The party of peace and tolerance

  1. ***** Vampire
    goldylight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    562
    Level
    24
    Lv. Percent
    71.75%

    The party of peace and tolerance


    http://www.wbir.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=20241


    additionally:
    In Wisconsin four homes with Bush/Cheney sings on their lawns has swastika's burned into their lawns with grass killer. The signs were also stolen. There seems to be an increase in these incidents the closer the election gets.
    the other week "some group" broke in and stole Republican computers from campaign head quarters

    thoughts:
    why cant democrats get this fired up about islamic terrorists.

    Question - What does the Democrat Party and Islam have in common?

    Answer - They are both hate-filled, evil cults.

    Flame away.

  2. New Member
    Gumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    42
    Posts
    194
    Rep Power
    229
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    19.1%

    Quote Originally Posted by goldylight
    http://www.wbir.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=20241


    additionally:
    In Wisconsin four homes with Bush/Cheney sings on their lawns has swastika's burned into their lawns with grass killer. The signs were also stolen. There seems to be an increase in these incidents the closer the election gets.
    the other week "some group" broke in and stole Republican computers from campaign head quarters

    thoughts:
    why cant democrats get this fired up about islamic terrorists.

    Question - What does the Democrat Party and Islam have in common?

    Answer - They are both hate-filled, evil cults.

    Flame away.

    Agreed.

    Gumbo

  3. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    637
    Rep Power
    463
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    79.71%

    Free speech for me, not for thee
    •   
       

  4. ***** Vampire
    goldylight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    562
    Level
    24
    Lv. Percent
    71.75%
  5. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Communists......
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  6. ***** Vampire
    goldylight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    562
    Level
    24
    Lv. Percent
    71.75%

    http://www.local6.com/politics/3785861/detail.html
    again WTF is wrong with these people now they ransack an office. geez.
  7. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Today,
    Tennessee: Liberals shoot up Bush/Cheney headquarters
    http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...4050-1855r.htm

    West Virginia: Liberals shoot at Bush/Cheney headquarters
    http://wowktv.com/news/index.cfm?newsItemID=1320
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  8. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    there you have it. The open minded peacenik liberals
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  9. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.83%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Ha, ha, ha...so open minded aren't they?

    Kinda like how they call the rightists the racists, yet they repeatedly insist that minorities must have lower standards in school, etc, in order to achieve; ROFL. A good example was a UC system example. Our UC's decided to up the GPA for acceptance out of highschol from 2.8 to 3.0. Seems reasonable to me for going to a UC! Now, after the vote passed (smoething like 15-4) liberal activists chanted "Education is right, not just for the rich and white!" I don't understand how minorities vote for these kooks! They've essentially labeled them as inherent underachievers and incompetent, yet they cast huge numbers in their favor! Another example is when we try to upgrade voting equiptment or standards (i.e. requiring drivers liscenses and proof of citizenship to vote). These are ALWAYS met with remarks saying that the Republicans are using this as a racist mechanism to discount minority votes; By virtue of that statement they're saying a) that minorities are too dumb to use new voting equiptment and b) that we're racists for not wanting illegal aliens to vote.

    ROTFLMAO!

    The party of equality (see above)...the party of peace and open-mindedness (see original post)...ROFL...they really need to rethink that party of peace and open-mindedness thing...LOL
  10. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    scholarships at UC-Berkeley reserved for homosexuals.
    I love it.

    in other news,
    Cheney was solid. Edwards wasn't bad either (my opinion).
    The media is calling it a solid Cheney victory though
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  11. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.83%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Many California schools have a policy that not only allow low income students to get free classes and books (which I don't have a problem with), THEY GIVE LOW INCOME STUDENTS PRIORITY OVER ALL OTHER STUDENTS WHEN IT COMES TO REGISTRATION TIMES FOR CLASSES!! Now, that pisses me off!! Equality....where???
  12. Registered User
    Iron Warrior's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  265 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,328
    Rep Power
    13070
    Level
    51
    Lv. Percent
    28.76%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    Many California schools have a policy that not only allow low income students to get free classes and books (which I don't have a problem with), THEY GIVE LOW INCOME STUDENTS PRIORITY OVER ALL OTHER STUDENTS WHEN IT COMES TO REGISTRATION TIMES FOR CLASSES!! Now, that pisses me off!! Equality....where???
    Not only that but they give them money too !!! In community college, some **** got $4,000 plus tuition and books covered I didn't get jack **** and I was on the football team.
  13. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2676
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.38%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    There's an easy answer to all this: get the government out of education. There's a reason why 90% of the households in our country have TVs but very few have good education delivered. The regulation of the former is relatively free, the regulations surrounding the latter are strict, basically state controlled. There's no profit sheet, so no way to tell who is doing a good job, ie educting kids as good as can possibly be at the lowest cost possible. And liberals scream for more money, when they should be screaming as to why they are getting so little for what they've already poured into the system.
  14. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    587
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.09%

