NationStates Jolt Archive

What took you so long?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051116/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_clinton

What took you so long?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051116/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_clinton

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.

What took you so long?
Dude, give the guy a break.
I mean, he’s retired after spending eight years doing arguably the most stressful job in the world, but they keep pulling him back in. On top of dictating his life to a ghostwriter (which must have been painfully boring) his lesbian wife keeps hounding him to support her none-candidacy. And then the bastard who took his job appoints him to run some huge ass charity with the bastard's dad. What the fuck?

We definitely should NOT have deposed Saddam in the First Gulf War. We weren't in the position to handle the rebuilding of Iraq. The tremendous folly is that we were much less capable when Bush started the Second Gulf War. The only good time to do it would be when at least two other strong-ass countries are interested in putting the time and effort into rebuilding Iraq.

What took you so long?
I haven't seen you call a press conference yet...WHAT ARE YOU HIDING FROM US

We definitely should NOT have deposed Saddam in the First Gulf War. We weren't in the position to handle the rebuilding of Iraq. The tremendous folly is that we were much less capable when Bush started the Second Gulf War. The only good time to do it would be when at least two other strong-ass countries are interested in putting the time and effort into rebuilding Iraq.

We rebuilt Japan and most of Europe from US physical aid and economic aid. That was when the US economy was less than half the size it is today. There is no reason we couldnt take on the task of a small nation such as Iraq.

Haha. Man I am sick of liberals bitching. Unless you've served in Iraq shut your fucking mouths. And remember, its because of the soldiers that you have the right to make fools of yourselves.

Semper Fi

We rebuilt Japan and most of Europe from US physical aid and economic aid. That was when the US economy was less than half the size it is today. There is no reason we couldnt take on the task of a small nation such as Iraq.
When Tennou Shouwa surrendered and demanded the citizens cooperate with the US occupation forces, the job was easy

the japs were eager to get back on their feet

in Iraq, we've got a bunch of imported fuckers trying to ruin everything :/

Haha. Man I am sick of liberals bitching. Unless you've served in Iraq shut your fucking mouths. And remember, its because of the soldiers that you have the right to make fools of yourselves.

Semper Fi
you forgot the second part of the motto

it's a call-and-response motto

Call: Semper Fi!
Response: Motivate!

Haha. Man I am sick of liberals bitching. Unless you've served in Iraq shut your fucking mouths. And remember, its because of the soldiers that you have the right to make fools of yourselves.

Semper Fi


Semper Fi



Bill Clinton said a lot of things. Does this make everything he's said true?

We rebuilt Japan and most of Europe from US physical aid and economic aid. That was when the US economy was less than half the size it is today. There is no reason we couldnt take on the task of a small nation such as Iraq.

You forgot to put that into proportion. At the end of WWII we were kind of the only industrialized nation in the world that did not suffer massive damage to their infastructure and today our economy is "stronger" in terms of how much money we can throw around but when you account for inflation it doesn't look so great and compare it to our economic competitors today as opposed to 1945. (Today: China, EU. 1945: *crickets*) Your choice in words were... misleading.

Bill Clinton said a lot of things. Does this make everything he's said true?

He said Iraq had WMD's...........

He said Iraq had WMD's...........

Well- aside from the landslide of his other bullshit, I believe Iraq had WMDs too.

Your choice in words were... misleading.

Correction: Your choice in words was... misleading.

Sorry, I couldn't resist! ;)

It's certainly easy to look at a war after it's happened and make judgement shots. Did he make any such comments before the war?

Well- aside from the landslide of his other bullshit, I believe Iraq had WMDs too.
I think he did too! I mean ,come on people! They were PORTABLE chemical weapons labs on semis. I can drive one from The east coast of America to the west in two days! Saddam had weeks!

You forgot to put that into proportion. At the end of WWII we were kind of the only industrialized nation in the world that did not suffer massive damage to their infastructure and today our economy is "stronger" in terms of how much money we can throw around but when you account for inflation it doesn't look so great and compare it to our economic competitors today as opposed to 1945. (Today: China, EU. 1945: *crickets*) Your choice in words were... misleading.

