Wow, Obama tongiht: "I will not hesistate to strike those who would do us harm."

[Skip Intro]

bush:

The war on terror really will be addressed by strong actions by our intelligence and military services to bring to justice those who would do us harm.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060613-2.html

----------------------------------------

ok.

[blonndee]

1. And? This means what?

Especially considering the opponent, who actually has a history of voting FOR war, who continues to fail to admit a mistake in doing so.

I guess you like quotes, though:

"In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table.""We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force," she said."

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/02/02/america/NA-GEN-US-Clinton-Iran.php

"As president, I will never hesitate to use force to protect Americans or to defend our territory and our vital interests."

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20071101faessay86601-p10/hillary-rodham-clinton/security-and-opportunity-for-the-twenty-first-century.html

Out of context? Tit for tat.

[Skip Intro]

3. There's a difference here, Obama is talking about those who "would" use attack us.

Would.

In other words, we need to hit them over there before they hit us over here.


It's called pre-emptive.


Hillary said what she said. But this is the man of change, no more status quo. Yet he's saying the same damn thing.

[Unsane]

9. LMAO--Hillary's the only one here who VOTED for preemptive war.

You're parsing the word "would."


Hillary voted for war. Parse that.

[avrdream]

10. Exactly!

And he continued the war.....let's not forget that: HE CONTINUED THE WAR BY VOTING FOR ALL THE FUNDING FOR IT!

In case anyone forgot that.

As always, Barrack: actions speak so much louder than words.

[ruiner4u]

2. how Bush-esque...

and this is "Change" how?

[berni_mccoy]

5. Because you will have a competent Commander In Chief vs. an idiot who gave up on OBL

or let him go for whatever reason.

The CHANGE would be catching the people WHO ACTUALLY ATTACKED US.

I think Clinton would let OBL get away like her husband did.

[anigbrowl]

4. Yawn...more empty semantic analysis

Film at 11.

[tandem5]

6. me personally, I'm more of a syntactic parser...

on the subject of meaning, however, the phrase "empty semantic" has an almost quasi-oxymoronic quality about it whereas "almost quasi" is completely redundant!

[mysteryman2]

7. How by refusing to fight or enlist

He has no military exsperience.

[Unsane]

8. Dumb much? Would you propose he NOT strike those who would harm the US?

Ah nevermind, you're just being a hack.