    Another example is when we try to upgrade voting equiptment or standards (i.e. requiring drivers liscenses and proof of citizenship to vote). These are ALWAYS met with remarks saying that the Republicans are using this as a racist mechanism to discount minority votes; By virtue of that statement they're saying a) that minorities are too dumb to use new voting equiptment and b) that we're racists for not wanting illegal aliens to vote.
    If they that passed the democrats loose votes. Why wouldn't they fight it.lol
  15. ***** Vampire
    goldylight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    562
    Level
    24
    Lv. Percent
    71.75%
  16. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    637
    Rep Power
    463
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    79.71%

    Kind of off topic but I these are the usual talking points with the 'bush lied' people at work

    I think it's time to roll out the historical quotes by memory-hole leftists again:


    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
    President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998


    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
    President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.


    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
    Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.


    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
    Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.


    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
    Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998


    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.


    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
    Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
  17. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    637
    Rep Power
    463
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    79.71%

    And the current administration is not the only one to tie iraq and al-queda

    From the December 29, 2003 / January 5, 2004 issue of the weekly standard
    Connecting the dots in 1998, but not in 2003.
    by Stephen F. Hayes
    12/29/2003, Volume 009, Issue 16


    ARE AL QAEDA'S links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq just a fantasy of the Bush administration? Hardly. The Clinton administration also warned the American public about those ties and defended its response to al Qaeda terror by citing an Iraqi connection.


    For nearly two years, starting in 1996, the CIA monitored the al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan. The plant was known to have deep connections to Sudan's Military Industrial Corporation, and the CIA had gathered intelligence on the budding relationship between Iraqi chemical weapons experts and the plant's top officials. The intelligence included information that several top chemical weapons specialists from Iraq had attended ceremonies to celebrate the plant's opening in 1996. And, more compelling, the National Security Agency had intercepted telephone calls between Iraqi scientists and the plant's general manager.


    Iraq also admitted to having a $199,000 contract with al Shifa for goods under the oil-for-food program. Those goods were never delivered. While it's hard to know what significance, if any, to ascribe to this information, it fits a pattern described in recent CIA reporting on the overlap in the mid-1990s between al Qaeda-financed groups and firms that violated U.N. sanctions on behalf of Iraq.


    The clincher, however, came later in the spring of 1998, when the CIA secretly gathered a soil sample from 60 feet outside of the plant's main gate. The sample showed high levels of O-ethylmethylphosphonothioic acid, known as EMPTA, which is a key ingredient for the deadly nerve agent VX. A senior intelligence official who briefed reporters at the time was asked which countries make VX using EMPTA. "Iraq is the only country we're aware of," the official said. "There are a variety of ways of making VX, a variety of recipes, and EMPTA is fairly unique."


    That briefing came on August 24, 1998, four days after the Clinton administration launched cruise-missile strikes against al Qaeda targets in Afghanistan and Sudan (Osama bin Laden's headquarters from 1992-96), including the al Shifa plant. The missile strikes came 13 days after bombings at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed 257 people--including 12 Americans--and injured nearly 5,000. Clinton administration officials said that the attacks were in part retaliatory and in part preemptive. U.S. intelligence agencies had picked up "chatter" among bin Laden's deputies indicating that more attacks against American interests were imminent.


    The al Shifa plant in Sudan was largely destroyed after being hit by six Tomahawk missiles. John McWethy, national security correspondent for ABC News, reported the story on August 25, 1998:



    Before the pharmaceutical plant was reduced to rubble by American cruise missiles, the CIA was secretly gathering evidence that ended up putting the facility on America's target list. Intelligence sources say their agents clandestinely gathered soil samples outside the plant and found, quote, "strong evidence" of a chemical compound called EMPTA, a compound that has only one known purpose, to make VX nerve gas.