Now that doesnt discount the fact that Iraq is a relatively small project.

Truth be told, we went in there to take out saddam and the supposed wmd's, so why in the hell are they still there? mission accomplished Saddam is in custody the wmd's are either gone or never were so who ever said anything about rebuilding Iraq when we could sellm it to Jordan, or Saudi Arabia or any of the other countries the U.S. likes?:D

Truth be told, we went in there to take out saddam and the supposed wmd's, so why in the hell are they still there? mission accomplished Saddam is in custody the wmd's are either gone or never were so who ever said anything about rebuilding Iraq when we could sellm it to Jordan, or Saudi Arabia or any of the other countries the U.S. likes?:D

Nah, truthfully we need to build them up so some tinpot dictator doesnt move back in. That way my grandchildren dont have to ride a M1A9 into Baghdad.

Or we could do things the easy way and just say that any dictatorship prepare for carpet bombing so we can finaly put the b52's to good use.

People seem to forget the guy isn't running the country anymore. He isn't obliged to make a press release for his every little opinion anymore, and thank god he doesn't!

People seem to forget the guy isn't running the country anymore. He isn't obliged to make a press release for his every little opinion anymore, and thank god he doesn't!

Ahh yes, please tell Bill that. Anyway he is starting up the campaign for the Mrs.

Nah, truthfully we need to build them up so some tinpot dictator doesnt move back in. That way my grandchildren dont have to ride a M1A9 into Baghdad.
Thank god SOMEBODY gets it. It's called "personal sacrifice for the good of our children"

Iraq today is better for it.Hahahahahaha :p You're funny.

I think he did too! I mean ,come on people! They were PORTABLE chemical weapons labs on semis. I can drive one from The east coast of America to the west in two days! Saddam had weeks!

Exactly, people think they are these giant 100 foot missle that would easily be seen from a satalite or a survey. A little drop of any dangerous chemcial could possibly kill thousands and thousands of people.

I remember reading a while back, the way the UN was looking for them, was like taking a van and placing it somewhere in California and then asking 5 people to go find it. It would take them months to find a single van. They could hide it anywhere, and you could pass it without even knowing whats inside.

Or we could do things the easy way and just say that any dictatorship prepare for carpet bombing so we can finaly put the b52's to good use.Ok ...First on line...the Dictatorship of Jordan.

want to line up another Dictatorship?
take a number.

As a point, most politicians who rely on voter sufferance would call their reproductive organs a big mistake if they thought it might increase their voter base.

Exactly, people think they are these giant 100 foot missle that would easily be seen from a satalite or a survey. A little drop of any dangerous chemcial could possibly kill thousands and thousands of people.

I remember reading a while back, the way the UN was looking for them, was like taking a van and placing it somewhere in California and then asking 5 people to go find it. It would take them months to find a single van. They could hide it anywhere, and you could pass it without even knowing whats inside.
Not to mention that our troops found a Mig fighter BURIED in the fucking desert. Give me an hour, and a D-10 bullzozer, and I could bury a Semi and trailor 20 feet deep in sand.

Ok ...First on line...the Dictatorship of Jordan.

want to line up another Dictatorship?
take a number.

Um, Jordan is a constitutional Monarchy last I checked. But yes we should just carpet bomb North Korea, South Korea while we are at it, China, and last but not least Mexico just for the sake of less fuel cost.

Um, Jordan is a constitutional Monarchy last I checked.read my lips

J-O-R-D-A-N__I-S__A__D-I-C-T-A-T-O-R-S-H-I-P

read my lips

J-O-R-D-A-N__I-S__A__D-I-C-T-A-T-O-R-S-H-I-P
Not only that, but they're cozy with "Israel"

Not only that, but they're cozy with "Israel"several Arab Dictatorships are not-so-cozy with Israel...But If you wanna Carpet bomb them...you gotta take a number...

