Sarah Palin: 20/20 Interview

[AE14]

One differences between Charlie GIbson and Sarah Palin, she is running for VP

 

[Dwight Schrute]

One differences between Charlie GIbson and Sarah Palin, she is running for VP

And Obama for President. Which one is more important?

 

[Usf97j4x4]

Obama would not pass an FBI background check yet he stands to be elected into a position with the highest security clearance afforded to any one person.

 

[AE14]

And Obama for President. Which one is more important?

however the issue of this was her lack of knowledge on the Bush Doctrine. Since this was about Palin and not Obama, your point is fruitless.

If Obama or Biden were interviewed and had nb clue about it, you would be up here harping away about it, and rightfully so. She does deserve some criticism.

 

[Usf97j4x4]

however the issue of this was her lack of knowledge on the Bush Doctrine. Since this was about Palin and not Obama, your point is fruitless.

If Obama or Biden were interviewed and had nb clue about it, you would be up here harping away about it, and rightfully so. She does deserve some criticism.

The question was poised by someone who had no clue about what the "bush doctrine" was. I cant blame her for the confusion

The Palin smear campaign by the media machine is incredible. Too bad its only bolstering her support from sympathetic women.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

however the issue of this was her lack of knowledge on the Bush Doctrine. Since this was about Palin and not Obama, your point is fruitless.

According to you but the overall theme is foreign policy experience in this election so therefore its not.

If Obama or Biden were interviewed and had nb clue about it, you would be up here harping away about it, and rightfully so. She does deserve some criticism.

I have already stated my point several times. I wouldn't expect any governor in the US to recite the Bush Doctrine but it is common knowledge that Russia has veto power in the UN..something Obama forgot.

 

[AE14]

The question was poised by someone who had no clue about what the "bush doctrine" was. I cant blame her for the confusion

The Palin smear campaign by the media machine is incredible. Too bad its only bolstering her support from sympathetic women.

again it doesnt matter if Gibson knew or not, which we do not know. She did not know, and should have.

This aspect is not smear, she is running for public office and should know, thats just the bottom line:hammer:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

again it doesnt matter if Gibson knew or not, which we do not know.
:

:lol:

 

[RobInKuwait]

however the issue of this was her lack of knowledge on the Bush Doctrine. Since this was about Palin and not Obama, your point is fruitless.

It was a trick question.

Its like asking, do you agree with how the US fought the Cold War? Most people would agree with some facets but disagree on others. Its stupid to ask a loaded yes or no question like that.

Also, it makes it terribly difficult for someone watching to know what's being asked. I don't know what the Bush doctrine is. Why doesn't he just ask about facets of the doctrine so viewers can follow along.

I think he asked it to help Obama with trying to associate her and McCain with Bush more than anything however.

If Obama or Biden were interviewed and had nb clue about it, you would be up here harping away about it, and rightfully so. She does deserve some criticism.

If Obama or Biden were being interviewed he wouldn't play stump the chump.

 

[Usf97j4x4]

This aspect is not smear, she is running for public office and should know, thats just the bottom line:hammer:

Yea.

I went on Yahoo homepage the other day and saw about 50%+ of the articles related to Palin, all portraying her in a negative light. "Is she experienced enough?" "Palin banning books" "Palin and the road to nowhere." I see Time magazine covers doing the same.

The only time I see Obama on a magazine cover its "family man" showing him loving his daughters.. do you sense an imbalance at all?

Are his racist wife and preacher forgotten? His connection to Bill Ayers forgotten? What about his community organizer status, for ACORN, who coincidently is tied to Fannie and Freddie by giving loans, subsidized by the govt to unqualified buyers, what about his lack of experience? Can I go on indefinitely here? Yea

 

[RobInKuwait]

That whole interview reminded me of the type of questions defense attorneys ask hostile witnesses during trials. Loaded questions, leading questions, double questions.

 

[Mulletsoldier]

Pro Palin Crowd:

Guys, it is not smear, slander, or defamation to suggest Sarah Palin is unknowledgeable; that was more or less bluntly apparent in her interview. The questions were not 'trick questions' - at least in my opinion - either.

On one occasion Charlie Gibson stated, several times over, "What are the three specific things you would change about the Bush Economic Policy?". Now, any politician would spin rhetoric the way she did initially, but even upon pressing her she simply could not produce three viable solutions. While the "Bush Doctrine" may be admittedly vague, this administration's economic policy is not. She should have been able to produce far more specific answers other than "find efficiencies in these agencies".

