Quote:
Originally Posted by joeysteele
I actually think we in the UK had a lot to do with the fall of Gaddafi and what then ensued in Libya.
Anyway, she was not a leader of the USA at the time of Iraq and as a Senator, along with many other Senators too of both USA parties, she was just one other vote.
Just as all the MPs in the UK, of all Parties except the Lib Dems also supported action in Iraq here.
You keep saying she did all this, she was 'not' the President, she was not the Senate or the House of representatives.
She was only supporting a motion put forward by the president,
Whatever was done would need the sanctioning of said president/s of the times, not herself, and it would need the approval of the 2 houses too, with loads more voting the same way as she did.
I know you appear to have a thing against women at times but many other Senators supported all that was done, not just Hillary, and the then presidents of the USA too.
Along with other Countries too such as France as to Libya.
You are being selective, and really in part blaming the wrong person totally for it all,just to suit your odd argument at times, the buck stops with the presidents and Prime Ministers of Countries who support any action anywhere and who indeed propose it too.
Asking their MPs or Senators to support their plans.
Last time I checked, I found nothing wrong with people being rich either, most Presidents and their families end up rich as generally our UK PMs do too.
Rather a bit of a red herring that one to me.
|
I was waiting for you to play the sexist card, shame on you
where is the woman card for the 500,000 women killed in the iraq invasion and many more killed in hilarys other invasions