First come first serve. ;)

after we are done with Jordan...you can take Kuwait apart...or UAE...or Saudi Arabia...or whatever...

Not only that, but they're cozy with "Israel"

Wouldn't you be if they had kicked your ass up and down the Jordan River for fifty years?

Not to mention that our troops found a Mig fighter BURIED in the fucking desert. Give me an hour, and a D-10 bullzozer, and I could bury a Semi and trailor 20 feet deep in sand.

SHHHHHHH. A lot of people in America don't like it when the public starts to catch wind of things like that, makes them think "If they could do that what's to stop them from burying an entire fucking stockpile?" and then all of the sudden the media has to switch directions and say "Ah ha! Through the loyal support of this station the administration has managed to find the WMD's!"

Want an example of how easy it is to hide dangerous chemicals? Look at the Love Canal and how many millions of gallons were thrown in there over the decades and nobody noticed till it started to overflow.

Wouldn't you be if they had kicked your ass up and down the Jordan River for fifty years?that is not the reason...

the reason why they are "officially" no-so-unfriendly with The Jewish state...Is that US taxpayers pay for it.

Thats right..we give the dictatorship of Jordan a shiite-load of welfare money to buy their "support" for Israel.

The other "friend" we literally bough for Israel is Egypt.

For most parts of the Century the biggest recipients of Welfare Billions$ are Israel, Egypt and Jordan. (all of that to help Israel)

Not countries that really need it like Ethiopia...

Oh yeah, and what about those SCUDS fired at Kuwait in March, 2003. Weren't those supposed to be on some sort of list of banned weapons? Wouldn't Saddam using them be proof that he had them or can we not charge him with anything since he launched them at American and Kuwaiti forces before we could capture him pushing the little red button?

Wouldn't you be if they had kicked your ass up and down the Jordan River for fifty years?
No, I'd hate them like a fat kid hates rice cakes
and I do :/

No, I'd hate them like a fat kid hates rice cakes
and I do :/

Just because you hate them doesn't mean you can't respect them. Have to be careful when you have a knife at your throat. ;)

Just because you hate them doesn't mean you can't respect them. Have to be careful when you have a knife at your throat. ;)
I respect people with good intentions and poor execution, not the other way around. All I have for the Zionists is hate and suspicion. Whatever causes their victories is irrelevant to me. :|

read my lips

J-O-R-D-A-N__I-S__A__D-I-C-T-A-T-O-R-S-H-I-P

I'll call the BS here.

several Arab Dictatorships are not-so-cozy with Israel...But If you wanna Carpet bomb them...you gotta take a number...

First come first serve. ;)

after we are done with Jordan...you can take Kuwait apart...or UAE...or Saudi Arabia...or whatever...

Both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are working on election reforms. Kuwait moreso than Saudi Arabia.

I'll call the BS here.Showdown!!! :D

Meet me at the main... :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

12 o-clock sharp.

I think Iraq was a mistake too

The British should have used the boundaries T.E. Lawrence suggested

Oh yeah, and what about those SCUDS fired at Kuwait in March, 2003. Weren't those supposed to be on some sort of list of banned weapons? Wouldn't Saddam using them be proof that he had them or can we not charge him with anything since he launched them at American and Kuwaiti forces before we could capture him pushing the little red button?

for those of you who know of scuds the most modified al-abbas version is the longest range with 800 klicks and horribly eratic flight path/ accuracy so to use them is quite useless unless you either a) don't care where it hits in the general area or b) are mass launching them. thus to claim scuds as some form of proof is quite useless especialy if being used overseas.

Showdown!!! :D

Meet me at the main... :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

12 o-clock sharp.

I'm sorry but I don't take up challenges from a person who has less intelligence than my 5 yo niece.

Both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are working on election reforms. Kuwait moreso than Saudi Arabia.
read my lips again...

T-H-E-Y__A-R-E__D-I-C-T-A-T-O-R-S-H-I-P-S

read my Lips again...