Admitting she lacks knowledge does not concede some imaginary Maginot Line to the Democrats, nor lose the election; it makes you appear sensible. As well, admitting she lacks knowledge does nothing to remove her appeal - especially to those who would have voted for her anyway. I think not reconciling with the fact she is somewhat unknowledgeable, and constantly diverting to the 'other' party's mistakes is unfortunately bi-partisan.

 

[Usf97j4x4]

Pro Palin Crowd:

Guys, it is not smear, slander, or defamation to suggest Sarah Palin is unknowledgeable; that was more or less bluntly apparent in her interview. The questions were not 'trick questions' - at least in my opinion - either.

On one occasion Charlie Gibson stated, several times over, "What are the three specific things you would change about the Bush Economic Policy?". Now, any politician would spin rhetoric the way she did initially, but even upon pressing her she simply could not produce three viable solutions. While the "Bush Doctrine" may be admittedly vague, this administration's economic policy is not. She should have been able to produce far more specific answers other than "find efficiencies in these agencies".

Admitting she lacks knowledge does not concede some imaginary Maginot Line to the Democrats, nor lose the election; it makes you appear sensible. As well, admitting she lacks knowledge does nothing to remove her appeal - especially to those who would have voted for her anyway. I think not reconciling with the fact she is somewhat unknowledgeable, and constantly diverting to the 'other' party's mistakes is unfortunately bi-partisan.

The big picture is that Obama, the democratic candidate, who is equally (if not more) guilty of this has completely skirted criticism from the media because they are in the tank for him. That cannot be denied.

I'm not really Pro-Palin or Pro-McCain, I just think there is an unfair balance here and find it incredible that most sensible people do not pick up on this.


Barr for 08

 

[RobInKuwait]

Pro Palin Crowd:

Guys, it is not smear, slander, or defamation to suggest Sarah Palin is unknowledgeable; that was more or less bluntly apparent in her interview. The questions were not 'trick questions' - at least in my opinion - either.

On one occasion Charlie Gibson stated, several times over, "What are the three specific things you would change about the Bush Economic Policy?". Now, any politician would spin rhetoric the way she did initially, but even upon pressing her she simply could not produce three viable solutions. While the "Bush Doctrine" may be admittedly vague, this administration's economic policy is not. She should have been able to produce far more specific answers other than "find efficiencies in these agencies".

Admitting she lacks knowledge does not concede some imaginary Maginot Line to the Democrats, nor lose the election; it makes you appear sensible. As well, admitting she lacks knowledge does nothing to remove her appeal - especially to those who would have voted for her anyway. I think not reconciling with the fact she is somewhat unknowledgeable, and constantly diverting to the 'other' party's mistakes is unfortunately bi-partisan.

I'll admit that she is not as knowledgeable as some. I would not include Obama in the "some".

You can admit compared to some of the easy questions Obama routinely gets (probably ahead of time for most interviews), Palin's questions were not on par.

 

[Usf97j4x4]

Even O'reilly sold out and bent over to get an interview with Obama... what a load of horse dung.

 

[RobInKuwait]

YouTube - Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States

Obama may need to work on his domestic policy a little.

 

[Usf97j4x4]

Are you serious!!! Let's not forget the facts, which is we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and the CIA lied about the intelligence. So let me get this straight.... we lost over 4,500 troops in a war that was built on a lie, but we won. That is the most ridiculous statement I hear people make anytime they make a statement about the war. .... and according to the White House Mission Accomplished 4 years ago. Cut the bull crap out about we us winning the war. We are not winning, we are limping out Iraq with our tails between our legs for making such a big mess. In case you didn't know------WE INVADED THE WRONG COUNTRY. Let's get real folks!!!!!

The UN lied too!! :clap2:

I want a bumper sticker that says

"No one died when Clinton lied, but now your 11 year old daughter is giving blowjobs... hey, its not sex!"

 

[neoborn]

Are you serious!!! Let's not forget the facts, which is we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and the CIA lied about the intelligence. So let me get this straight.... we lost over 4,500 troops in a war that was built on a lie, but we won. That is the most ridiculous statement I hear people make anytime they make a statement about the war. .... and according to the White House Mission Accomplished 4 years ago. Cut the bull crap out about we us winning the war. We are not winning, we are limping out Iraq with our tails between our legs for making such a big mess. In case you didn't know------WE INVADED THE WRONG COUNTRY. Let's get real folks!!!!!