    Then, the connection:



    The U.S. had been suspicious for months, partly because of Osama bin Laden's financial ties, but also because of strong connections to Iraq. Sources say the U.S. had intercepted phone calls from the plant to a man in Iraq who runs that country's chemical weapons program.



    The senior intelligence officials who briefed reporters laid out the collaboration. "We knew there were fuzzy ties between [bin Laden] and the plant but strong ties between him and Sudan and strong ties between the plant and Sudan and strong ties between the plant and Iraq." Although this official was careful not to oversell bin Laden's ties to the plant, other Clinton officials told reporters that the plant's general manager lived in a villa owned by bin Laden.


    Several Clinton administration national security officials told THE WEEKLY STANDARD last week that they stand by the intelligence. "The bottom line for me is that the targeting was justified and appropriate," said Daniel Benjamin, director of counterterrorism on Clinton's National Security Council, in an emailed response to questions. "I would be surprised if any president--with the evidence of al Qaeda's intentions evident in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam and the intelligence on [chemical weapons] that was at hand from Sudan--would have made a different decision about bombing the plant."


    The current president certainly agrees. "I think you give the commander in chief the benefit of the doubt," said George W. Bush, governor of Texas, on August 20, 1998, the same day as the U.S. counterstrikes. "This is a foreign policy matter. I'm confident he's working on the best intelligence available, and I hope it's successful."


    Wouldn't the bombing of a plant with well-documented connections to Iraq's chemical weapons program, undertaken in an effort to strike back at Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, seem to suggest the Clinton administration national security officials believed Iraq was working with al Qaeda? Benjamin, who has been one of the leading skeptics of claims that Iraq was working with al Qaeda, doesn't want to connect those dots.


    Instead, he describes al Qaeda and Iraq as unwitting collaborators. "The Iraqi connection with al Shifa, given what we know about it, does not yet meet the test as proof of a substantive relationship because it isn't clear that one side knew the other side's involvement. That is, it is not clear that the Iraqis knew about bin Laden's well-concealed investment in the Sudanese Military Industrial Corporation. The Sudanese very likely had their own interest in VX development, and they would also have had good reasons to keep al Qaeda's involvement from the Iraqis. After all, Saddam was exactly the kind of secularist autocrat that al Qaeda despised. In the most extreme case, if the Iraqis suspected al Qaeda involvement, they might have had assurances from the Sudanese that bin Laden's people would never get the weapons. That may sound less than satisfying, but the Sudanese did show a talent for fleecing bin Laden. It is all somewhat speculative, and it would be helpful to know more."


    It does sound less than satisfying to one Bush administration official. "So, when the Clinton administration wants to justify its strike on al Shifa," this official tells me, "it's okay to use an Iraq-al Qaeda connection. But now that the Bush administration and George Tenet talk about links, it's suddenly not believable?"


    The Clinton administration heavily emphasized the Iraq link to justify its 1998 strikes against al Qaeda. Just four days before the embassy bombings, Saddam Hussein had once again stepped up his defiance of U.N. weapons inspectors, causing what Senator Richard Lugar called another Iraqi "crisis." Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering, one of those in the small circle of Clinton advisers involved in planning the strikes, briefed foreign reporters on August 25, 1998. He was asked about the connection directly and answered carefully.



    Q: Ambassador Pickering, do you know of any connection between the so-called pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum and the Iraqi government in regard to production of precursors of VX?


    PICKERING: Yeah, I would like to consult my notes just to be sure that what I have to say is stated clearly and correctly. We see evidence that we think is quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq. In fact, al Shifa officials, early in the company's history, we believe were in touch with Iraqi individuals associated with Iraq's VX program.



    Ambassador Bill Richardson, at the time U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, echoed those sentiments in an appearance on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer," on August 30, 1998. He called the targeting "one of the finest hours of our intelligence people."


    "We know for a fact, physical evidence, soil samples of VX precursor--chemical precursor at the site," said Richardson. "Secondly, Wolf, direct evidence of ties between Osama bin Laden and the Military Industrial Corporation--the al Shifa factory was part of that. This is an operation--a collection of buildings that does a lot of this dirty munitions stuff. And, thirdly, there is no evidence that this precursor has a commercial application. So, you combine that with Sudan support for terrorism, their connections with Iraq on VX, and you combine that, also, with the chemical precursor issue, and Sudan's leadership support for Osama bin Laden, and you've got a pretty clear cut case."


