SomaliNet Forums

It's clear Romney's strategy tonight was agree with Obama who has an up on him in Foreign affairs, leaving the voters to decide based on Economy. If America believes that America who they are made to believe America is on the right Foreign affairs course, the only difference will be who can handle the economy better. And if Romney has an edge against the President on the Economy, he is in trouble. According to the Romney strategy.

48 % believe Obama won, according to CNN, only 40% say Romney won.

I don't know which one is worse if elected. One who doesn't have to worry about another re-election. Or one that wants to prove himself to be a president that is hard on terrorists and pro-Israel.

I don't know which one is worse if elected. One who doesn't have to worry about another re-election. Or one that wants to prove himself to be a president that is hard on terrorists and pro-Israel.

What's wrong with being hard on terrorists? You some sort of bin laden sympathizer?

I don't know which one is worse if elected. One who doesn't have to worry about another re-election. Or one that wants to prove himself to be a president that is hard on terrorists and pro-Israel.

This is just rhetoric. When the President of Israel favors the presidential hopeful against the incumbent, that shows you there is a souring of relationship. But both have to pander to jewish voters, and this is why muslims need to be big voters.

US foreign policy doesn't change with Presidents, the agenda is already set, they can only make tweaks, this debate proved it.

This.

I would vote for Romney if he promised to be moderate on domestic issues while waging all out war against all the enemies of freedom and democracy in the world, namely the Islamists. Bomb Mali, bomb Afghanistan (more), bomb Iran, bomb Pakistan annihilate Al Shabab and topple the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

I think this character needs to be banned for constantly posting this blasphemous picture

I don't know which one is worse if elected. One who doesn't have to worry about another re-election. Or one that wants to prove himself to be a president that is hard on terrorists and pro-Israel.

What's wrong with being hard on terrorists? You some sort of bin laden sympathizer?

What gives you the idea that a terrorist is exclusively limited to an individual that is a Muslim or non-Western?

The term "terrorist/terrorism" have been misused and abused to further America's political and economic interests in the Muslim world. And the fact that it's almost accepted to be synonymous with Muslims/Islam highlights it's bias political usage for Western propaganda.

I don't know which one is worse if elected. One who doesn't have to worry about another re-election. Or one that wants to prove himself to be a president that is hard on terrorists and pro-Israel.

What's wrong with being hard on terrorists? You some sort of bin laden sympathizer?

What gives you the idea that a terrorist is exclusively limited to an individual that is a Muslim or non-Western?

The term "terrorist/terrorism" have been misused and abused to further America's political and economic interests in the Muslim world. And the fact that it's almost accepted to be synonymous with Muslims/Islam highlights it's bias political usage for Western propaganda.

A lot of the terrorists threatening America happen to be Muslims, or at least claim to be. This is a fact. They must be obliterated. If you don't agree with this you are a terrorist enabler who must be locked up in Guantanamo Bay

What gives you the idea that a terrorist is exclusively limited to an individual that is a Muslim or non-Western?

The term "terrorist/terrorism" have been misused and abused to further America's political and economic interests in the Muslim world. And the fact that it's almost accepted to be synonymous with Muslims/Islam highlights it's bias political usage for Western propaganda.

A lot of the terrorists threatening America happen to be Muslims, or at least claim to be. This is a fact. They must be obliterated. If you don't agree with this you are a terrorist enabler who must be locked up in Guantanamo Bay

You're going out of your way to make me laugh tonight. Gitmo? Me? LOL!


One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

US Foreign policy doesn't change with the man in the White House. The two parties have major consensus on most issues globally. Obama campaigned to bomb the hell out of Pakistan in 08 and he did it. He pledged to surge troops in Afghanistan in 08 and he did it. Drones have been used forever now and they been used in places like Somalia and Yemen even more now a days. Obama perfectly defined the way things are on US foreign policy: Romney would do what Obama does, just louder!