Don't forget the real reason behind the war folks...

We came, we saw, we stole their motherfuggin oil yo!

 

[Usf97j4x4]

Don't forget the real reason behind the war folks...

We came, we saw, we stole their motherfuggin oil yo!

The sad part is our administration doesnt have the balls to TAKE the oil!!!

Dammit. If Bush didnt put in 2 very conservative justices I would regret voting for him.

 

[AE14]

The big picture is that Obama, the democratic candidate, who is equally (if not more) guilty of this has completely skirted criticism from the media because they are in the tank for him. That cannot be denied.

I'm not really Pro-Palin or Pro-McCain, I just think there is an unfair balance here and find it incredible that most sensible people do not pick up on this.


Barr for 08

I agree that Obama has it easier, however to me for anyone to assume that the Gibson interview was smear is ridiculous. She was asked questions that ANY VP candidate should know, however, she didnt.

I am not saying she looked terrible as a result, but it was a chink in the armor

 

[Fastone]

Recent examples of Palinese: language of the double standard


If you're a minority and you're selected for a job over more qualified
candidates you're a 'token hire.'

If you're a conservative and you're
selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a 'game changer.'

Black teen pregnancies? A 'crisis' in black America.
White teen pregnancies? A 'blessed event.'

If you grow up in Hawaii you're 'exotic.'
Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're the quintessential
'American story.'

Similarly, if you name you kid Barack you're 'unpatriotic.'
Name your kid Track or Trig, you're 'colorful.'

If you're a Democrat and you make a VP pick without fully vetting the
individual you're 'reckless.' A Republican who doesn't fully vet is a
'maverick.'

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer growing your
organization from a staff of 1 to 13 and your budget from $70,000
to $400,000, then become the first black President of the Harvard
Law Review,create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000
new African Amerian voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law
professor,then spend nearly 8 more years as a State Senator
representing a district with over 750,000 people, becoming chairman
of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, then
spend nearly 4 years in the United States Senate representing a
state of nearly 13 million people, sponsoring 131 bills and serving
on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's
Affairs committees, you are woefully inexperienced.

If you spend 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor
of a town with less than 7,000 people, then spend 20 months as
the governor of a state with 650,000 people, you've got the most
executive experience of anyone on either ticket, are the
Commander in Chief of the Alaska military and are well qualified
to lead the nation should you be called upon to do so because
your state is the closest state to Russia.

If you are a Democratic male candidate who is popular with
millions of people you are an 'arrogant celebrity'. If you are a
popular republican female candidate you are 'energizing the base'.

If you are a younger male candidate who thinks for himself
and makes his own decisions you are 'presumptuous'. if you
are an older male candidate who makes last minute decisions
you refuse to explain, you are a 'shoot from the hip' maverick.

If you are a candidate with a Harvard law degree you are
'an elitist 'out of touch' with the real America. if you are a
legacy (dad and granddad were admirals) graduate of Annapolis,
with multiple disciplinary infractions you are admired.

If you manage a multi-million dollar nationwide campaign, you
are an 'empty suit'.If you are a part time mayor of a town of
7000 people, you are an 'experienced executive'.

If you go to a south side Chicago church, your beliefs are 'extremist'.
If you believe in creationism and don't believe global warming is man
made, you are 'strongly principled'.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years with whom
you are raising 2 beautiful daughters you're 'risky'.
If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your
disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a
Christian.


If you're a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton, the right-wing press calls you
'First dog.'
If you're a 17-year old pregnant unwed daughter of a Republican, the
right-wing press calls you 'beautiful' and 'courageous.'

If you kill an endangered species, you're an excellent hunter.
If you have an abortion you're not a Christian, you're a murderer
( forget about if it happen while being date raped)

If you teach abstinence only in sex education, you get teen parents.
If you teach responsible age appropriate sex education, including the
proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

Just some things to ponder

:bruce3:

 

[RobInKuwait]

Just some things to ponder

So you're arguing Palin is getting a honeymoon from the press? You have got to be kidding me. They took their gloves off for her.

Some people act like Palin woke up one day and said.....Ok, heres the plan: my daughter will get 17 and before shes married, I'm going to have a kid has down syndrome, and I'm going to choose to be from Alaska....

