Just a kid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voltz

I'm just happy he followed up on his father's actions and got rid of Saddam, hopefully we can work out public relations with Iraq once it's been rebuilt.

What bugs me is when we have a re-election, I'm hoping people ain't stupid enough to vote in another Democrat who'll likely fuck us over like the last one did.

Joe Lieberman better not make next election, or I may consider japan for residence.

---

The last thing I would say is that Clinton fucked us over... But maybe that's just because I was paying attention to how our country was doing, rather than how many other countries we bombed.

Your second point, on the other hand, I definitely agree with. I don't see one person on either side I want in office, and that would hold true even if Gore ran. My options are running thin.

That said, I would have voted for McCain in a heartbeat. I'll do it for you: :bang:

Oh and Nightwolve, I take offense at youre insinuations.
Im not some anti american psycho, you people however try to believe I am so you have an easier time dismissing all the things I say no matter how well documented they may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NightWolve

Clinton? Wuh? Why are you asking about him now? I know very little about his administration aside from his "unilateral," "unprecedented," non-UN sanctioned actions in Kosovo/Bosnia; his bombing of a drug factory in Sudan; and him turning down an offer to have Osama Bin Laden handed over. He's only a good reference point in pointing out the hypocrisy of democrats these days.

---

The action in Kosovo was not "unilateral". It was conducted under the auspices of NATO. This was done because Russia and China threatened a Security Council veto. The ongoing peacekeeping mission in Bosnia was, and has always been (to my recollection) UN-sanctioned.

I'll grant you the bombing in Sudan. That was a collossal mistake, and it never should have been ordered.

As for Clinton "turning down an offer to have Osama Bin Laden handed over", you make it sound like the Sudanese actually had him in jail and were forced to let him out when Clinton refused. The Sudanese offered an intelligence-sharing agreement which in 20-20 hindsight may have been a good idea, but even today strikes me as dubious. Sudan is run by the most henious and oppressive regimes on the planet, and I'm not sure their information was worth their asking price.

"you have an easier time dismissing all the things I say no matter how well documented they may be"

hahhahahhaa...I've yet to see this "well-documentation"

Anyone else shows some, and it is false. You show it and it is "well-documented".

*wipes tears out of eyes*


"In an attempt to prove President Bush was not misleading Americans about reasons for the Iraq war, the White House on Friday released declassified intelligence that said there was "compelling evidence" Iraq sought uranium for nuclear weapons.

IC so instead of providing COMPELLING EVIDENCE the Bush administration provides a piece of paper wich states that there is COMPELLING EVIDENCE."

Where did I claim that something tangeable was false?
Go on bob i dare ya.

"Where did I claim that something tangeable was false?"

You simply dismiss it. Same thing. There's no point bring evidence against you because that's all you do. "Oh that isn't credible" etc etc.

BORING. There's a reason most people cannot tolerate your discussions, and it isn't because you're a skilled debater. In fact, from now on, I'll be a mirror image of you, and watch what happens.

Come on dude, if I do that all the time surely you can give us some examples.

"if I do that all the time surely you can give us some examples"

No one needs any, except you, and you aren't good enough for them. See how I can do that? I'm pulling an "Almaci"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almaci

Oh and Nightwolve, I take offense at youre insinuations.
Im not some anti american psycho, you people however try to believe I am so you have an easier time dismissing all the things I say no matter how well documented they may be.

---

All I know is you're the guy who won't let me buy you a drink. And you're short.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

The action in Kosovo was not "unilateral". It was conducted under the auspices of NATO. This was done because Russia and China threatened a Security Council veto. The ongoing peacekeeping mission in Bosnia was, and has always been (to my recollection) UN-sanctioned.

---

Right, so Clinton ignored the will of the "international community" by not getting UN approval going in, hence "unilateral" as well as non-UN sanctioned if you go by today's standards. But yeah, if you wanna go by the exact definition, it wasn't "unilateral" ;).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

I'll grant you the bombing in Sudan. That was a collossal mistake, and it never should have been ordered.

---

Indeed, perhaps a bipartisan investigation into the intelligence that went behind that order should've been initiated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

As for Clinton "turning down an offer to have Osama Bin Laden handed over", you make it sound like the Sudanese actually had him in jail and were forced to let him out when Clinton refused. The Sudanese offered an intelligence-sharing agreement which in 20-20 hindsight may have been a good idea, but even today strikes me as dubious. Sudan is run by the most henious and oppressive regimes on the planet, and I'm not sure their information was worth their asking price.

---

Well, from what I read and heard, in the end, that's exactly what happened. A chance to have him handed over was turned down. I draw my own conclusions from it as well. Besides, if Clinton could give tons of food aid, fuel oil and assist in the building of light-water nuclear reactors to a brutal and oppressive communist dictatorship - all for a mere promise - surely he could've taken Sudan up on their offer (it wasn't due to him having moral objections).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almaci

Oh and Nightwolve, I take offense at youre insinuations.
Im not some anti american psycho, you people however try to believe I am so you have an easier time dismissing all the things I say no matter how well documented they may be.

---

Yeah, and you offend with every single post and topic... Psycho? Well, if the shoe fits... Maybe if 99% of your posts didn't take a hate-America Leftist position, I wouldn't think as such. Maybe if all you ever did here wasn't criticizing Israel or the US, yeah, I might be more "open-minded..." But, that's not reality, is it?? I thought you were expressing genuine grief here, but much to my surprise, it was veiled for your usual attacks.