Obama the Hawk. Most Successful BAD Guy Killing President in History.

Somali Pirates -
Status: DEAD Cost: Destroyer Fuel and few sniper bullets U.S. Casualties: None

Osama Bin Laden-
Status: DEAD Cost: Chopper Fuel and Seal Team equipment U.S. Casualties: None

Ilyas Kashmiri-
Status: DEAD Cost: Drone Fuel and a Hellfire Missile U.S. Casualties: None

Attiyah Abd al-Rahman-
Status: DEAD Cost: Drone Fuel and a Hellfire Missile U.S. Casualties: None

Anwar al-Awlaki-
Status: DEAD Cost: Drone Fuel and a Hellfire Missile U.S. Casualties: None

Moammar Gadhafi-
Status: DEAD Cost:About $1 Billion Dollars U.S. Casualties: None


-------------------------------------------------------
Details have surfaced about Gaddafi's death that reveal that the U.S. was directly involved in Khadaffi's capture.

We launched several Hellfire missiles from a drone and then the French came in and hit them with heavy bombs. Gaddafi then hid in a nearby ditch where the rebels eventually picked him up and likely executed him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8839964/Col-Gaddafi-killed-convoy-bombed-by-drone-flown-by-pilot-in-Las-Vegas.html

So another one. Small ops results in dead bad guy. We didn't directly kill him, but there is no way this happens without our direct an indirect involvement.
-------------------------------------------------------


No U.S. casualties in any of these operations. Each of the operations was relatively cost effective. These were some of the biggest operational anti-American threats out there. (If there are any bad guys we killed that I left off the list, please add them)

So, if Obama isn't the most effective Bad Guy killing president we've ever had, who was it?

 

What I wonder is this..

When Bush was potus, he caught the guy who planned 9/11. KSM

He had him water boarded, where there was a doctor, a lawyer, trained personnel.

He got (*)(*)(*)(*) for it and was basically called the devil.

Now we have Obama, just bombing people. Killing civilians and their families etc.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am all for blowing up the bad guy. Killing him and his friends.

But why the double standard?

 

When Bush was president liberals coined the term "chickenhawk" for people who avoided military service themselves but then sent others off to die when they become president.

It's true that no Americans have been killed in the Obama wars so far but they are going in harms way so sooner or later some will be.

 

KSM was a great score. But it was Pakistan who captured him and gave him up to us.

I still give Bush credit though. I think the CIA were involved. He was also president at the time and I have no problem with what they did to KSM in captivity.

Bush did a good job on that one.....what I'm saying is look at the number of bad guys that Obama got in comparison.....and the comparative cost.

 

Qaddafi was not captured or killed by Obama. So you can't give him credit for that either.

As for saying Obama has killed more bad guys than any other president is not correct either. That would have to go to FDR.

 

Reagan's efforts "killed" the USSR...a far bigger threat to liberty and mankind than modernity challenged 5th century desert dwellers.

just sayin...

 

Maybe someday we'll look back and love Obama as much as you do now.

But don't count on it.

 

I don't think Chicken Hawk was coined at the outset of Bush II's presidency. But Obama has also been disparaged in different ways by critics.

What I'm doing is putting forth Obama's track record on foreign affairs and the "War on Terror"......not projecting what he could of done or might do next.....I'm citing what he DID.

 

That's a different thing. If you want to cite the president who presided over our most successful large scale war, you'd have to put FDR for winning WWII over Reagan for fighting and putting the conditions in motion for "winning" the Cold War.

Operationally, Reagan conducted Panama, Grenada, supporting the Mujahadeen, and Iran-Contra...........I wouldn't think that this would serve him well in terms of comparisons.

 

too bad we needed more domestic leadership , just like when we needed a jobs bill he jammed healthcare up our butts ,

 

Great point. Why isn't Amnesty International, Code Pink, and all the other extremist Left groups mobilizing to arrest Obama, Biden, Gates, and Panetta for war crimes?

The hypocrisy and selective umbrage is glaring.

 

That's the first time I ever heard it and liberals called Bush that repeatedly.

You make it sound as if the US Navy, the Air Force, the CIA and the Navy Seals would have disbanded and done nothing if someone else were president.

It's as if Obama had a K-BAR knife clinched in his teeth and he was killing all these bad guys himself.

But I suspect that the war on terror would have still scored a few successes even without him in the White House.

 

So, now the loony left like cowboys.

 

I don't know if you're accurate but I do wonder how long it will be before President Obama is killing "bad guys" in the U.S. If I were Rep. Boehner I'd been worried and would keep my eyes open for drones.

I suppose everyone has forgotten how many "bad guys" Bill Clinton killed in Waco, Texas, when he was President. Those liberals love to kill. Purges are in their blood.

 

You liberals seem very happy that Obama has executed all these people or at least had a hand in it as POTUS. Why is it that you get so up in arms when it comes to executing child torturers/murderers here at home? I thought you were all anti-capital punishment. Or as usual does this just fit into the liberal concept that being a liberal excuses you from being guilty of hypocrisy and that actually having a consistent belief system is simply too constraining?

 

It's only a short short step from killing American citizens without due process and a trial in foreign countries which Obama has already done and killing Americans Obama doesn't like right here in America.

 

No president has been conducted America's business as a commando assassin...


But let's say there was no Obama presidency......Let's say John McCain and Sarah Palin had won.

The foreign policy most likely would have followed the continuity of neo-conservative thinking which would have led us to a shouting match with Iran and possible conflict there. Both Bush and McCain were very tentative about going into Pakistan, so I don't think getting Bin Laden would have been as likely. McCain did want to go into Libya, so the result might have been the same, except I believe our operation would have been a lot more conventional and direct. I like the idea of McCain going after terrorists. I think he would have been very successful, but I don't think he would have been as careful.

But that's all hypothetical. Again, I'm talking about what has actually happened and am surprised that Obama doesn't get more credit for it. Conducting that many successful operations, at that cost is nothing short of amazing.

 

That's not true.

 

Today:
Senate Republicans block Obama jobs bill

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20111021senate_republicans_block_obama_jobs_bill/

10-11-11:
Senate Republicans block Obama's jobs package

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20118915-503544.html

You ire is directed at the wrong folks.

 

There is one advantage to having Obama conduct the war on terror instead of a Republican.

People like you are more forgiving and supportive of Obama than you would be of Bush, McCain or Palin.

So are the libs in the news media who do not harass Obama every day the way they would a Republican.

 

Anwar-Awlaki?

Yeah, he was an American citizen. He was obviously an operational terrorist and was as well documented a member of Al Qaida as Bin Laden. Other Awlaki-types should be dealt with in the same way IMO.

When you are active and self-announced as an Islamic terrorist, you are an enemy of the United States.....even if you are an American citizen. I don't buy the argument that this is some sort of slippery slope to targeting Joe the Plumber types on American soil.

 

I chose my words carefully.

Obama inherited the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and it would be an endless argument about how much he is responsible for there.

But there is no doubt that the foreign adventures he has started are his sole responsibility and I prefer to concentrate on them.

 

What double standard? Are we still waterboarding?
Did bush go into iraq or did he go after the guys responsible for 9/11?

 

Obama is an awesome killer to be sure....

 

I have less faith in Obama than you do because I'm not willing to let him decide which American citizens are guilty of crimes against the state and condemn them to die without a trial.

That's too much power to give one man.