Gravitymaster

Why aren't the whiners pissed about the cost of Hillary Clintons trip to Afghanistan? I would venture to say our troops are happier about GWB coming to see them than they are about Hillary's photo-op.

There you go again.... posting stuff that turns out to be bogus

I don't think there's much doubt he had them. The question is what he did with them. Not sure Bush knew we didn't know where they are. Seems many Politicians from both parties believed as Bush did. There's also some fair criticism about the Clinton Admin. policies effects on the CIA's Intel gathering capabilities. i belive they relied too much on technology and not enough emphasis on informers due to a policy that informers with criminal backgrounds couldn't be used. I mean WTF was that about? Agreed, at least at this time. I still believe there's more to this story. Too many things don't add up. The jury's still out on this one. If you are right, Bush wasn't the only one who thought this and if true, It goes more to an intelligence failure within that community. Question is whether Bush was given faulty intel and if so why? > Clinton would have had the same reaction because not only >because it was the right response, but because the American People > were demanding it. It is a president's job to do the right thing, not what the people are demanding. That's why we have a republic instead of a pure democracy. Mob rule is particularly bad during times of national crisis. Really? I'm suprised. Gore would have been in Iraq _before_ 9/11. He was, by far, the biggest hawk in the Clinton administration. And if you really believe that there was a Saddam/Bin Laden link, it might just have prevented 9/11 to begin with.*** I'm surprised to hear you say this. Gore always impressed me as indecisive and too much of a Politician. What makes you believe he would have attacked Iraq as soon as he was in office?

Not trying to change the debate. I'm only pointing out that Clinton believed the same thing as Bush regarding SH and WMDs because he had the same intel. Clinton would have had the same reaction because not only because it was the right response, but because the American People were demanding it. I'm glad we didn't have to find out how Gore would have reacted.

Then there would have been a war. I am glad he took the option that allowed for peace. It was a risk; it paid off. What faulty info are you reffering to?

I think you mean "is dwarfed by". Doesn't change my statement. A US Frigate made a visit to Ho Chi Minh City today. Last time US military were there it was called "Saigon". Hopefully, the first step towards normalized relations.

What if he had been wrong? Suppose the USSR had called his bluff? He'd have looked pretty stupid. His choice then would have been either war or to turn tail and back down. I wouldn't call putting yourself into a situation like this as particularly admirable, just lucky the USSR backed down.

Not if you stay on topic.

Quote>I beg to differ .... Invading Cuba was not an option. It was an option he considered and discarded. >Remember the Bay of pigs... Failed. Miserably. Is it your position that if something fails of course it's not tried again? The germans failed miserably in the Great War. Didn't stop them from trying again. The russian invasion of Afghanistan failed miserably - but we invaded Afghanistan anyway. The North Koreans fought us to a standstill in our last war with them - but people here now talk about invading them again. You can't compare then and now. PRNK's Military and economic strength dwarfs that of the U.S today. My guess is they wouldn't be able to sustain a very long war. I don't advocate invading PRNK but I don't think you can fairly compare the situation today to what it was 50 years ago.

What do you think the President and Co-President Clintons response would have been if 9-11 had happened during the Clinton Administaration?

And apparently you missed my point. Clue: read the topic of the thread again.

OH, aren't you lefties always yapping about how Bush lied about WMD and the reasons for going to war? I thought that was the Outrage of the Century. From Hillarys' speech it appears she thought there was a link between SH and OBL. But hey, what could she know? She was only the Co-President and apparently, the smartest woman in the world.

Apparently not if you read some of the responses in this thread. Who is "you guys"? Can you quote where "you guys" said this? So were most of SH's henchmen immediately after the war. Most of them have been arrested. SH and OBL will be found eventually. As will everyone who isn't a Muslim Extremist. t

I believe the Bush administration lies (that's been proven already) AND is incompetent. Take your choice as to which explanation works for you. *** Then how do you explain this? Note ALL these quotes were BEFORE Bush became President. Was he able to manipulate Intel even before that? "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. Here's one of my all-time favorites: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

*** *** Wrong............ Rush isn't fat.

[ Hey, Professor, I'm curious. Why not elaborate on why you consider it "garbage", and let your position speak for itself instead of whaling on the poster? I'm interested in why you think it garbage. Ciels- Michele " United States Department of Defense News Releases On the web: http://www.dod.mil/releases/2003/nr20031115-0642.html Media contact: +1 (703) 697-5131 Public contact: http://www.dod.mil/faq/comment.html or +1 (703) 428-0711 No. 851-03 IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 15, 2003 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DoD Statement on News Reports of al-Qaida and Iraq Connections News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate." Whom do you believe, Michele? I find it laughable that someone like you, Kallend, who is always contending the Bush Administration is lying, would be so quick to believe this denial. It is probably just a cover story Bush ordered the CIA to put out there after the story was leaked. Maybe or maybe not. Lets not be so quick to believe the Government.

No Mikey I'm not admitting to posting this without checking it's credibility. I never said it had any credibility. I simply posted a news item I found interesting and thought others might find it interesting too. Had I checked out the article and found it to be credible, I might have said something like this: "Hey all you left wing wackos, here's an article which proves what a bunch of nut jobs you are. I want all of you in line while I start serving the Crow. Ummmm. If you can't be bothered to respond to posts like this, then why are you responding? Then you must walk around being an extremely annoyed guy all the time, Mikey.

*** Yeah, well the weather isn't good throught out the country and the LLC doesn't seem to have a problem with an emmissary most of the time.

Hey Kallend First of all I posted it with a question mark. This clearly indicates to all except someone looking for a reason to bitch, that I was simply posting an interesting article I found. Second of all, I neither commented on it's accuracy or gave any kind of opinion about it. So, since you are the only one who seems to have gotten their little panties in a wad about it. F*ck off.

Heh, heh. I just post'em.

Gee.............. 5 hours since I posted this article and not a single response from the LLC. What do you suppose the reason could be? Maybe they are checking to see what Al Franken has to say first.

I would add: "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should".

Just a little red meat for our Little Lefty Club (LLC) http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

*** Yeah, lets forget about implementing ANY safety procedures because of something that happened one time and could happen again. We can then assure it won't happen by scrapping the TSA. Their nothing but a bunch of Nazis who want to take away our freedom anyway. Good thinking , Bill.

Typical oversimplification Bill. You take what one person may have said back then and then contrast it to what someone else might have said now. I even started to research it just to prove you wrong but decided it wasn't worth the effort as I think anybody can see thru the shallowness of this post.