Author Topic: 911 Commission Blockbuster! (Read 2368 times)

Mini D · « **Reply #60 on:** December 18, 2003, 01:45:56 PM »

It's much easier to sit back and figure out where things went wrong than it is to sit down and figure out what is going to happen in the future.

Tom Clancy ended a book with a 747 crashing into the whitehouse and killing congress and the president. This is not an unknown concept. I think where everyone from the airline industry to the FBI to the FAA slipped was in their public broadcasting of hi-jacking policies, lax security and underestimating the patience/planning capabilities of the terrorists. 9-11 was a wakeup call to all of America in that regards. It was also proof of the ineffectiveness policies from top to bottom leading up to that point.

MiniD

Sandman · « **Reply #61 on:** December 18, 2003, 01:46:25 PM »

Yeah, but Tom Clancy is a hack.

Mini D · « **Reply #62 on:** December 18, 2003, 01:50:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Yeah, but Tom Clancy is a hack.

He's a political hack who's latest books have been unbearable... but he's never really portrayed terrorists as imbiciles. Though, the terrorists never seem to realize that if they just got rid of Jack Ryan and Mr. Clark then nobody would be able to stop them.

MiniD

Sandman · « **Reply #63 on:** December 18, 2003, 01:52:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
He's a political hack who's latest books have been unbearable... but he's never really portrayed terrorists as imbiciles. Though, the terrorists never seem to realize that if they just got rid of Jack Ryan and Mr. Clark then nobody would be able to stop them.

MiniD

True enough.

DmdNexus · « **Reply #64 on:** December 18, 2003, 01:55:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
BS. Clinton did nothing to improve the military he inherited. Quite the contrary, he gutted it. Not saying it wasn't due some pruning but Clinton never showed anything but contempt for the US Armed Forces.

Man are you ignorant.

It was Clinton who authorized the support of the special ops and predator programs which were the key to the success in Afghanistan.

Re-organization of the military and battlefield management was completely re-done during Clinton's administration.

The credit really goes to the Pentagon planners.. but as CiC Clinton authorized it.

Clinton also authorized the assasination of Ben Laden, when Bush came into office he was warned about the threat from Bin Laden, yet he ignored the threat and rescended the order to assassinate him.

The truth about Bush is coming out... and it's being reported by the govenment!

Not the LIBERALS... and all you deluded Bush****eheads just get in lock step with the brown shirts and defend him.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #65 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:06:06 PM »

And thus was invoked Godwin's Law.

Hortlund · « **Reply #66 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:26:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
Well it was the Clinton Military that kicked bellybutton in Afghanistan and Iraq. You don't honestly think the troops and doctrine for those successes were developed by Bush and his team? That would be laughable.

Do I have to dig up the quote by Cheney stating that the military any administration has at its service is the result of his predecesor?

So then you admit that it was Clintons CIA that failed to prevent 9-11?

And while the size and equipment of the armed forces might be decided by the previous administration, the moral and motivation of the troops sure as hell aint. A Clintonian army would do anything in its power to stay out of combat (witness Kosovo and Somalia).

Of cource the sucesses in Afghanistan and Iraq is thanks to the armed forces, led by Bush and his team. If you are trying to grab the credit for that to Clinton you are truly weird.

Clinton downsized the army and the CIA, and he treated the army and the CIA just as most liberals do. But because he didnt disband the entire army you feel he should be given some sort of credit for Afghanistan and Iraq? You are insane.

Yeager · « **Reply #67 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:30:53 PM »

what is godwins law?

Does it support my assertion that people with liberal tendancies are misguided and easily fooled?

and whenever you hear the great "brownshirt" invocation you can be assured that its a liberal having an argument with a brickwall, and losing.

midnight Target · « **Reply #68 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:34:15 PM »

Yeager admits that his argument meets all the intellecual expectations to qualify it as a brick wall.... film at 11.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #69 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:36:54 PM »

Yeager
It is a theory that says same ******* will always ruin a BBS conversation with a Nazi reference.

midnight Target · « **Reply #70 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:41:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund
Clinton downsized the army and the CIA, and he treated the army and the CIA just as most liberals do. But because he didnt disband the entire army you feel he should be given some sort of credit for Afghanistan and Iraq? You are insane.

Well Stevie, you continually meet all my expectations and then some.. wtg.

Do ya think maybe we downsized the Armed Forces in the 90's because we didn't have 200 divisions of Russian tanks to worry about anymore? Are you gonna claim that FDR lost ground against the Indians because he failed to buy as many horses as his predesessor? Are you sane?

Yeager · « **Reply #71 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:46:21 PM »

no argument here mt.

I accept that peoples experiences in life are what motivates their political ideals. I just try to have fun with it all.

As for bush vrs clinton and what did and did not happen:
It usually boils down to what you perceive best supports
your political ideals, whether correct or not.

I know some real decent but misguided liberal socialists and I freely admit that even they, yes they -are people too.

SaburoS · « **Reply #72 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:51:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Do you honestly believe that Bush could have prevented 9/11? Answer honestly. I want to know who the lunatics are and who are not. Then I can update my ignore list.

Rip, lets go one further.....
Would anyone (Democrat or Republican) have prevented those 9/11 attacks?

I'd say no. We Americans are into convenience. We would not stand for the "inconvenience" of what we have to go through now in order to fly on an airline pre 9/11. Any politician that would have proposed the present post 9/11 security issues would probably be voted out of office pre 9/11.
Post 9/11 it becomes the other's fault.
Bush nor Gore could have prevented the 9/11 attacks.
Get over it people.

SaburoS · « **Reply #73 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:54:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
If Bubba or Dubya had taken any real action (like Dubya is doing now) against terrorism before 9/11, there's no way the public would have supported it. Just look at the whining about Afghanistan and the Patriot Act, even AFTER 9/11.

Just saw this after my post.

Yeah, what you said!

midnight Target · « **Reply #74 on:** December 18, 2003, 02:59:41 PM »

SubaruS is probably right... just get tired of the constant Clinton bashing in regards to terrorism. It my be the one issue he least deserves to be slammed.