Obama - 20 brand new F-16's; part of 1B Aid package for the Muslim Brotherhood

[Rudeboyelvis]

Great. This is working out well.


Any chance we learn our lesson in Syria?

I know. I was being facetious.


http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12...est=latestnews

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Great. This is working out well.


Any chance we learn our lesson in Syria?

I know. I was being facetious.


http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12...est=latestnews

I think this is Congress, not Obama, yes? As Congress allots funding/aid and where it goes.

[Danzig]

i googled for confirmation. but everyone with an article cites fox news as a source. is there a second, viable source for the story?

and it's not 'obama' sending it. just inflammatory rhetoric (propaganda) from fox.

as for morsi, he already backed down and removed the powers he'd recently granted himself. there's instability for sure, but it's not like we are sending planes to assad in syria, or iran.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I think this is Congress, not Obama, yes? As Congress allots funding/aid and where it goes.

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's not 'obama' sending it. just inflammatory rhetoric (propaganda) from fox.

Is he not the president? Does he not have veto authority?

Yes. Congress appropriates funding. And does an amazing job of spending it too. But not without Executive approval.

He is still charge, right??

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Is he not the president? Does he not have veto authority?

Yes. Congress appropriates funding. And does an amazing job of spending it too. But not without Executive approval.

He is still charge, right??

since it's part of the deal made two years ago, i don't know if it can be changed. also, presidents don't have line item veto, so he couldn't draw a line thru just that.
at any rate, a bit disingenuous to say 'obama' is sending them. the u.s. is sending them as part of a deal made in '10.
what reason would there be not to send? egypt ostensibly remains an ally. and i see in the article, that 'some' suggest it's a bad move. which means others don't.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I think this is Congress, not Obama, yes? As Congress allots funding/aid and where it goes.

So the Iraq war was not Bush but congress?

Or do only republican Presidents allocate military funding?

GM bailout, extending unemployment benefits, payroll tax cut, cash for clunkers, Obamacare etc etc. are those congress as well?

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

since it's part of the deal made two years ago, i don't know if it can be changed. also, presidents don't have line item veto, so he couldn't draw a line thru just that.
at any rate, a bit disingenuous to say 'obama' is sending them. the u.s. is sending them as part of a deal made in '10.
what reason would there be not to send? egypt ostensibly remains an ally. and i see in the article, that 'some' suggest it's a bad move. which means others don't.

Yes, the ever present 'some' 'others' are saying is a constant from one talking head to the next one...always wonder who the some and others are...'It's the guy on the show before you numnutz' (Jon Stewart}..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

So the Iraq war was not Bush but congress?

Or do only republican Presidents allocate military funding?

GM bailout, extending unemployment benefits, payroll tax cut, cash for clunkers, Obamacare etc etc. are those congress as well?

well, yes, dell. it is congress and not just the president. thanks for catching on, finally.
or you can keep blaming just obama. i'm sure you took umbrage when people only blamed bush...so, you know, do the same thing. but it's different, cause it's a democrat. right?

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Danzig

since it's part of the deal made two years ago, i don't know if it can be changed. also, presidents don't have line item veto, so he couldn't draw a line thru just that.
at any rate, a bit disingenuous to say 'obama' is sending them. the u.s. is sending them as part of a deal made in '10.
what reason would there be not to send? egypt ostensibly remains an ally. and i see in the article, that 'some' suggest it's a bad move. which means others don't.

I think it's disingenuous to make believe that same crap occurring in Syria can't happen in Egypt with this new regime. Egypt is not the same country that it was 2 years ago.
"To say, oh well, that was the deal we had, so..." is preposterous. and Yes, the president can invoke Executive privilege to stop a congressional action that can potentially threaten our security. Perhaps he is only familiar with it when using it to keep his cronies out of prison (RE: Holder & Fast and Furious).

So yes. It's on him. He's the Commander in Chief.

Oh, wait - Morsi apologized for installing Islamic law. Don't know what could have possibly come over him. Perhaps it's the cash and the fighter jets. Wait until he has them and see what happens.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I think it's disingenuous to make believe that same crap occurring in Syria can't happen in Egypt with this new regime. Egypt is not the same country that it was 2 years ago.
"To say, oh well, that was the deal we had, so..." is preposterous. and Yes, the president can invoke Executive privilege to stop a congressional action that can potential to threaten our security. Perhaps he is only familiar with using it to keep his cronies out of prison (RE: Holder & Fast and Furious).

So yes. It's on him. He's the Commander in Chief.

Oh, wait - Morsi apologized for installing Islamic law. Don't know what could have possible come over him. Perhaps it's the cash and the fighter jets. Wait until he has them and see what happens.

ok, egypt democratically elected their leader. that's difference number one from syria and assad, who is a dictator. second, morsi did try to claim some powers not granted, he has already rescinded that due to the protests.
and i'm sure there is far more to the story than 'we had a deal, so...'. and 'crap' can occur anywhere, whether jets are on the way or not.

why would we need to stop the delivery? how would the delivery threaten u.s. national security?

btw, egypt has over 200 jets already. why would 4 jets coming in january be the tipping point?

i think you're reading far too much into the fox story, which is what they want. is this a big deal? no, not at all. what makes it a big issue? why are you concerned? and i'm not being sarcastic, i really want to know.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Danzig

ok, egypt democratically elected their leader. that's difference number one from syria and assad, who is a dictator. second, morsi did try to claim some powers not granted, he has already rescinded that due to the protests.
and i'm sure there is far more to the story than 'we had a deal, so...'.