Dude, shes a real person, born in a small town in Alaska. That's not political, its the way it is. Just like Barry was born in Hawaii and spent his childhood in Indonesia. No different.

With real people you have to take the good with the bad. If someone wants to spin it, its on them.

 

[Fastone]

Dude, shes a real person, born in a small town in Alaska. That's not political, its the way it is. Just like Barry was born in Hawaii and spent his childhood in Indonesia. No different.

With real people you have to take the good with the bad. If someone wants to spin it, its on them.

No one said she's not a real person, she's been built up over the last 2 weeks to be legend. Your last statement I wholly agree with,but that's what Obama has dealt with from day one, SP is a candidate come lately to divert the attention away from John McCain's shortcomings within his own party imo.

:bruce3:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I agree that Obama has it easier, however to me for anyone to assume that the Gibson interview was smear is ridiculous.

No, the Gibson interview was most definitely not a smear.

But the amount of stories picked up from left wing blogs and reported as news in the media is quite astonishing. Stories with absolutely no sources. When you have people in CNN admitting it, it has to be pretty bad.

But its expected.......the Palin pick pissed off a lot of people on the left.

 

[RobInKuwait]

No one said she's not a real person, she's been built up over the last 2 weeks to be legend. Your last statement I wholly agree with,but that's what Obama has dealt with from day one, SP is a candidate come lately to divert the attention away from John McCain's shortcomings within his own party imo.

:bruce3:

The problem started when Barry and Biden took the bait and diverted attention to her. Why are dems so bad at managing campaigns...not that I'm complaining

 

[AE14]

No, the Gibson interview was most definitely not a smear.

But the amount of stories picked up from left wing blogs and reported as news in the media is quite astonishing. Stories with absolutely no sources. When you have people in CNN admitting it, it has to be pretty bad.

But its expected.......the Palin pick pissed off a lot of people on the left.

I agree, my issue was with some here that think the Gibson interview was a smear, when it was not, and quite obviously so

 

[Fastone]

The problem started when Barry and Biden took the bait and diverted attention to her. Why are dems so bad at managing campaigns...not that I'm complaining

I'd have to agree with you in the case of 2004, however maybe you should complain as the McCain\Sarah ticket will be turning into a pumpkin shortly.

:bruce3:

 

[timmmah]

No, the Gibson interview was most definitely not a smear.

But the amount of stories picked up from left wing blogs and reported as news in the media is quite astonishing. Stories with absolutely no sources. When you have people in CNN admitting it, it has to be pretty bad.

But its expected.......the Palin pick pissed off a lot of people on the left.

Hey Seinfeld, Why are you in a workout forum posting comments about politics? Are you afraID that you wouldn't have any valid points on a forum like Political crossfire? :dance:? You're like the bully from sixth grade that's 16 years old. To quote the movie Waiting;Congratulations! You're the smartest kid with down syndrome!

 

[DAdams91982]

Hey Seinfeld, Why are you in a workout forum posting comments about politics? Are you afraID that you wouldn't have any valid points on a forum like Political crossfire? :dance:? You're like the bully from sixth grade that's 16 years old. To quote the movie Waiting;Congratulations! You're the smartest kid with down syndrome!

You are a credit to all of society... keep those quality posts coming there girl pants.

Adams

 

[strategicmove]

Recent examples of Palinese: language of the double standard


If you're a minority and you're selected for a job over more qualified
candidates you're a 'token hire.'

If you're a conservative and you're
selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a 'game changer.'

Black teen pregnancies? A 'crisis' in black America.
White teen pregnancies? A 'blessed event.'

If you grow up in Hawaii you're 'exotic.'
Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're the quintessential
'American story.'

Similarly, if you name you kid Barack you're 'unpatriotic.'
Name your kid Track or Trig, you're 'colorful.'

If you're a Democrat and you make a VP pick without fully vetting the
individual you're 'reckless.' A Republican who doesn't fully vet is a
'maverick.'

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer growing your
organization from a staff of 1 to 13 and your budget from $70,000
to $400,000, then become the first black President of the Harvard
Law Review,create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000
new African Amerian voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law
professor,then spend nearly 8 more years as a State Senator
representing a district with over 750,000 people, becoming chairman
of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, then
spend nearly 4 years in the United States Senate representing a
state of nearly 13 million people, sponsoring 131 bills and serving
on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's
Affairs committees, you are woefully inexperienced.