T-H-E-Y__A-R-E__D-I-C-T-A-T-O-R-S-H-I-P-S

Actually, Kuwait has an elected Parliment that they just allowed women to be voted into . On top of that, they just had their first woman cabinet member. Kuwait is more democratic than a dictatorship. Actually, they are more a Constitutional Monarchy than a dictatorship.

As for Saudi Arabia, they too are looking at reforms and have taken steps at reforms. They are also a constitutional monarchy than a dictatorship.

Nice to know you know nothing about the Middle East.

I'm sorry but I don't take up challenges from a person who has less intelligence than my 5 yo niece.smart move.

at this point...that is the best move you could possibly make...because I was going to totally pwn you

smart move.

at this point...that is the best move you could possibly make...because I was going to totally pwn you

:rolleyes: This has got to be the most childish statement I have heard you state.

Nice to know you know nothing about the Middle East.soo...you are going to take the challenge after all?

good. :D

:rolleyes: This has got to be the most childish statement I have heard you state.only because you don't come here often enough...:D

soo...you are going to take the challenge after all?

good. :D

Have you or any of your relatives ever been to the Middle East?

for those of you who know of scuds the most modified al-abbas version is the longest range with 800 klicks and horribly eratic flight path/ accuracy so to use them is quite useless unless you either a) don't care where it hits in the general area or b) are mass launching them. thus to claim scuds as some form of proof is quite useless especialy if being used overseas.
Let me get this right. Scuds are used only when you either a)launch them erratically, not caring who they kill, or b) when you launch them in mass numbers with the intent of "a)" and these AREN'T WMD's?

Did I miss the part where you made sense?

Have you or any of your relatives ever been to the Middle East?yes....and not inside a military base.(where you still live insulated ..and have to follow "rules" for the contacts with the local)

you?

I respect people with good intentions and poor execution, not the other way around. All I have for the Zionists is hate and suspicion. Whatever causes their victories is irrelevant to me. :|

Ahh, now I see, here I thought you were just joking around, throwing random stuff out there for shits and giggles, this changes things. I guess I being an American and supposedly a slave to the Zionists have a slightly different opinion on this matter. I have this little list of people to blame for the "Jewish Problem." (can you now guess who is first on my list? Go ahead, try.)

First on my list is Hitler and the SS. Their devotion to killing all the Jews in Europe caused the victors of WWII to decide that the Jews needed a home land to prevent another genocide like the holocaust.

Second on my list is the victors of WWII, or the UN as it is known today. They decided to just ignore the Muslims and Palestinians and created the state of Israel. Now, had the UN invited the Palestinian leaders and the leaders of other regional powers; Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and Saudia Arabia, I am sure they could have peacefully come to an agreement possibly identical to the original boundaries. But, they did not ask, they said "This is what we are going to do about it, if you don't like it tough."

Third on my list are the six nations who attacked Israel after she declared her Independence in 1948. They got their asses kicked and have had a sour taste in their mouth ever since.

I could have gone back to blaim the Catholic Church for most of the anti-semitic stereotypes in the world today but I won't. I could go on to say a lot of things which all kind of add up to create these troubles between the Jews and Palestinians, but once again I won't. Why? Probably because of my ADD that I don't have but it makes a great excuse for situations like this.

smart move.

at this point...that is the best move you could possibly make...because I was going to totally pwn you
Hey Corny, do you think he noticed yet that you insulted him? :D

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.

GHWBush said that we didn't have an exit strategy, so he refused to go into Bagdad.

When Tennou Shouwa surrendered and demanded the citizens cooperate with the US occupation forces, the job was easy

the japs were eager to get back on their feet

in Iraq, we've got a bunch of imported fuckers trying to ruin everything :/

Exactly. It's not even Iraqis that are opposing us! The vast majority are glad Saddam was removed and that we're there! It's the damned terrorist sponsoring neighbors that are the problem.

yes....and not inside a military base.(where you still live insulated ..and have to follow "rules" for the contacts with the local)

you?

