Clinton Anger Unleashed

mmarsh said:
What on earth are you talking about?

You asked Bones to prove the fact that Iraq was not behind 9-11 nor never a planned to attack us, Remember? If not See Below...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Bones
GW Bush had NONE of those fallbacks ... he ordered an invasion of a country that had NOT attacked us and had no plans of doing so.

Prove it.

To wit, I pointed out the this (from the 9/11 commision). I never once talked about causuality figures...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

Did you forget what you wrote? or are you deliberatly trying to change the subject?
Click to expand...

No change of subject, I was simply proving that GW is not solely to blame...He is not the only one responsible for the deaths in Iraq... Furthemore no president is solely responsible, that is not how the Government of the USA works, that would be case in point for a dictatorship.

For further proof, have a look at this:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_senate_hearings&docid=f:81697.wais
 
Last edited:
Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong .........

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

As the CinC, GW Bush ordered troops to invade a country that never attacked us and that had NO PLANS TO DO SO ... (proven time after time by various investigative committees).

Congress made their decision based upon justification presented by GW and his administration. Whichever side of the argument you come down on ... the SOLE reason most of the congress voted to allow the invasion, was because of the justification which was presented to them at that time.

Since there was NO DECLARATION OF WAR ... and we hadn't been attacked, every bit of the responsibility for those deaths we were discussing rest squarely upon the shoulders of the person who went to congress seeking 'absolution' and permission (GW Bush, President of the United States and CinC of all US Forces).

So as I said ... you are:

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG
 
Clinton had chance to get UBL but was a lame duck his last two years his got what he deserved from FNC and Chris Wallance is just like his old man.
 
Chief Bones said:
WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

As the CinC, GW Bush ordered troops to invade a country that never attacked us and that had NO PLANS TO DO SO ... (proven time after time by various investigative committees).

Congress made their decision based upon justification presented by GW and his administration. Whichever side of the argument you come down on ... the SOLE reason most of the congress voted to allow the invasion, was because of the justification which was presented to them at that time.

Since there was NO DECLARATION OF WAR ... and we hadn't been attacked, every bit of the responsibility for those deaths we were discussing rest squarely upon the shoulders of the person who went to congress seeking 'absolution' and permission (GW Bush, President of the United States and CinC of all US Forces).

So as I said ... you are:

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG
Click to expand...

So you are syaing we have a Dictator and our branches of the govermenet (the checks and balances) Do not work????????

Therefore I say you are

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG
 
Last edited:
Donkey said:
So you are syaing we have a Dictator and our branches of the govermenet (the checks and balances) Do not work????????

Therefore I say you are

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG
Click to expand...

You miss the point.


GW lied lied lied lied lied ... and ... then went to congress and told the same lies to congress (who bought them) and sought absolution (asked for their backing) and congress gave it.


As far as the 'checks and balances', it ONLY works when 'truth' is used as a yardstick between the branches ... when there is untruth, it breaks down.

We are NOT supposed to bash GW ... but I know no other way to put this.

GW BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS A CROOK, A CHEAT AND A LIAR. (IT'S MY OPINION, I GRANT YOU - SORRY)
 
No I dont miss the point...

I get what you are saying, however the years of dicussion and documentation on the US and it stance on Iraq. The amount of information other countries had on Iraq and even how Saddam himself believed he had things he didnt.

I watched a documentry on Saddam and his sons and he would kill his scientists and engineers if they told him they where unsuccefull in anything. So a lot of the time they lied to him, thus feeding is fairytale of possible domination.

I'm saying you can't blame one person and that is what is going on right now they are all trying to blame one person and argue about how to do it. Instead the government as a whole should take the blame, move on, and figure out how to solve the problems at hand. They should not waste their time by saying it is this parties fault and that parties fault and it is the President to blame. Because quiet frankly it doesnt matter and that will not bring any sort of peace or stop the deaths of our soldiers.
 
Gentlemen, do I really have to remind you of this rule?
5. Almost all opinions are welcome, as long as they are well presented and in a respectful manner.

Thanks for understanding.

Carry on...
 
Donkey said:
No I dont miss the point...

I get what you are saying, however the years of dicussion and documentation on the US and it stance on Iraq. The amount of information other countries had on Iraq and even how Saddam himself believed he had things he didnt.

I watched a documentry on Saddam and his sons and he would kill his scientists and engineers if they told him they where unsuccefull in anything. So a lot of the time they lied to him, thus feeding is fairytale of possible domination.

I'm saying you can't blame one person and that is what is going on right now they are all trying to blame one person and argue about how to do it. Instead the government as a whole should take the blame, move on, and figure out how to solve the problems at hand. They should not waste their time by saying it is this parties fault and that parties fault and it is the President to blame. Because quiet frankly it doesnt matter and that will not bring any sort of peace or stop the deaths of our soldiers.
Click to expand...

