What a whacko bird isolationist.
https://reason.com/blog/2014/09/02/wacko-isolationist-rand-paul-would-seek
Japan said they know we have already been there and don't need approval to come back. They will behave. Germany said they are not sure yet. Confederate states say they doubt we will come back again.
Japan said they know we have already been there and don't need approval to come back. They will behave. Germany said they are not sure yet. Confederate states say they doubt we will come back again.
President Obama just authorized an additional 350 troops to go to Iraq...I'm sure they will be covered by a status-of-forces agreement...
Obama wouldn't send troops there if they were not .covered .....would he ?
President Obama just authorized an additional 350 troops to go to Iraq...I'm sure they will be covered by a status-of-forces agreement...
Obama wouldn't send troops there if they were not .covered .....would he ?
More importantly what did Obama expect would happen ..all unicorns and rainbows?
More importantly what did Obama expect would happen ..all unicorns and rainbows?
More importantly what did Obama expect would happen ..all unicorns and rainbows?
More importantly what did Obama expect would happen ..all unicorns and rainbows?
That may be true ,,but if most of them were as intelligent as you think you are ...we would have an overflow of Covers Moderators ..now wouldn't we?
If we are talking about Iraq and George Bush's daddy we really shouldn't just skip over the contributions of Bill Clinton for the mess in Iraq.. You want to blame GW Bush for things that happened 5 and a half years after he left office ..then why isn't Clinton responsible for the 9/11 attack ..that happened only 9 mths. after Bush took office?
Funny we have drifted off topic something that usual happens when want to play the Iraqi blame game..
The tread is about what Rand Paul said ..:
"If I were President, I would call a joint session of Congress. I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily."
Some say he had a change of positions about bombing ISIS ..Well if he did than he's evolving ..like Obama evolved and changed his position on same sex marriage..
I agree with Sen. Rand Paul on this one and support for using U.S. military power to battle ISIL, but only after receiving Congressional authorization....because if we cannot destroy ISIS with Obama's piecemeal approach ..We should go to Congress for a vote and authorization and than give the basturds everything we got and be done with them in short order ..
That may be true ,,but if most of them were as intelligent as you think you are ...we would have an overflow of Covers Moderators ..now wouldn't we?
If we are talking about Iraq and George Bush's daddy we really shouldn't just skip over the contributions of Bill Clinton for the mess in Iraq.. You want to blame GW Bush for things that happened 5 and a half years after he left office ..then why isn't Clinton responsible for the 9/11 attack ..that happened only 9 mths. after Bush took office?
Funny we have drifted off topic something that usual happens when want to play the Iraqi blame game..
The tread is about what Rand Paul said ..:
"If I were President, I would call a joint session of Congress. I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily."
Some say he had a change of positions about bombing ISIS ..Well if he did than he's evolving ..like Obama evolved and changed his position on same sex marriage..
I agree with Sen. Rand Paul on this one and support for using U.S. military power to battle ISIL, but only after receiving Congressional authorization....because if we cannot destroy ISIS with Obama's piecemeal approach ..We should go to Congress for a vote and authorization and than give the basturds everything we got and be done with them in short order ..
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.