    If the case appeared "clear cut" to top Clinton administration officials, it was not as open-and-shut to the news media. Press reports brimmed with speculation about bad intelligence or even the misuse of intelligence. In an October 27, 1999, article, New York Times reporter James Risen went back and reexamined the intelligence. He wrote: "At the pivotal meeting reviewing the targets, the Director of Central Intelligence, George J. Tenet, was said to have cautioned Mr. Clinton's top advisers that while he believed that the evidence connecting Mr. Bin Laden to the factory was strong, it was less than ironclad." Risen also reported that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright had shut down an investigation into the targeting after questions were raised by the department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (the same intelligence team that raised questions about prewar intelligence relating to the war in Iraq).


    Other questions persisted as well. Clinton administration officials initially scoffed at the notion that al Shifa produced any pharmaceutical products. But reporters searching through the rubble found empty aspirin bottles, as well as other indications that the plant was not used exclusively to produce chemical weapons. The strikes came in the middle of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, leaving some analysts to wonder whether President Clinton was following the conspiratorial news-management scenario laid out in "Wag the Dog," then a hit movie.


    But the media failed to understand the case, according to Daniel Benjamin, who was a reporter himself before joining the Clinton National Security Council. "Intelligence is always incomplete, typically composed of pieces that refuse to fit neatly together and are subject to competing interpretations," writes Benjamin with coauthor Steven Simon in the 2002 book "The Age of Sacred Terror." "By disclosing the intelligence, the administration was asking journalists to connect the dots--assemble bits of evidence and construct a picture that would account for all the disparate information. In response, reporters cast doubt on the validity of each piece of the information provided and thus on the case for attacking al Shifa."


    Now, however, there's a new wrinkle. Bush administration officials largely agree with their predecessors. "There's pretty good intelligence linking al Shifa to Iraq and also good information linking al Shifa to al Qaeda," says one administration official familiar with the intelligence. "I don't think there's much dispute that [Sudan's Military Industrial Corporation] was al Qaeda supported. The link from al Shifa to Iraq is what there is more dispute about."


    According to this official, U.S. intelligence has obtained Iraqi documents showing that the head of al Shifa had been granted permission by the Iraqi government to travel to Baghdad to meet with Emad al-Ani, often described as "the father of Iraq's chemical weapons program." Said the official: "The reports can confirm that the trip was authorized, but the travel part hasn't been confirmed yet."


    So why hasn't the Bush administration mentioned the al Shifa connection in its public case for war in Iraq? Even if one accepts Benjamin's proposition that Iraq may not have known that it was arming al Qaeda and that al Qaeda may not have known its chemicals came from Iraq, doesn't al Shifa demonstrate convincingly the dangers of attempting to "contain" a maniacal leader with WMD?


    According to Bush officials, two factors contributed to their reluctance to discuss the Iraq-al Qaeda connection suggested by al Shifa. First, the level of proof never rose above the threshold of "highly suggestive circumstantial evidence"--indicating that on this question, Bush administration policymakers were somewhat more cautious about the public use of intelligence on the Iraq-al Qaeda connection than were their counterparts in the Clinton administration. Second, according to one Bush administration source, "there is a massive sensitivity at the Agency to bringing up this issue again because of the controversy in 1998."


    But there is bound to be more discussion of al Shifa and Iraq-al Qaeda connections in the coming weeks. The Senate Intelligence Committee is nearing completion of its review of prewar intelligence. And although there is still no CIA team assigned to look at the links between Iraq and al Qaeda, investigators looking at documents from the fallen regime continue to uncover new information about those connections on a regular basis.


    Democrats who before the war discounted the possibility of any connection between Iraq and al Qaeda have largely fallen silent. And in recent days, two prowar Democrats have spoken openly about the relationship. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana who sits on the Intelligence Committee, told THE WEEKLY STANDARD, "the relationship seemed to have its roots in mutual exploitation. Saddam Hussein used terrorism for his own ends, and Osama bin Laden used a nation-state for the things that only a nation-state can provide."


    And Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut Democrat and presidential candidate, discussed the connections in an appearance last week on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." Said Lieberman: "I want to be real clear about the connection with terrorists. I've seen a lot of evidence on this. There are extensive contacts between Saddam Hussein's government and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I never could reach the conclusion that [Saddam] was part of September 11. Don't get me wrong about that. But there was so much smoke there that it made me worry. And you know, some people say with a great facility, al Qaeda and Saddam could never get together. He is secular and they're theological. But there's something that tied them together. It's their hatred of us."
    The missile strikes came 13 days after bombings at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed 257 people--including 12 Americans--and injured nearly 5,000. Clinton administration officials said that the attacks were in part retaliatory and in part preemptive.