I stated simply, that the "responsibility" for deaths of military members and Iraqis, belongs to the President of the United States - I am NOT quite sure just what you were trying to say with your statement. The President is ALWAYS 'accountable' for decisions HE makes on his watch ... this makes him "responsible", whether Congress backs him up (or) not.
 
Chief Bones said:
I stated simply, that the "responsibility" for deaths of military members and Iraqis, belongs to the President of the United States - I am NOT quite sure just what you were trying to say with your statement. The President is ALWAYS 'accountable' for decisions HE makes on his watch ... this makes him "responsible", whether Congress backs him up (or) not.
Click to expand...

Yes...

What I am trying to say is that it is congresses responibility to make sure that he is doing what is best for this country...Hence the checks and balances...

I would say that GW's biggest mistake was not getting a Declaration of War...

Just saw these....

http://cagle.com/news/ClintonOsama/

Kind of funny kind of not funny....None the less I post them since they are on topic with the topic or something ;)

This one sums it all up.....
http://cagle.com/news/ClintonOsama/images/kelley3.gif

(note to mod, Sorry I didnt notice btw vBulliten has a plugin to automatically merge double posts)
 
Last edited:
When I was a young warrior, I had to hold my rage and I mean rage in as we watched in horror when two of our troops were drug through the streets of somalia and we suffered the humiliation of watching the Army go through black hawk down and the President( bill clinton) gave the order to stand down and do absolutly nothing, I lost all respect for him from that point on. Some may forget, but I never will.
 
GunnyD said:
When I was a young warrior, I had to hold my rage and I mean rage in as we watched in horror when two of our troops were drug through the streets of somalia and we suffered the humiliation of watching the Army go through black hawk down and the President( bill clinton) gave the order to stand down and do absolutly nothing, I lost all respect for him from that point on. Some may forget, but I never will.
Click to expand...

Your anger and disdain for WC is understandable ... what is NOT reasonable, is ALL OF THE BLAME for someone else's inactivity (GW), being placed on WC's shoulders. GW has had 6 years to deal with various trouble spots around the world and ALL he has done, has been to sit on his arse in the Oval Office.

This is NOT the thread to discuss GW's lack of action on the various trouble spots. Suffice it to say, Clinton is NOT the LONE OGRE, as to where we are now politically or diplomatically ... GW created MOST of the political and diplomatic problems now facing the United States.
 
Chief Bones said:
Your anger and disdain for WC is understandable ... what is NOT reasonable, is ALL OF THE BLAME for someone else's inactivity (GW), being placed on WC's shoulders. GW has had 6 years to deal with various trouble spots around the world and ALL he has done, has been to sit on his arse in the Oval Office.
Click to expand...

Chief, you complain about President Bush getting involved in the war on terror and overthrowing two heinous regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and then you turn around and complain because he won't get involved in the rest of the World's problem areas. I can't figure out which will satisfy you,
get out of the war or go to war with half the countries on earth. At least, if what you say is true about him sitting around the Oval Office, that is a far cry from what went on in it during the last administration.
 
Missileer said:
Chief, you complain about President Bush getting involved in the war on terror and overthrowing two heinous regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and then you turn around and complain because he won't get involved in the rest of the World's problem areas. I can't figure out which will satisfy you,
get out of the war or go to war with half the countries on earth. At least, if what you say is true about him sitting around the Oval Office, that is a far cry from what went on in it during the last administration.
Click to expand...

What I was complaining about was something that HE SHOULD HAVE BECOME INVOLVED IN. He made his great pronouncement about North Korea when he listed them as part of the 'Axis of Evil', then REFUSED to hold one-on-one meetings to discuss North Korea's nuclear weapons program.

It seems to me that in order to reach ANY KIND OF AGREEMENT, it just might be nice if you actually "TALKED" to the other party.

Notice I made NO comments about either of the two wars ... that has NO bearing on this issue as far as I am concerned.

In an area where he SHOULD have become involved he sat on his arse and NOW we have to deal with a North Korea the DOES HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, instead of a country that was in the process of TRYING to develop them.

A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE and a direct result of NOT pursuing some kind of agreement.

NOW IT'S TOO LITTLE TOO LATE.
 
Chief Bones said:
What I was complaining about was something that HE SHOULD HAVE BECOME INVOLVED IN. He made his great pronouncement about North Korea when he listed them as part of the 'Axis of Evil', then REFUSED to hold one-on-one meetings to discuss North Korea's nuclear weapons program.

It seems to me that in order to reach ANY KIND OF AGREEMENT, it just might be nice if you actually "TALKED" to the other party.