If you spend 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor
of a town with less than 7,000 people, then spend 20 months as
the governor of a state with 650,000 people, you've got the most
executive experience of anyone on either ticket, are the
Commander in Chief of the Alaska military and are well qualified
to lead the nation should you be called upon to do so because
your state is the closest state to Russia.

If you are a Democratic male candidate who is popular with
millions of people you are an 'arrogant celebrity'. If you are a
popular republican female candidate you are 'energizing the base'.

If you are a younger male candidate who thinks for himself
and makes his own decisions you are 'presumptuous'. if you
are an older male candidate who makes last minute decisions
you refuse to explain, you are a 'shoot from the hip' maverick.

If you are a candidate with a Harvard law degree you are
'an elitist 'out of touch' with the real America. if you are a
legacy (dad and granddad were admirals) graduate of Annapolis,
with multiple disciplinary infractions you are admired.

If you manage a multi-million dollar nationwide campaign, you
are an 'empty suit'.If you are a part time mayor of a town of
7000 people, you are an 'experienced executive'.

If you go to a south side Chicago church, your beliefs are 'extremist'.
If you believe in creationism and don't believe global warming is man
made, you are 'strongly principled'.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years with whom
you are raising 2 beautiful daughters you're 'risky'.
If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your
disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a
Christian.


If you're a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton, the right-wing press calls you
'First dog.'
If you're a 17-year old pregnant unwed daughter of a Republican, the
right-wing press calls you 'beautiful' and 'courageous.'

If you kill an endangered species, you're an excellent hunter.
If you have an abortion you're not a Christian, you're a murderer
( forget about if it happen while being date raped)

If you teach abstinence only in sex education, you get teen parents.
If you teach responsible age appropriate sex education, including the
proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

Just some things to ponder

:bruce3:

Excellent post, Sir! :thumbsup: Reps!

 

[aristo3369]

FOXNews.com - Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq - U.S. Senate

We invaded them because they had WMDs. We found a shatload of them. It wasn't built on a lie, you never bothered to check whether they were lying and you just assumed.


Have you heard anything about the war on your liberal news stations lately? Wonder why that is, they reported the hell out of it when the insurgency was going strong.

Have you spoke to anyone whose been over there in the past year? The Iraqi army is doing 80-90% of the fighting and the insurgency is virtually dead compared to a couple of years ago.

I know it disappoints your soft liberal ass, but we are winning the war in Iraq. These colors don't run beatch!

No harm taken

Hey dumb azz, before you send a fox news clip, make sure you read it first, or did you bother to read through your own clip first. Here is what you forgot to read.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war)."
Now who looks like the b......h!!!!!!!!!! RULE NUMBER #1 ALWAYS DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND READ FIRST BEFORE HITTING THE SEND BUTTON. Calm down and don't let your hands get ahead of your mind!

I know it disappoints your soft liberal ass, but we are winning the war in Iraq. These colors don't run beatch![/QUOTE]

What is your definiton of winning? I will give you two days to define winning....okay start

I don't need to... I'm living proof (War Veteran and U.S MARINE)

To prove my point..... ask George Bush did we find any weapons of WMD.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Hey Seinfeld, Why are you in a workout forum posting comments about politics? Are you afraID that you wouldn't have any valid points on a forum like Political crossfire? :dance:? You're like the bully from sixth grade that's 16 years old. To quote the movie Waiting;Congratulations! You're the smartest kid with down syndrome!

 

[RobInKuwait]

No harm taken

Hey dumb azz, before you send a fox news clip, make sure you read it first, or did you bother to read through your own clip first. Here is what you forgot to read.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war)."
Now who looks like the b......h!!!!!!!!!! RULE NUMBER #1 ALWAYS DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND READ FIRST BEFORE HITTING THE SEND BUTTON. Calm down and don't let your hands get ahead of your mind!

Oops....old absentminded Saddam must have forgot to dismantle the pre-1991 WMDs........not buying it.

"The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions."

What is your definiton of winning? I will give you two days to define winning....okay start

Winning is instilling a government that can provide security and basic services to the citizens of Iraq.

I don't need to... I'm living proof (War Veteran and U.S MARINE)

To prove my point..... ask George Bush did we find any weapons of WMD.

Thanks for your service.

However, I asked if you knew anyone over there who has gotten back recently. The reason I asked is because in 2005-2006, we were getting our ass kicked. Today, the Iraqi Army is doing the ass kicking in many parts of Iraq.

 

[AE14]

Oops....old absentminded Saddam must have forgot to dismantle the pre-1991 WMDs........not buying it.

"The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions."

Rob I do have to ask you, knowing now in 2008 what we do, do you think the above truly justifies the mess that has gone on for 5 years? Or can we acknowledge the error in judgement, and the error in connecting it to 9/11, which we know truthfully, there was no connection

 

[Fastone]

Oops....old absentminded Saddam must have forgot to dismantle the pre-1991 WMDs........not buying it.

"The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions."



Winning is instilling a government that can provide security and basic services to the citizens of Iraq.




Thanks for your service.

However, I asked if you knew anyone over there who has gotten back recently. The reason I asked is because in 2005-2006, we were getting our ass kicked. Today, the Iraqi Army is doing the ass kicking in many parts of Iraq.

As you have been in the middle east I value your service however in 2005-2006 or anytime for that matter, we shouldn't have been there. This war was supposed to be like Grenada, didn't work out that way. Somehow you wear out your welcome when you go to somebody else's house and try to tell them what to do in their own house.

Of what value are the Iraqi people to us actually that we had to drop what we were doing in Afghanistan. No one seems to want to answer that question. Also why was it so important to kill Saddam, couldn't he just stay in that ratty jail he was in like Noriega.

Boy those Scud missles that couldn't fly straight were sure scary WMD's (said in Elmer Fudd's voice)

:bruce3:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Boy those Scud missles that couldn't fly straight were sure scary WMD's (said in Elmer Fudd's voice)

:bruce3:

Ask people in Tel Aviv that question.

 

[DAdams91982]

Also why was it so important to kill Saddam, couldn't he just stay in that ratty jail he was in like Noriega.

I would like to point out that we are not the ones who executed Saddam. We gave Saddam to the Iraqi people, where he was tried by the courts of Iraq, and subsequently hung.

Adams

 

[RobInKuwait]

Rob I do have to ask you, knowing now in 2008 what we do, do you think the above truly justifies the mess that has gone on for 5 years? Or can we acknowledge the error in judgement, and the error in connecting it to 9/11, which we know truthfully, there was no connection

Well, I was very much against it when it kicked off. I think we were going to invade Iraq unless Saddam gave inspectors carte blanche access, which wasn't going to happen. Why do I think this? Because my unit in Germany shipped 1100 containers of ammunition while Hans Blix was trying to inspect stuff. You just don't send 1100 containers of ammunition to the desert unless you're looking for a fight.

I would most definitely agree that it was an error, though not in authority...I don't feel we overstepped our bounds. I feel the error was in that going in was in the best interest of the US. I would have never gone in just because I like Saddam in the Middle East scaring his neighbors too much.

However, after we went in there, the whole ball game changed. Leaving then became about admitting defeat and
showing weakness, something I don't think is in the US's best interest. It became about finding a logical conclusion and making it work. I think we're getting there and in a few more years, we will be there.

 

[AE14]

Well, I was very much against it when it kicked off. I think we were going to invade Iraq unless Saddam gave inspectors carte blanche access, which wasn't going to happen. Why do I think this? Because my unit in Germany shipped 1100 containers of ammunition while Hans Blix was trying to inspect stuff. You just don't send 1100 containers of ammunition to the desert unless you're looking for a fight.

I would most definitely agree that it was an error, though not in authority...I don't feel we overstepped our bounds. I feel the error was in that going in was in the best interest of the US. I would have never gone in just because I like Saddam in the Middle East scaring his neighbors too much.

However, after we went in there, the whole ball game changed. Leaving then became about admitting defeat and
showing weakness, something I don't think is in the US's best interest. It became about finding a logical conclusion and making it work. I think we're getting there and in a few more years, we will be there.

it is good to see a repub. acknowledge the error. It was most certainly an error, and it was precipitated on dishonesty. This administration used 9-11 to scare the American public into the invasion of Iraq, and they are 2 completely unrrelated events.

Sadly, several thousands have died, and billions have been spent, which makes this current administrations one of the worst in the last century. That will most certainly hurt McCain come November, especially as the economy begins to flounder.