    WAIT a minute only Bush-hitler makes preemptive strikes!

  18. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    231
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    62.37%

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff
    Kind of off topic but I these are the usual talking points with the 'bush lied' people at work

    I think it's time to roll out the historical quotes by memory-hole leftists again:


    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
    President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998


    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
    President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.


    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
    Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
    And given the utter lack of WMD's when Bush invaded, it appears that the Clinton administration did a fantastic job!




    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
    Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.


    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
    Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998


    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.


    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
    Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
    And those cruise missle strikes against Saddam in Jan and Jun '93 , Sept. '96 and gosh, he actually ordered a cruise missle strike in Nov 1998 when Saddam blinked and Clinton called off the strike.
    http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9811/15/us.iraq/
    Saddam weasled and attacks were called in December 1998. http://www.indianamilitary.org/Timelines/1998.htm


    Given the lack of WMD seen in the recent invasion, it seems Clinton was devistatingly effective. What did he get from the rightist wingnuts? Only that he was trying to take attention off the Starr investigation, and was lambasted for his hawkishness. He would have been impeached for invading (they were looking for anything).

    Friggin hypocrites.

    Flame away; I'm out of here.

    INFOHAZARD

    Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
    Sir Winston Churchill
  19. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    587
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.09%

    And given the utter lack of WMD's when Bush invaded, it appears that the Clinton administration did a fantastic job! Given the lack of WMD seen in the recent invasion, it seems Clinton was devistatingly effective. What did he get from the rightist wingnuts? Only that he was trying to take attention off the Starr investigation, and was lambasted for his hawkishness. He would have been impeached for invading (they were looking for anything).
    Clinton did not do a good job at all. He could have got Bin Laden several times and didn't. The Sudanese offered Bin Laden to us on a silver platter and he declined to take him. He denied this of coarse but there was one problem....................... there is an audio tape of him talking about it. By the way ........Clinton could have been impeached for many things. He should have been impeach for treason.
    With Iraq even the Clinton administration said that Iraq had WMDs. A point many people miss is that if the UN enforced it's own resolutions we would not be in Iraq today!!!!!!!!
  20. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2676
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.38%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    Given the lack of WMD seen in the recent invasion, it seems Clinton was devistatingly effective. What did he get from the rightist wingnuts? Only that he was trying to take attention off the Starr investigation, and was lambasted for his hawkishness. He would have been impeached for invading (they were looking for anything).
    And the right was wrong then to pull that. However the problem is I think your view is a bit incomplete. Clinton did do a good job, but what then? Terminal sanctions against Iraq so Saddam, the French, Russians and Chinese could keep getting rich and Saddam could keep visiting misery on the Iraqis? Or, once the sanctions are lifted Saddam or whatever brute replaced him in the interrim could just go right ahead and develop WMDs again? Iraq was a continuing problem that needed to be dealt with one way or another, and sanctions and such under Clinton worked to a point, but in the end continuing with the same policy would have been akin to using only a bandage on a wound that needed to be sewn up. There were only two options I could see: pull out and let the process go to its ievitable conclusion, economic and social collapse; or go in and take Saddam and his regime out and make the best of what's left over.
  21. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    587
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.09%

    Clinton was the first impeached president because of perjury, subornation on perjury, and abuse of power. He should have been impeached for that. The problem is are so many other things he did he could have been impeached for. IMO They should have gone after the foreign campaign contributes and the selling of technology to china. That was one of the most egregious things he got away with. I think they chose not too because it's complicated and many people in the country have the attention span of a caffeinated squirrel.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. how would you use the stack of powerfull and activate?
    By jonathan180 in forum Supplement Logs
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-23-2006, 02:55 AM
  2. The rollercoaster of Gains and Losses
    By Mach .78 in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-17-2005, 12:36 PM
  3. Biotest Surge masks the flavor of HMB and CEE
    By Chippewa in forum Supplements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-08-2005, 09:22 AM
  4. The neccessity of HCG, and methyl 1-test?
    By Tiabin in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-17-2003, 09:27 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-22-2003, 11:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in