Notice I made NO comments about either of the two wars ... that has NO bearing on this issue as far as I am concerned.

In an area where he SHOULD have become involved he sat on his arse and NOW we have to deal with a North Korea the DOES HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, instead of a country that was in the process of TRYING to develop them.

A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE and a direct result of NOT pursuing some kind of agreement.

NOW IT'S TOO LITTLE TOO LATE.
Click to expand...

You do realize North Korea received the help they needed to produce nuclear energy from the Clinton administration via Madelyn Albright don't you? There would be no weapons to worry about without that boost.

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/94-470f.htm
 
Last edited:
Yeah let's talk about the Clinton administration and it's selling of weapons technology to countries like North Korea and China....

Bravo, bravo Billy

But hell he is out of office now so let's bash the current administration...
 
Missileer (in quote)

"You do realize North Korea received the help they needed to produce nuclear energy from the Clinton administration via Madelyn Albright don't you? There would be no weapons to worry about without that boost".

Nuclear Energy yes, but never Nuclear Weapons.

In fact, The Clinton administration agreed to build 2 Light Water reactors for North Korea in exchange for North Korea giving up its Plutonum Enrichment process. It is very difficult, to reprocess plutonium or uranium into weapons grade materiel in a light water facility. If you want to have a viable weapons program you need a Heavy Water reactor order to do it.

I find an interesting article for those wanting to lay yet another GOP screwup on Clintons feet.

http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=258410&
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
Missileer (in quote)

"You do realize North Korea received the help they needed to produce nuclear energy from the Clinton administration via Madelyn Albright don't you? There would be no weapons to worry about without that boost".

Nuclear Energy yes, but never Nuclear Weapons.

In fact, The Clinton administration agreed to build 2 Light Water reactors for North Korea in exchange for North Korea giving up its Plutonum Enrichment process. It is very difficult, to reprocess plutonium or uranium into weapons grade materiel in a light water facility. If you want to have a viable weapons program you need a Heavy Water reactor order to do it.

I find an interesting article for those wanting to lay yet another GOP screwup on Clintons feet.

http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=258410&
Click to expand...

Yeah and that is from a very creditable non-biased source....

You can make a weapon out of any grade.... granted weapons grade gets the job done better but none the less a similar result can be obtained with reactor grade...

http://www.fas.org/RLG/980826-pu.htm

So in turn yes one could say Clinton did give NK nuclear capabilities...
 
Last edited:
Donkey said:
Yeah and that is from a very creditable non-biased source....

You can make a weapon out of any grade.... granted weapons grade gets the job done better but none the less a similar result can be obtained with reactor grade...

http://www.fas.org/RLG/980826-pu.htm

So in turn yes Clinton did give NK nuclear capabilities...
Click to expand...

Oh you can be sure IT IS true, otherwise the Dems would not have put on their website. But feel free to fact check it if you wish. Just because it because its their source doesnt automatically make it wrong.

You are grasping at straws on the last point. You can make a dirty bomb out of spent nuclear waste if you wish. Thats a WMD too. But to make a nuclear warhead that can be fitted on a ICBM you need the processing ability that will provide both quality AND quantity. I dont know of ANY country that uses light water for reprocessing weapons grade. It produces a low-grade fissile material and it would take years (as opposed to months) to do it.

The reason North korea wanted the light water reactors is because most of the country is without electricity. Light water is much more efficient, cleaner and safer for producing power. Thats not to say they dont ALSO want the bomb but they are not going to do it with a light water Reactor.
 
Last edited:
How about we take a look at some REAL FACTS instead of partisan statements. During the time of Clinton's presidency, after the nuclear agreement with North Korea was signed, North Korea put a temporary halt to any research and development of weapons and allowed inspection teams to inspect ALL of their nuclear facilities.

ALONG COMES GW ... he loudly proclaims before the world that he has added North Korea to his "Axis of Evil" list, and what does North Korea do? After ceasing their nuclear weapon research and development and allowing inspector in, they then turn around and basically say "If the United States is going to take that line with North Korea, then it must mean that they are no longer going to live up to their agreement" ... and they kicked the inspectors out of their country, and went back to their quest for nuclear weapons.

So who is the real ogre here? Clinton who managed to delay North Korea's nuclear weapon program (or) GW who managed to 'cancel' the agreement between the United States and North Korea, by his STUPID and NOT WELL THOUGHT OUT foreign policy. He is guilty of screwing the pooch on this one in my estimation.

NOW in October of 2006, we are now faced with a North Korea that has announced they have tested a prototype nuclear weapon.

I LEAVE IT TO YOU TO FIGURE OUT THIS ONE FOR YOURSELVES.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top