Yes! My father has. Served with distinction in the Middle East. Has traveled inside many of their cities. He has also been into Baghdad.

I also had other relatives that have been in the region too.

GHWBush said that we didn't have an exit strategy, so he refused to go into Bagdad.

That is either A.) Very ironic or B.) The reason why Dubya went in without and exit strategy, didn't want to make teh same mistake twice. ;)

Hey Corny, do you think he noticed yet that you insulted him? :D

I don't think he has noticed. As I said, my 5 yo niece is smarter than this :D

Yes! My father has. Served with distinction in the Middle East. Has traveled inside many of their cities..you mean he traveled...inside a tank? ...or inside a Hummer? :D

you mean he traveled...inside a tank? ...or inside a Hummer? :D

Nope. In a regular car in civilian clothes. Goes to show you know nothing.

Hey Corny, do you think he noticed yet that you insulted him? :Dhow about you help him with the SaudiArabia-is-a-Dictatorship debate. or Kuwait or UAE or Jordan or Pakistan...

:D Pick you weapon (I mean your country) :mp5: :sniper:
Common...Bring it on. :cool:

Nope. In a regular car in civilian clothes. Goes to show you know nothing.
but...but no american is brave enough to mingle with ay-rabs unprotected! you're lying and everything you ever said is a lie and you voted for bush and blah blah blah! ;)

Nope. In a regular car in civilian clothes. didnt you say the words "my father served.."

didnt you say the words "my father served.."

Ever hear of a 24 hour pass? Two-day pass? Shore leave? etc.

didnt you say the words "my father served.."
hell, my dad served in the gulf war and he walked around saudi arabia in civvies

you can walk around like that sometimes when you're not in a combat zone

didnt you say the words "my father served.."

Yep. He was on orders while he was over there but he wasn't restricted to base. He traveled into the city in civilian clothes and shopped. He bought some nice jewelry for my mother. :D

hell, my dad served in the gulf war and he walked around saudi arabia in civvies

you can walk around like that sometimes when you're not in a combat zone

Goes to show he does know nothing about the Middle East :D

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.

we didn't go in BECAUSE we would be in the situation we are in right now. To quote powell, or bush, or whoever the general was... the U.S. would have been "like a dinasour in a tarpit". They new it was unsafe/suicidal to go in there, so they were smart and stayed out.

Yes! My father has. Served with distinction in the Middle East. Has traveled inside many of their cities. He has also been into Baghdad.Nope. In a regular car in civilian clothes. Goes to show you know nothing.Ever hear of a 24 hour pass? Two-day pass? Shore leave? etc.Lets do a summary...

whenever they get their 2 day pass...GIs in Baghdad...take out the kevlar... get inside a armorless car...and go wandering into the Warzone?

Interesting.

FYI... Arabs can smell (tell-a-part) a GI in Civilian clothes from 20 metters away...unless the GI is a latino...

Is your dad a Latino?

Goes to show he does know nothing about the Middle East :D
No, that post goes to show you know nothing about the Middle East. Do you think Americans in Saudi Arabia are automatically gunned down by ubiquitous headress-wearing lunatics, or are you not quite that racist?

Let me get this right. Scuds are used only when you either a)launch them erratically, not caring who they kill, or b) when you launch them in mass numbers with the intent of "a)" and these AREN'T WMD's?

Did I miss the part where you made sense?

I had meant that they are quite inefective if you have any form of target in mind and that is what makes them useless and dangerous, by no knowing where it will go it is quite difficult to intercept as it is also next to impossible to even designate something like a city block to hit. Also the scuds are eratic in nature, in no way may one actually make a flight path or attempt to have it positioned in any way, shape, or form which makes it unreliable which is why it has only been used as a pathetic supplement for artillery to bombard civillian targets.

No, that post goes to show you know nothing about the Middle East. Do you think Americans in Saudi Arabia are automatically gunned down by ubiquitous headress-wearing lunatics, or are you not quite that racist?

