle ground it makes sense. Also I was very against the afghan deployments and other military actions that happened under Labor. No arbitrary threat levels were tweaked though.

read what you wrote again you fool

Yep shorten ' s position is definitely a product of the implied threat of isil . If he went against it their will be a never ending shit storm .

so Shorten is excused then :lol:

Pretty sure Noone was asking your opinion ricey . Move along

Exactly, not what I'm looking for in a leader but playing it safe is how you win elections these days. Then once you're in you're free to do whatever the hell you want.

Every body plays it safe these days . To get votes it's all about the basics . Ie immigration , asylum seekers , health care , roads

i don't require your approval to give opinion meltdown boy

[youtube]lD4sxxoJGkA[/youtube]


Wrong thread?

Who are you calling boy? Learn to respect your elders .

are you stalking me now? didnt get the reaction you wanted?

ok meltdown boy

Me?

Luv ya too much!

Someone call waaaabulance somebody is being a sook waaahhh. Dude I have two kids I can do this all night

Edited by mvfcarsenal16.8: 14/9/2014 11:06:31 PM