Mysteryman wrote:
Questions for Parados
How many American died during the Clinton years to terrorist attacks?
The first WTC attacks,the embassy bombings,the Khobar towers, the USS Cole,the Achille Lauro,etc.
Now,how many Americans,not counting the troops in combat,have died to terrorist attacks since Bush took office,and how many terrorist attacks have there been on US soil,its territories or possessions?
end of quote
Mysteryman, Parados won't answer you. He can't because he cannot find the answers to your questions. He is quite IGNORANT!
But, let us proceed with your excellent line of reasoning!
Parados and the left wing do not know that Clinton screwed up the fight on Terror over and over and over. He did NOTHING to stop North Korea-
quote
"In exchange for a temporary freeze on its nuclear program and a mere promise to refrain from developing such weapons in the future, the Clinton Administration EXTENDED NEARLY ONE BILLION IN FOREIGN AID FOR FOOD AND FULE IOL, AS WELL AS PROMISING TO BUILD TWO LIGHT WATER REACTORS FOR THE NORTH KOREANS IN 1995....In 1998, they( North Korea) tested a new three-stage ballistic missle."
"Did the Clinton administration learn that appeasment does not work? Not quite...Secretary of State Madeline Albright held a press conference to announce that the United States was continuing to pursue good relations with North Korea, stating:
"We must deal with the North Korean government as it is, not as we wish it would be"
end of quote
source
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/Ldotvets/Bubba_99_35.html
I hope that Albright doesn't live on the West Coast where those Korean missles can reach her, Mysteryman!!
Clinton was a complete failure as a president and his adolescent activities in the Oval Office proved that he had NO emotional intelligence!
Mr. Hinteler- I do hope that you realize that we were talking about Clinton and NOT Russian Terrorists many years ago or Fenians. Now, if you wanted to reference the Palestinian Islamo-fascist morons who were caught trying to blow up German trains, that might be pertinent. But Old time Russians and Fenians don't make it-
SO-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parados and the left wing do not know that Clinton screwed up the fight on Terror over and over and over. He did NOTHING to stop North Korea-
quote
"In exchange for a temporary freeze on its nuclear program and a mere promise to refrain from developing such weapons in the future, the Clinton Administration EXTENDED NEARLY ONE BILLION IN FOREIGN AID FOR FOOD AND FULE IOL, AS WELL AS PROMISING TO BUILD TWO LIGHT WATER REACTORS FOR THE NORTH KOREANS IN 1995....In 1998, they( North Korea) tested a new three-stage ballistic missle."
"Did the Clinton administration learn that appeasment does not work? Not quite...Secretary of State Madeline Albright held a press conference to announce that the United States was continuing to pursue good relations with North Korea, stating:
"We must deal with the North Korean government as it is, not as we wish it would be"
end of quote
source
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/Ldotvets/Bubba_99_35.html
I hope that Albright doesn't live on the West Coast where those Korean missles can reach her, Mysteryman!!
Clinton was a complete failure as a president and his adolescent activities in the Oval Office proved that he had NO emotional intelligence!
revel wrote:Ticomaya wrote:Intrepid wrote:What if he did think that? He didn't go to war!!!!
True. He did very little to deal with the growing problem of global terrorism.
Iraq is not part of the fighting terrorism however much you folks like to make it so. But invading it for nothing has turned Iraq into a violence ridden country. Way to go Bush and keep up the good work.
Fresh bombs shake Iraqi capital
Iraq was invaded because the prospect of a Saddam Hussein with WMD was unacceptable, and many years of attempts to verify the promised disarmament had produced no clear result.
Historically, most wars have been started merely because one side thought it could gain something, as in Iraq's invasions of Kuwait and Iran.
Quote:Historically, most wars have been started merely because one side thought it could gain something, as in Iraq's invasions of Kuwait and Iran.
Blinking lights! Clue! Clue! Clue!
Bernard wrote:Parados and the left wing do not know that Clinton screwed up the fight on Terror over and over and over. He did NOTHING to stop North Korea-
And George Bush is doing a wonderful job fighting terrorist. Why look at Iraq. It is now a peaceful lawbiding country in which all those nasty Al Qaeda types were run out thanks to our 21th century equivalent of FDR. They love Israel and condemn any terrorist organization that will attack her. They love America and are inviting Christian missionaries into their country to bring a more peace-loving religion into their country.
And Afghanistan is enjoying peace and posterity. I heard the farmers are doing great there and this year they had a bumper crop.
And North Korea? She is shaking in her boots fearful of our mighty president. She has given up all ideas of keeping her nuclear weapons and is embracing America as a friend and ally.
The following was a conservative wet dream.
Talking of Suri Cruise (thanks Xing, had no idea who or what that was) and the axis of evil, did you know Ahmedinejad refers to the "triangle of evil" for US UK and Israel? I thought he could do a bit better than that, how about the "triangle of tribulation"...cant think of anything else just now.
Axis of evil really is quite good. It makes one think of... well, evil- Hitler, he was evil, The Axis...thats our enemy in WW2. Quite appropriate for our enemy of WW3...who's in the club btw right now? Still Iraq Iran and North Korea. Or was it France? Iraq no longer a member. It must be the the Pole of Poison now. Or maybe its just time to hit Iran.
Anyone who saw the picture of the 15 year old girl hanging from a mobile crane jib in a market square in Iran might well think that there is something to be said for your idea Steve.
spendius wrote:Anyone who saw the picture of the 15 year old girl hanging from a mobile crane jib in a market square in Iran might well think that there is something to be said for your idea Steve.
Well I absolutely despise and loathe theocracy and capital punishment in equal measure. But its for the Iranians to get rid of the mad mullahs not George W Bush.
Steve 41oo wrote:spendius wrote:Anyone who saw the picture of the 15 year old girl hanging from a mobile crane jib in a market square in Iran might well think that there is something to be said for your idea Steve.
Well I absolutely despise and loathe theocracy and capital punishment in equal measure. But its for the Iranians to get rid of the mad mullahs not George W Bush.
The problem with George Bush is he made those mad mullahs stronger by his invasion of Iraq. Our idiot for a president has not only played into the hands of Al Qaeda by allowing Osama bin Laden to remain alive but into Iran's hands as well by eliminating the one strong force that countered Iran, Saddam Hussein.
Now the Shiite government in Iraq is closer to Iran than America and Osama bin Laden is safe along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border being protected by the tribal people that live there.
Quote:
Historians Will Morally Impeach George W. Bush For Exploiting, Not Honoring, 9-11
Brent Budowsky
...
And never before in our history has any leader of our Nation exploited such an event with such smallness, such partisanship, such disunity, such contempt and such vindictiveness.
Never before in our history, has any leader of this country exploited a crisis by deliberately creating anger and hatred of some Americans against other Americans.
Never before in our history, has any leader of our country surrendered in the challenge of inspiring our people to bravery and valor, and tried to make our people act like a timid and fearful nation.
Never before in our history, never, has any President of the United States so aggressively surrendered his moral authority as leader of free world to create such worldwide anger, antipathy and fear directed not towards our enemy, but towards our President.
These words are not partisan.
The national leaders and national security establishment of the Democratic Party failed to serve our nation in October of 2002. They marched in lockstep with ideologues, extremists and the partisans of the Republican Party to support a war that should never have been fought, at great cost to our country.
The national leaders of our media failed our Nation by treating propaganda as news, by treating falsehood as truth, by abandoning the traditions of a free press to act like cronies and courtiers, in search of corporate profits, political convenience, book deals and cable contracts in their new creed of government-media collusion.
The Congress turned its constitutional role of oversight and war powers into a legislative farce that shed great blood of heroes for the safety and convenience of politicians.
The American people are disillusioned and angry at all of them, and for good reason.
But in our system of government there is one President and Commander in Chief with unique
responsibilities and duties. And historians will judge that the greatest lie ever told by any man who ever held that post was this:
The man who campaigned as the Great Uniter, and declared himself the Great Decider, will burn in history as the Great Divider with all of the catastrophic consequences that are escalating every hour, of every day.
How pathetic that as the sun begins to set on his failed Presidency, he blames the people of our Nation, saying we have some psychological trauma rather than learning the lessons of his enormous mistakes. He will never understand that a grateful nation would rise with relief, if he only had the wisdom to learn and change, and a grateful world world will rise with relief, when his days in
office are done.
George W. Bush will be impeached by the court of history for using 9-11 to create fear throughout the land, rather than bravery, courage and valor.
[READ ON. If he doesn't cover everything, he comes mighty close]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-budowsky/historians-will-morally-i_b_29088.html
JTT, Your article details all the obvious Bush faux pas and the divisions he has created in this country and in this world, but why is it that some people can't seem to "see it?"
That remains one of the great mysteries of life, Chaplin. Personally, I can't imagine going through life with such a blinkered view, but hey, that's just me.
I guess the world needs tico (Ijustmayacomearoundsomeday) characters.
Is that how it's done, Joe?
And kudos for the article.
It's difficult to pierce the authoritarian follower's mindset once enough fear has been instilled. Once properly frightened, ANYTHING said to one of sheeple will be accepted, even if it contradicts something previously held dear.
So at one point, Bush can say "We shouldn't have American troops engaged in nation building." and later pronounce that it's vital to our nation's interest to do so.
The GOP can hold that all life is precious and at the same time promote the use of the death penalty.
They can claim that they have some kind of moral superiority while encouraging the use of torture in secret prisons.
They can claim the dubious enterprise known as the Iraq War as the centerpiece in the War on Terror, vital to the very existence of our nation, all while doing next to nothing to provide security at our chemical plants and harbors.
All while making sure that the level of fear never subsides.
Joe(then they would lose their edge.)Nation
Of course, the clueless and IGNORANT Joe Notion, as usual, overlooks the statements made by the madmen in Iran. Joe Notion apparently has not read any History. It was well for the Allies to worry about Hitler. But, there were many appeasers in Europe, hoping against hope and not using their judgement when they encountered Hitler on the Sudenten question.
Shirer reports that Hitler felt that:
"He would, of course, be sorry if a world war would result from this problem. The danger, however, was incapable of making him falter in hiss determination...he would face any war, even a world war, for this. THE REST OF THE WORLD MIGH DO WHAT IT LIKED. HE WOULD NOT YIELD EVEN ONE STEP."
Like the left wing appeasers in the USA at this time, we did not take Hitler seriously, hoping that he really would not begin World War II>
And Iran? Not to worry-at least for the gutless myopic left wing--but the abyss beckons:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear-armed Iran a threat to more than the Mideast
Feb 17, 2006
URI DROMI
The threat of Iran becoming a nuclear power should not only be the worry of Israel. If I were a Saudi prince, I would now have sleepless nights -- and not necessarily for reasons that usually keep Saudi princes awake while other people sleep. A Shiite Iran, armed with nuclear weapons, will shatter the delicate balance between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in this region in such a way that the Iraqi situation will pale in comparison.
The United States and the West should be concerned as well. A nuclear Iran will not only threaten one of the major oil supplies of the world. Once the Iranians acquire a capability of mass destruction, they will not have to settle anymore with burning American flags or supporting clandestine anti-Western operations; they will be able to openly threaten, not only Western targets in this region, but a good many parts of Europe with their deadly missiles.
As for Israel, there is no need for any guess here: Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeatedly called for the destruction of the Jewish state. Once armed with nukes, this stops being the ranting of a lunatic and becomes a real threat. And if the last century has taught us anything, it is about taking the threats of dictators seriously and stopping them before they put their words into action.
There is, however, one threat which has gained less attention than others. For almost six decades, since the establishment of Israel, Arabs have entertained the idea that one day, the Jewish state will somehow disappear. In 1948, 1967 and again in 1973, they tried to do it by force. At the same time, others, like the late Tunisian president Habib Bourguiba, have argued that the Arabs shouldn't take on Israel militarily, but rather besiege her economically and let her wilt away. A modern twist to this approach was introduced by Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, the Shiite movement in Lebanon, which is inspired and supported by Iran. Harass "the Zionist entity" with terror, he preaches, and it will be torn apart like a spider's web.
Both courses have failed miserably, and Israel is an accomplished fact, home of the Jewish People, an advanced and modern, prosperous democracy. Egyptian President Anwar Sadat spearheaded the Arab recognition of Israel in 1977. Then followed the Palestinians and the Jordanians, with others in the Arab world resigning to the fact that Israel is here to stay.
With Hamas taking over the Palestinian Authority, one wonders whether this gradual process of reconciliation with Israel will continue. After all, Hamas has at its core a charter that calls for the elimination of the Jewish state. Indeed, some pundits argue that it's better to deal with Hamas, which consists of serious people -- unlike Yasser Arafat the crook or Mahmoud Abbas the impotent. With the Hamas guys, at least you know perfectly well where you stand.
Others urge Israel not to be so edgy. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has just told Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz: "Why all this fuss? Remember, we Egyptians had also been talking about throwing you into the sea, and look where we are today."
That is true, except that the reason why the Egyptians, followed by the other Arabs, accepted the existence of Israel, is not that they became Zionists overnight; it's because they discovered the hard way that there is no way on Earth by which they can destroy the Jewish state. Former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, architect of Israel's nuclear capability, said: "Between Jerusalem and Dimona [the site of Israel's nuclear reactor], Sadat chose Jerusalem."
With Iran close to becoming a nuclear power, the old dream of destroying Israel, which has been buried in the back of the minds of many Arabs, might come to life again. Decades of arduous struggle toward peace will go down the drain, and the cycle of violence will only increase.
That Israel will defend itself against such a threat goes without saying. The free world, however, should not release itself from responsibility: If it lets Iran arm itself with nuclear capability, it not only sanctions the bloodletting of Jews again, but instead of helping the Muslim peoples of this region to reach peace and prosperity, it dooms them to endless wars and poverty.
Uri Dromi is director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute in Jerusalem.
Joe(is usually right)Nation,
Stay the course Bush strategy in the war on terrorism has failed since his preemptive war in Iraq; evidence of world terrorism increased. His management plan is to create havoc, then leave the solution to future president to solve.
We don't hear about Afghannistan too often, but for those few of us that continues to keep abrast of "progress" there, it's evident "stay the course" is Bush's solution there too! Leave the solution to future presidents.
The national debt has incrased to new levels during the past five years of Bush's rein. He'll leave the solution for that national bankruptcy to future presidents to solve. Most of the high tech jobs are being off-shored to India and China, so the workers of this country will try to reduce the debt with service industry-scale pay when the per capita debt will be about $100,000 for each man, woman and child.
BTW, isn't it interesting how the tax breaks for the rich have produced more Wal-Mart jobs, while engineers and scientists are losing their jobs.
Chaplin wrote:
The national debt has incrased to new levels during the past five years of Bush's rein. He'll leave the solution for that national bankruptcy to future presidents to solve. Most of the high tech jobs are being off-shored to India and China, so the workers of this country will try to reduce the debt with service industry-scale pay when the per capita debt will be about $100,000 for each man, woman and child.
Chaplin, is, of course, WRONG!
l. The President does not issue revenue bills. The House of Representatives does.
2. The Congress could have easily cut a great deal out of the budget. They did not do so.
3. The Congress GAVE President Bush the AUTHORITY to invade Iraq with the express provision that he be able to utilize whatever methods he saw fit.
4. The US is not bankrupt. There is MORE money coming in to the Treasury now than before the tax cuts.
5. It is clear that Chaplin knows NOTHING about Globalization. He really should try to read Tom Friedman's classic and highly acclaimed books on Globalization. If Chaplin thinks that President Bush created globalization, he is completely at sea with regard to World Economics.
6. The Congress could, of course, pass many "protectionist" laws KEEPING jobs in the USA. Chaplin does not know just how much that would cost the nation. Chaplin is invited to read some Economics books.
7. As a percentage of the GDP, the national debt is far below the ratio it had during world war II. Chaplin apparently does not know this.
I respectfully suggest that Chaplin read some Economics texts before making statements which are egregiously mistaken!