Now your confusing me. Where the hell did you get that from?

Now your confusing me. Where the hell did you get that from?

I believe the first reference was directed towards ocean

Now your confusing me. Where the hell did you get that from?
You seem to think there's something tremendously dangerous about being of non-Arab descent while walking in a Middle Eastern country without wearing military-issued clothing. Sorry, but I assumed you were thinking that people who do that are cut in half by scimitar-wielding lunatics riding white horses, or something like that.

You seem to think there's something tremendously dangerous about being of non-Arab descent while walking in a Middle Eastern country without wearing military-issued clothing. Sorry, but I assumed you were thinking that people who do that are cut in half by scimitar-wielding lunatics riding white horses, or something like that.

That ain't me Osutoria. That's OceanDrive2

how about you help him with the SaudiArabia-is-a-Dictatorship debate. or Kuwait or UAE or Jordan or Pakistan...

:D Pick you weapon (I mean your country) :mp5: :sniper:
Common...Bring it on. :cool:
Sure. You are wrong. He is right. I 'm thinking more along the lines of 4years, not 5. How's that for solid debating tactics?

That ain't me Osutoria. That's OceanDrive2
When I said my dad walked around Saudi Arabia in civvies, you said:

Goes to show he does know nothing about the Middle East

That's what I'm replying...to...damn. I hate ending sentences with prepositions.

of course there's danger, there's danger everywhere you go; rape,murder,abductions,muggins,etc.etc. though in a warzaone the factor is of course quite higher though unless one is locked in a white room alone there is always danger of others.

:) :) ;) :p :D :sniper: -----> :( :mad: :mad: :eek:

You seem to think there's something tremendously dangerous about being of non-Arab descent while walking in a Middle Eastern country without wearing military-issued clothing. Sorry, but I assumed you were thinking that people who do that are cut in half by scimitar-wielding lunatics riding white horses, or something like that.there is degrees of danger...an non-Arab civie could be a humanitarian org worker, an independent Journalist...all these travel with a well paid Translator and a Guide with "connections"...and money to pay eventual drunk armed thugs...all of that does not make them Danger-free

Militar personnel are more of a target...way more. If they figure you are a GI wandering around in civilean clothes...they will sell the information to some insurgent group...at that point all the month salary will not save you.

GIs on their "2 day pass" will not pay for a Guide and translator...and it is probably against the rules.

The Military has probably set up "safe" areas...with bars and hotels...were the military can rest...But its very rare that ordinary Iraqis are allowed in these areas...

When I said my dad walked around Saudi Arabia in civvies, you said:



That's what I'm replying...to...damn. I hate ending sentences with prepositions.

He equaling OceanDrive2. I happen to have respect for the Arab World.

Sure. You are wrong. He is right. I 'm thinking more along the lines of 4years, not 5. How's that for solid debating tactics?I dont know...you tell me.

How do you rate your own debating skills so far?

Sure. You are wrong. He is right. I 'm thinking more along the lines of 4years, not 5. How's that for solid debating tactics?

HAHA! I often wonder if he is a teenager with no real world experience. He acts like he is.

Now your confusing me. dont confuse yourself...all the way.

save something for me :D

He equaling OceanDrive2. I happen to have respect for the Arab World.
so it's a bug making it look like you said it?

hell, my dad served in the gulf war and he walked around saudi arabia in civvies

you can walk around like that sometimes when you're not in a combat zone

I did quote this and then I wrote:

Goes to show he does know nothing about the Middle East :D

I was agreeing with you and throwing a jab at OceanDrive2.

I think what we have here is mixup on the word he. I believe you thought that he referred to you instead of he referring to OceanDrive2.

I was agreeing with you and throwing a jab at OceanDrive2.

