Author Topic: Saving Nash the trouble... (Read 1432 times)

x0847Marine · « **Reply #30 on:** April 25, 2006, 09:28:24 AM »

ALL politicians are scandalous thieves, and every single President & his staff scheme, lie, connive, coerce, cover up, and generally spew sorotte de burro out of their pie holes as long as their lips are moving.

That said, I'm going to the bathroom to take a Bush and wipe my Clinton.

Maverick · « **Reply #31 on:** April 25, 2006, 10:59:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mr Big
The US war in Iraq is the most illegal, unjustified and corrupt war in world history. No other war in the history of earth has been this bad.

If, I say again, IF this is your true thought and not simply a poorly thought out troll, you are lucky to know enough to even SPELL history as you certainly have no clue about what it means.

Stringer · « **Reply #32 on:** April 25, 2006, 11:43:56 AM »

Toad, what do you think of what Drumheller says?

I know for me, I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt when he made the case that the invasion was due to Iraq's immediate threat to our security via their WMD's and WMD program.

As you know from our conversations at the time, I backed the action but stated he'd better be on the money with this. I look at this as squandering our projection of power, not enhancing it's affect as a political tool.

It's a big step to undertake regime change....and a huge difference to undertake regime change for security reasons to undertaking it because you want to.

You also know I agree with your holding Congress just as responsible, but at the end of the day, the initiative to regime change started and ended with the Administration....all the way from having Libby discredit sources of information that the Admin didn't like to outright disregarding information that did not fit their end purpose.

midnight Target · « **Reply #33 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:16:48 PM »

Funny stuff Toad.

If only those Democrats would act in unison, these things would improve.

LOL... Kinda like blaming the spectators for a lousy Superbowl.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #34 on:** April 25, 2006, 12:45:19 PM »

If only congress would act like Americans instead of Dems and Repubs, then things might improve.

Yeager · « **Reply #35 on:** April 25, 2006, 01:13:26 PM »

Last time I checked, regime change in Iraq was still underway....by that I mean it is still developing and has not failed yet, and I hope will not fail, although there are plenty of leftists in america who hope failure in Iraq does indeed occur.

Hussein needed to come down just as the leader of Iran will be coming down, one way or another. The Syrians thankfully are proving to be far more intelligent than the Iranians and dont appear to be too interested in bringing destruction on themselves...the Libyans figured it out....hopefully the North Koreans will implode and the South will retake what is rightfully theirs without a shot having to be fired.

The only caveat I see is some moronic democrat, like Kerry....getting elected and screwing the whole thing over........a likely scenario thanks to the ineptness of Bush at protecting his party from controversy.

Sandman · « **Reply #36 on:** April 25, 2006, 01:29:08 PM »

If I recall correctly, Ahmadinejad was ELECTED as president of Iran.

If I also recall correctly, during the previous tenure of Mohammed Khatami, the U.S. increased economic sanctions and openly threatened military attack.

What a surprise... the Iranian people elected a president who is now telling the U.S. to go **** itself.

This just in... as nation builders, our record isn't all that keen.

Yeager · « **Reply #37 on:** April 25, 2006, 01:42:10 PM »

If I recall correctly, Ahmadinejad was ELECTED as president of Iran.
====
and Hitler was elected Das Furher..........you support the Iranians pursuit of peacefull nuclear technologies? They only mean peacefull uses for their enriched uranium, dont you agree. Iran should have been liberated back in 1980 but our miserable pitiful disgrace of a president couldn't hardly wait to fail.

If I also recall correctly, during the previous tenure of Mohammed Khatami, the U.S. increased economic sanctions and openly threatened military attack. What a surprise... the Iranian people elected a president who is now telling the U.S. to go **** itself.
====
At least I will feel good knowing they are going to deserve whats coming to them if they continue going down the one way road they are on.

This just in... as nation builders, our record isn't all that keen.
====
I will take Japan and South Korea, Western Europe...and the eventual freedom of Eastern Europe as success stories and build upon those.

With any luck, Iraq will survive to be a free nation, wouldn't you like that.

lazs2 · « **Reply #38 on:** April 25, 2006, 02:31:25 PM »

So nash.... who should we support? I mean... you loved klinton.. is that your idea of an honest politician?

No? then who would you suggest? you say we shouldn't pick the lesser of two evils but.... yu have an anyone but republicans stance.

lazs

Sandman · « **Reply #39 on:** April 25, 2006, 02:56:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
With any luck, Iraq will survive to be a free nation, wouldn't you like that.

Don't bet on it. They've been in a state of civil war for decades.

midnight Target · « **Reply #40 on:** April 25, 2006, 03:12:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
So nash.... who should we support? I mean... you loved klinton.. is that your idea of an honest politician?

No? then who would you suggest? you say we shouldn't pick the lesser of two evils but.... yu have an anyone but republicans stance.

lazs

Clinton... successful intervention in Yugoslavia (et.al.) total casualties... ZERO. Unsuccessful incursion into Somalia - 18 dead?

Bush.. well you know the story.

Yea, I'd pick Clinton.

Yeager · « **Reply #41 on:** April 25, 2006, 03:53:17 PM »

Dont forget the 400,000 dead in Rwanda. I seem to recall the UN blaming Klinton for that

And those poor old janitors in the bombed aspirn factory. throw them into the carcass pile

Eagler · « **Reply #42 on:** April 25, 2006, 04:43:32 PM »

mt
slick would only have had about 20 dead in Iraq too as he'd yanked the troops out as soon as the first poll told him to ...

nov is right around the corner.. anyone care to place a wager?

SOB · « **Reply #43 on:** April 25, 2006, 07:41:34 PM »

Or better yet, maybe he wouldn't have even sent them.

Toad · « **Reply #44 on:** April 25, 2006, 08:24:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Stringer
Toad, what do you think of what Drumheller says?

[/b]

I think he needs to testify before Congress.

Quote

[

I know for me, I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt when he made the case that the invasion was due to Iraq's immediate threat to our security via their WMD's and WMD program.

As you know from our conversations at the time, I backed the action but stated he'd better be on the money with this. I look at this as squandering our projection of power, not enhancing it's affect as a political tool.

[/b]

Which is almost word for word for what I said at the time and I have quoted posts of mine on this very BBS during that time that show that.

It's a big step to undertake regime change....and a huge difference to undertake regime change for security reasons to undertaking it because you want to.

The point is it is long past time for the opposition party to pursue this. They have the power, the access to information, the ability to subpoena witnesses, the money and the motive.

I have said before.... long before... that if he led us into invading with no just cause under Just War Theory then he should be impeached.