If so, please elaborate. Our relationships with other nations change constantly. We went form Cold War adversaries to championing democracy with the dismantling of the USSR, to a fairly icy post-soviet Russia relationship now. For better or worse, we were allies with Egypt under Mubarak. That landscape has completely changed and there is no one that knows whether or not they are an ally of ours now. We do know that the "democratically elected government " is anything but democratic by their actions thus far.

why would we need to stop the delivery? how would the delivery threaten u.s. national security? I don't know. Usually we try to learn lessons from history. Arming Iran didn't turn out to be such a hot proposition for us. I guess as long as someone is blowing someone else up, the war machine gets to churn along, and that can't be all bad.

btw, egypt has a lot of arms already. why would six jets coming in january be the tipping point? Is that the point?

i think you're reading far too much into the fox story, which is what they want. is this a big deal? no, not at all. what makes it a big issue? why are you concerned? and i'm not being sarcastic, i really want to know.

It's just more and more infiltration into sovereign nations and imposing our will. I guess with Afghanistan drawing down, we need a fresh antagonist. What happens when the democratically elected Islamic govt. of Egypt aligns with Hezbollah and trains these F-16's on Israel?? You've already said they have plenty of arms, why do you feel this is a non-event when were are giving away a billion dollars (hey, we don't need it) in arms and aid to a "less than stable" at best govt with strong Islamic underpinnings?

..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

..

elaborate on what? the deal? i don't know anything about the deal other than it went thru two years ago. yes, things have changed. no one undid the deal. i don't know why, but i must assume it was because the powers that be didn't feel the need?

we armed iran? i thought it was iraq when they fough iran? and you're preaching to the choir, i've said all along we are too involved elsewhere. my issue here isn't the deal, it's with fox making it out to be a huge problem now, because they don't like the democratically elected president of egypt.
we've been giving foreign aid forever. hell, afganistan was the number one recipient for years. that got us nowhere.

what i'm saying is, why should the delivery of four jets in january, and 20 total be halted now? i think it's a non-issue, especially considering that it's less than a tenth of what they already have in stock. getting a few more jets won't be the difference in peace and war for them.

[Antitrust32]

is Egypt paying for these jets?

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

elaborate on what? the deal? i don't know anything about the deal other than it went thru two years ago. yes, things have changed. no one undid the deal. i don't know why, but i must assume it was because the powers that be didn't feel the need?

we armed iran? i thought it was iraq when they fough iran? and you're preaching to the choir, i've said all along we are too involved elsewhere. my issue here isn't the deal, it's with fox making it out to be a huge problem now, because they don't like the democratically elected president of egypt.
we've been giving foreign aid forever. hell, afganistan was the number one recipient for years. that got us nowhere.

what i'm saying is, why should the delivery of four jets in january, and 20 total be halted now? i think it's a non-issue, especially considering that it's less than a tenth of what they already have in stock. getting a few more jets won't be the difference in peace and war for them.

Correcto..known as "Iraqgate".

United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, against post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, Special Operations training, and direct involvement in warfare against Iran.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...%80%93Iraq_war

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Danzig

elaborate on what? the deal? i don't know anything about the deal other than it went thru two years ago. yes, things have changed. no one undid the deal. i don't know why, but i must assume it was because the powers that be didn't feel the need?

we armed iran? i thought it was iraq when they fough iran? and you're preaching to the choir, i've said all along we are too involved elsewhere. my issue here isn't the deal, it's with fox making it out to be a huge problem now, because they don't like the democratically elected president of egypt.
we've been giving foreign aid forever. hell, afganistan was the number one recipient for years. that got us nowhere.

what i'm saying is, why should the delivery of four jets in january, and 20 total be halted now? i think it's a non-issue, especially considering that it's less than a tenth of what they already have in stock. getting a few more jets won't be the difference in peace and war for them.

Thanks I obviously meant "Iraq" when typing Iran in haste.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

is Egypt paying for these jets?

No, part of the billion dollar aid package. Guess the jets are edible.

At least the top twenty percent of taxpayers will be footing 75% of the bill.

Like lemmings walking off a cliff while waiting for Christmas. At least Morsi gets his fighter planes.

[GenuineRisk]

Someone needs a refresher in Civics 101. To wit:

Originally Posted by dellinger63

So the Iraq war was not Bush but congress?

Congress authorized, yes. Oct 16, 2002.

Or do only republican Presidents allocate military funding?

No President allocates military funding. Congress allocates all funding. It's in the Constitution. Look it up.

GM bailout, extending unemployment benefits, payroll tax cut, cash for clunkers, Obamacare etc etc. are those congress as well?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And depending on what your "etc. etc" are, probably yes and yes as well.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Someone needs a refresher in Civics 101. To wit:



Congress authorized, yes. Oct 16, 2002.



No President allocates military funding. Congress allocates all funding. It's in the Constitution. Look it up.



Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And depending on what your "etc. etc" are, probably yes and yes as well.

Not Bush's war....

Congress's Cash for Clunkers

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Not Bush's war....

Congress's Cash for Clunkers

The president submits a budget proposal every year. Of course the actual budget is done by congress. The president also is the one to ask for military intervention. I don't think a president has ever been denied a war resolution or military request by congress.
So, its not bushes war, or obamas (except maybe the libya action for a fairly recent example, since i do not think obama ever went to congress about that) but that doesn't mean its all on congress either.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Someone needs a refresher in Civics 101. To wit:



Congress authorized, yes. Oct 16, 2002.
but it will forever be know as Bush's War!



No President allocates military funding. Congress allocates all funding. It's in the Constitution. Look it up.



Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And depending on what your "etc. etc" are, probably yes and yes as well.

Yes, indeed..