I think what we have here is mixup on the word he. I believe you thought that he referred to you instead of he referring to OceanDrive2.
OOOOOOOHHHHHHHH

Ok cool

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHH

Ok cool

Yea I should've been more clear. Sorry! :)

*hands you a cookie*

Yea I should've been more clear. Sorry! :)

*hands you a cookie*
it's all good, brutha

I think what we have here is mixup on the word he. I believe you thought that he referred to you instead of he referring to OceanDrive2.well Ladies...when you have all of this figured out...call me...sometime tomorrow :D

I gotta go sleep some...

Do not worry...Ill be back. :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper:

well Ladies...when you have all of this figured out...call me...sometime tomorrow :D

I gotta go sleep some...

Do not worry...Ill be back. :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper:

To late. Its already worked out! You lost this round.

Well- aside from the landslide of his other bullshit, I believe Iraq had WMDs too.

You are right. He had them. He used them. That is a fact.
The only problem is where are they now? There is no proof of their destruction.

Or we could do things the easy way and just say that any dictatorship prepare for carpet bombing so we can finaly put the b52's to good use.

No need for carpet bombing when we have the MOAB.

No need for carpet bombing when we have the MOAB.

AHH screw the moab! Use the Nukes :D

*note* this post is ment in jest. I don't support the use of nukes unless chem,bio, or nukes are used against the US first

Will at least President Bill Clinton admits getting rid of Dictator for life Saddam Hussein of Iraq is a good thing, now lets get rid of Dictator for life Fidel Castro
of Cuba, I bet President Clinton would not say its a good thing but he should say the same.

Fidel Castro who once urged the Soviet Union to launch Soviet nuclear missles
at the USA, who a few years ago visited Iran and stated something to the affect of, I have studied the USA, I know its weeknesses' and toghether we can bring America to its knees.

I happen to have respect for the Arab World.
Ummmm no you don't.:eek:

Bill Clinton signed an executive policy to seek Saddam Hussein's ouster from power during his administration.

He's been in support of toppling Saddam for years.

The big mistake he's referring to is the post-war mess. The initial invasion was executed well. What the Bush administration did not plan for was the post-war occupation and nation-building.

Of course, had a Democratic President tried this, they'd have howled and mercilessly attacked him, as they did when he ordered Operation Desert Fox, which did attack and destroy a few key WMD sites Saddam had left in 1998.

The big mistake was saying the whole thing could be done for $53 billion, underbudgeting the war by only a $170 billion so far, and shy of the eventual total $400 - $900 billion, depending on how long we stretch out the occupation.

The big mistake was the causus bellorum du jour, when intelligence claims that there would be a "slam dunk" proving connections with al Qaeda did not pan in fact out, and WMD claims proved to be feeble, and in direct contradiction of Secretary Powell's own testimony to Congress in the time before 9/11.

The claim that Ramzi Yusef (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramzi_Yousef), the 1993 bomber of the WTC, met with Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS), was the original very strong line of reasoning to believe Saddam had involvement with 9/11. There are theories he is not who he says he is, and that he is an Iraqi spy operating under an identity gotten from a dead Kuwaiti that disappeared in the 1990 invasion. Only, those claims have not panned out under closer scrutiny. The Czech claims that Yousef and IIS met in Prague nation were backpedaled from.

The FBI had evidence that Ramzi Yusef made calls to Iraq. But he also had made calls to many other nations, including Pakistan, Iran, etc.

We nabbed him in the Philippines before he could implement Project Bojinka (http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/terrorists/ramzi-yousef/), which was the first attempt to blow up jet liners and also crash a plane into CIA headquarters.

But there was never a direct connection between him and IIS. If there was, you'd have thought since his capture and sentencing in 1998 they'd have brought it forward. Sadly, there's no proof.

Laura Mylroie (http://www.fas.org/irp/world/iraq/956-tni.htm) is the chief proponent of the Yousef-Iraq connection. She's been marginalized. Her work is highly conjectural. There's a few too many ifs. However, some give credibility to her work.

I leave it to others to see if there is actual proof. If there is, as opposed to conjecture, it would make the claim of harboring or sponsoring terrorism stick.

It's never been proven by CIA or any other intelligence agency. I've been waiting since 1993 for an answer to that question. So was President Clinton.