 

[Fastone]

I would like to point out that we are not the ones who executed Saddam. We gave Saddam to the Iraqi people, where he was tried by the courts of Iraq, and subsequently hung.

Adams

Come on now, we killed that MF. That he might of deserved it, there's no question but we had too much to do with it imo.

:bruce3:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

it is good to see a repub. acknowledge the error. It was most certainly an error, and it was precipitated on dishonesty. This administration used 9-11 to scare the American public into the invasion of Iraq, and they are 2 completely unrrelated events.

Sadly, several thousands have died, and billions have been spent, which makes this current administrations one of the worst in the last century. That will most certainly hurt McCain come November, especially as the economy begins to flounder.

And Democrats use the thousands that have died to get elected in 2006 and have done nothing.....thank God.

I guess the Bush administration did such a good job that they scared the Democratic party into it as well...oh wait, they we're saying Saddam needed to be taken out before 9/11.

 

[RobInKuwait]

Sadly, several thousands have died, and billions have been spent, which makes this current administrations one of the worst in the last century.

If thats your criteria for evaluating presidents, Bush pales in comparison to FDR, Woodrow Wilson, and LBJ, all of whom were liberal democrats.

That will most certainly hurt McCain come November, especially as the economy begins to flounder.

My brother works for a large mutual fund company and the company has developed two course of action. One for McCain, which is basically a bull market strategy, and one for Obama which is a bear market strategy. They're expecting a sharp, immediate decline if Obama gets elected. His capital gains taxes and taxes on rich are scaring the entire market.

 

[RobInKuwait]

it is good to see a repub. acknowledge the error. It was most certainly an error, and it was precipitated on dishonesty.

Careful, you're putting words in mouth. I said it was an error in strategic terms, I didn't say it was dishonest or that we acted beyond our authority.

Give people an inch.....

 

[aristo3369]

it is good to see a repub. acknowledge the error. It was most certainly an error, and it was precipitated on dishonesty. This administration used 9-11 to scare the American public into the invasion of Iraq, and they are 2 completely unrrelated events.

Sadly, several thousands have died, and billions have been spent, which makes this current administrations one of the worst in the last century. That will most certainly hurt McCain come November, especially as the economy begins to flounder.

Well said!!! This notion that Saddam Hussein had WMD was George Bush's excuse to get us in this war.

Here's the fact: George Bush went into Iraq for one reason and one reason only..... and that was to capture Saddam Hussein, not because it was for the best interest of our country, but it was more of a personal vendetta in retaliation for Sadaam Hussein making the president's father (George Bush Sr) look like an incompetent president during his presidency. This was a promise George Bush made to his father once he was elected president. With that being said, you can see why George Bush was going to invade Iraq regardless of the fact that Iraq did not have any WMD. This is why the Bush administration falsifided the evidence in the first place, and also one of the reason's Colin Powell left the administration (George Bush lied to him also).

When the president was standing under that sign on the carrier saying "saying mission accomplish", in his mind the mission was accomplished for him, not the country.

Let's be real...... it took a brutal dictator such as Saddam Hussein to govern a country such as Iraq.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

:lol:

 

[strategicmove]

I...They're expecting a sharp, immediate decline if Obama gets elected....

Market decline is not always a bad thing. May reflect some correction in the fundamental value of stocks and provides opportunity for consolidation.

 

[AE14]

And Democrats use the thousands that have died to get elected in 2006 and have done nothing.....thank God.

I guess the Bush administration did such a good job that they scared the Democratic party into it as well...oh wait, they we're saying Saddam needed to be taken out before 9/11.

I do not disagree, however you know as well as I do that the general American public looks at their presidents based on the events during their tenure. The Bush administration is suffering as a result

 

[AE14]

Careful, you're putting words in mouth. I said it was an error in strategic terms, I didn't say it was dishonest or that we acted beyond our authority.

Give people an inch.....

was not trying to take your words out of context. In essence though we agree it was an error

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I do not disagree, however you know as well as I do that the general American public looks at their presidents based on the events during their tenure. The Bush administration is suffering as a result

I agree but as you know, history tends to judge a bit better decades later as the consequences and total picture are more clear.

 

[Fastone]

I agree but as you know, history tends to judge a bit better decades later as the consequences and total picture are more clear.

The general perception that Richard Nixon was a crook who got pardoned and to be fair that Jimmy Carter was a wuss haven't changed with time.

:bruce3: