SkyDekker 1,153 #51 October 2, 2008 You are right, best to vote Republican for President. It has worked so well the last 8 years. I can't believe that people can be so fixated on that one letter behind a politicians name. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 643 #52 October 2, 2008 some don't some even change parties when election time comes around for that reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piper17 1 #53 October 2, 2008 False information??? Do you mean the "intelligence" reports of WMDs by Clinton holdover George Tennant, head of the CIA, who claimed it was a "slam-dunk"??? Do you mean when John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, etc all claimed there were WMDs when Bill was president??? The intelligence sucked...all western intelligence agencies were claiming the same crap. Because a president believes what the head of his key intelligence agency is telling him does not mean he lied. George Tennant should have been fired (although execution might have been deserved as well) immediately after 9/11 for that intelligence failure and NOT given a damn medal!"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,153 #54 October 2, 2008 QuoteThe intelligence sucked...all western intelligence agencies were claiming the same crap. Because a president believes what the head of his key intelligence agency is telling him does not mean he lied. What if the head of that Agency was told to only bring intelligence that supported an invasion of Iraq? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #55 October 2, 2008 QuoteDo you mean when John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, etc all claimed there were WMDs when Bill was president??? Show me where the recommendations from those people were to preemptively INVADE a country we were not at war with and you might have a point. We know plenty of countries that have WMDs. To my knowledge this is the first time we've ever used that as an excuse to invade and take over a country that actually posed no threat to us. The reason those people you mentioned didn't "act" on it, was because Iraq was contained and posed no immediate threat.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 177 #56 October 2, 2008 I just want to know how much the PNAC pals will profit from the war. Draft dodging "Chicken Hawks" making money off of our children's blood and futures... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #57 October 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteDo you mean when John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, etc all claimed there were WMDs when Bill was president??? Show me where the recommendations from those people were to preemptively INVADE a country we were not at war with and you might have a point. We know plenty of countries that have WMDs. To my knowledge this is the first time we've ever used that as an excuse to invade and take over a country that actually posed no threat to us. The reason those people you mentioned didn't "act" on it, was because Iraq was contained and posed no immediate threat. Ok, so Desert Fox *wasn't* needed and was an illegal act of war by President Clinton, then - gotcha. "What if Saddam Hussein fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction." The president's warnings are firm. "If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." The stakes, he says, could not be higher. "Some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal." -Bill Clinton, Feb 1998Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 October 3, 2008 QuoteI just want to know how much the PNAC pals will profit from the war. Draft dodging "Chicken Hawks" making money off of our children's blood and futures... Show the proof. Then show all those valiant Democrat parents signing their children up for the draft for Afghanistan... oh, wait - it's a VOLUNTEER military - nevermind.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piper17 1 #59 October 3, 2008 and all other Western intelligence agencies were told to do the same thing...even during the Clinton administration? Get real. The intelligence sucked in this country and the rest of world....unless you think it was a world-wide conspiracy. The real question is has anything changed in the intelligence communities? Do we really know what Iran and North Korea are up to nuclear-wise? Are they any better at discovering the next 9/11 than they were in 2001? If you consider London, Madrid, Bali, etc., I have concerns. Of course, there hasn't been anything major in the western world recently so ???"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piper17 1 #60 October 3, 2008 Wouldn't you consider shooting cruise missiles into Iraq an act of war? That was Clinton's solution."A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,279 #61 October 3, 2008 Quoteand all other Western intelligence agencies were told to do the same thing...even during the Clinton administration? Get real. The intelligence sucked in this country and the rest of world.... There was definitely some serious political pressure put on the UK's intelligence services in the run up to the 2003 invasion. At least, that's the only way I can explain the breathtakingly poor standard of some of the intel they were producing.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuteless 1 #62 October 4, 2008 THE USA is the most screwed up country in the world, and the people just sit back and take whatever the administration throws at them. I suppose its timeto start another war with a small country... allow the world to see the big bully needs to sell more munitions to kill others, so they can buy their American "dream" with all their greed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuFantasma 0 #63 October 5, 2008 The problem with the number is the lack of trailing zeros. I find it offensive when the government refers to the national debt as 11.3 Trillion dollars... that .3 is 300,000,000,000 dollars ! (3 billion)... The fact that we accept that short-hand notation is indicative of how well they manipulate us.Y yo, pa' vivir con miedo, prefiero morir sonriendo, con el recuerdo vivo". - Ruben Blades, "Adan Garcia" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #64 October 5, 2008 QuoteThe problem with the number is the lack of trailing zeros. I find it offensive when the government refers to the national debt as 11.3 Trillion dollars... that .3 is 300,000,000,000 dollars ! (3 billion)... The fact that we accept that short-hand notation is indicative of how well they manipulate us. Numbers, letter and words are simply a means for getting an idea from one person to another. Don't confuse the symbol with the thing it symbolizes. Just because the zeros make the number look physically larger, it's still the same number. It's not a number that a human mind can think of in terms of scale no matter how you look at it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