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.


Not sure if anyone else has already mentioned this to you, but this just isnt true.

Theres a very good reason why Bush Sr, didnt go into Baghdad.
There was no forseeable exit strategy.
It would have cost too much money to stay indefinately, wuch is what we are doing now.
The reason Bush Jr refuses to even give a timetable, is becuase we arent going anywhere, anytime soon, if at all.
However, this little detail would make him even more unpopular that he already is.

However, as for Bush Sr, and Baghdad, he, by his own admittance, did not invade and occupy, for the very same problems his son is now having.
Same with Clinton.
I suppose you could say that the two previous presidents were not only smarter, and better leaders than Bush Jr, but ulitimately wiser men, as well.

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.


Not sure if anyone else has already mentioned this to you, but this just isnt true.

Theres a very good reason why Bush Sr, didnt go into Baghdad.
There was no forseeable exit strategy.
It would have cost too much money to stay indefinately, wuch is what we are doing now.
The reason Bush Jr refuses to even give a timetable, is becuase we arent going anywhere, anytime soon, if at all.
However, this little detail would make him even more unpopular that he already is.

However, as for Bush Sr, and Baghdad, he, by his own admittance, did not invade and occupy, for the very same problems his son is now having.
Same with Clinton.
I suppose you could say that the two previous presidents were not only smarter, and better leaders than Bush Jr, but ulitimately wiser men, as well.

I actually agree with Bill here. Lots of mistakes were made. However lets not mistaken the last two presidents. They did make a mistake in letting Saddam stay there to long. We were not that far from Baghdad in the first gulf war. Would have been just a left turn with the 3rd armored and this would be a different story today. However the second chance was in 98 when Bill launched a 30 day bombing of Iraq. Saddam attempted to kill Bush I which gave Bill a green light to take out Saddam. The guy was a pile of crap. Iraq today is better for it. I dont fault Bush one bit for taking him out of power. It is something I wish we would have done in the first war.


Not sure if anyone else has already mentioned this to you, but this just isnt true.

Theres a very good reason why Bush Sr, didnt go into Baghdad.
There was no forseeable exit strategy.
It would have cost too much money to stay indefinately, wuch is what we are doing now.
The reason Bush Jr refuses to even give a timetable, is becuase we arent going anywhere, anytime soon, if at all.
However, this little detail would make him even more unpopular that he already is.

However, as for Bush Sr, and Baghdad, he, by his own admittance, did not invade and occupy, for the very same problems his son is now having.
Same with Clinton.
I suppose you could say that the two previous presidents were not only smarter, and better leaders than Bush Jr, but ulitimately wiser men, as well.

Ummmm no you don't.:eek:

Ummmm yes I do :eek:

Not sure if anyone else has already mentioned this to you, but this just isnt true.

Theres a very good reason why Bush Sr, didnt go into Baghdad.
There was no forseeable exit strategy.
It would have cost too much money to stay indefinately, wuch is what we are doing now.
The reason Bush Jr refuses to even give a timetable, is becuase we arent going anywhere, anytime soon, if at all.
However, this little detail would make him even more unpopular that he already is.

However, as for Bush Sr, and Baghdad, he, by his own admittance, did not invade and occupy, for the very same problems his son is now having.
Same with Clinton.
I suppose you could say that the two previous presidents were not only smarter, and better leaders than Bush Jr, but ulitimately wiser men, as well.

Actually we could have rolled left and put an end to him. Was there and know what the situation was. There would have been a total set of different circumstances at that time. The view of the war was different. There were alot more support from other Arab nations at the time. Even Syrian troops were with us! So I highly doubt that the problems today would have been the problems yesterday. Wiser men would have taken out Saddam.

Ummmm yes I do :eek:
Given your comments here at NS, I would have to say that you have very little respect for the Arab world.

Given your comments here at NS, I would have to say that you have very little respect for the Arab world.

I have more respect for the Arab World than you realize.

Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: