LOL! Clinton to blame for 9/11... .ROFL  If only he'd had a memo or
something! Say for instance, one that read "OBL plans to use
commercial aircraft to attack the US".
But I know, I know, it was CLINTON's fault! roflmao

I love it when Liberals or Conservatives blinded by their ideology
write that hysterical kind of bs. Just cracks me up!


On Jul 18, 4:24 pm, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote:
>              This whole argument can easily be put to an end ( if were
> looking for blame ) if Bubba had terminated Osama when the CIA had him
> in their sights in 1998. He ( Osama )
> would not have been around to plan 9/11, hence the course of history
> would have ( most likely ) been different. Suffice it to say Clinton
> did not act and more or less got caught with his pants down. No 9/11;
> no Afghan war & no Iraq war. The next thing I expect on this thread is
> that 9/11 had nothing to do with it. I will also remind you that the
> Iraq war no matter how you disagree with it was not illegal. The
> Congress of the USA and numerous countries signed on. Just as there
> were no WMD ( questionable ) there is no silver bullet against either
> George Bush or the CIA.
>
> ***************************************************************************­***************************************************************************­******************************
>
> On Jul 18, 6:37 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Clinton did not commit the US to armed conflict... it was prohibited by a
> > congress that had been told the truth....
>
> > read more »
>
> > Further release date is NOT important.... it was signed in Sept. of 2006...
> > no wiggle room there
>
> > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:52 PM, dick thompson 
> > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > What I threw out at you was info about the use of gas on the Kurds (true)
> > > and about the fact that the US did not provide the nuclear equipment that
> > > Saddam had (true) and that Clinton signed a bill authorizing him to cause
> > > regime change in Iraq (true).  Also note that the chairman of the 
> > > committee
> > > was not a Republican, we have no idea of the bipartisan makeup and vote of
> > > the committee, the report was released in 2008 (the Republicans were not 
> > > in
> > > charge then).  Also look back on the Senate report on 9/11 and what a load
> > > of bull that one was!  Why should I accept this then.
>
> > > Mark wrote:
>
> > > Yes it was and you decided to try a history lesson on me and throw out 
> > > some
> > > "holier than thou" Gringo bullshit
>
> > > again read the ONLY empiracal repoort done on this
> > >http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775 then choke mon
> > > your BS
>
> > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:31 PM, dick thompson 
> > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > >> The subject was AFghanistan and Iraq
>
> > >> Mark wrote:
>
> > >>  how about the thirty oir so thousand that died in central america in the
> > >> same time period at thands of alzheimer ronnie. ??  US forces lead by 
> > >> Felix
> > >> Rodriguez (I know, I met him there)
>
> > >> please read the republican dominated "senate intelligence report" from
> > >> sept 2006 that says ALL the info you are trying to feed me now is pure
> > >> BULLSHIT....
>
> > >>  On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>> >Thedifference in time from having used and being falsely accused of
> > >>> having gas was 25 years.....
>
> > >>> Really?LOL! Did the thousands who died wretching deaths come back to
> > >>> life in those 25 years? Did Saddam act like he'd become a humanitarian
> > >>> in those 25 years? Oh WAIT! Thats right! Saddam insisted that he still
> > >>> HAD WMDs. Only when the UN sanctioned him did he say they were
> > >>> gone.....supplying no evidence of their disposal, of course.
>
> > >>> >as far as building that reactor in Iraq... the US supplied and built
> > >>> it AND donated the yellow cake as well.....
>
> > >>> ROTFLMAO. You are either a very bad liar or a complete idiot. I think
> > >>> both. Bye!
>
> > >>> On Jul 18, 3:26 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>> > I didn't think he ahd gas or wmd's or nukes (though I Knew he was
> > >>> > sitting on a research reactor and a mountain of yellow cake) The
> > >>> > difference in time from having used and being falsely accused of
> > >>> > having gas was 25 years.....
>
> > >>> > as far as building that reactor in Iraq... the US supplied and built
> > >>> > it AND donated the yellow cake as well..... You are right the US is a
> > >>> > danger even to itself.  The only deluded person/people seems to be you
> > >>> > and Gringolandia.
>
> > >>> > On Jul 18, 12:07 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>> > > >If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did.
>
> > >>> > > We thought he had poison gas. Our soldiers were equipped to confront
> > >>> > > it.
>
> > >>> > > Everybody thought he had WMDs, mostly because he not only HAD them
> > >>> but
> > >>> > > because he used them against his enemies.
>
> > >>> > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state
>
> > >>> > > Actually, they were. Iraq had completed construction of a nuclear
> > >>> > > reactor (That makes you a nuclear nation state) but Israel
> > >>> immediately
> > >>> > > blew it up. (Thank you Israel).
>
> > >>> > > Some people would say that a leader who builds a nuclear reactor
> > >>> > > despite worldwide protests and has and uses poison gas on 
> > >>> > > neighboring
> > >>> > > countries and his own people was a dangerous guy. Other people like
> > >>> > > deluding themselves.
>
> > >>> > > On Jul 18, 1:42 pm, Frederick The Moderate
>
> > >>> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>> > > > If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did.
> > >>> Large,
> > >>> > > > tight formations are easy targets and we know that. Not to mention
> > >>> > > > that we would have sent a least one division to sweep and search
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > area where we "knew" the WMD's were for residual (or any other)
> > >>> > > > evidence they ever existed. We never did. Not one peek. I'm former
> > >>> > > > navy intel and i can assure you, even though Bush screwed our
> > >>> Humint
> > >>> > > > network fro some time to come, we still would have been able to
> > >>> find
> > >>> > > > evidence - if believed it was ever there.
> > >>> > > > But I get it. You really, really, really want to believe there 
> > >>> > > > were
> > >>> > > > WMD's there. Okay.
>
> > >>> > > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state
> > >>> but
> > >>> > > > again, if you really want to believe it is or was, okay dokey.
>
> > >>> > > > Talk about wanting to believe lies.
>
> > >>> > > > I've lost five friends in Iraq. All of them Psy-Ops and a couple
> > >>> Force
> > >>> > > > Recon. They've made it clear for years that Iraq will never
> > >>> appreciate
> > >>> > > > what we've done and no matter how long we're there, they'll 
> > >>> > > > regress
> > >>> > > > shortly after we leave. Two thousand years of culture.
> > >>> > > > Iraq has already made clear they view US as outsiders and went out
> > >>> of
> > >>> > > > the way to spit in Bush's face before he could get out of office.
> > >>> But
> > >>> > > > you believe what you want to believe.
>
> > >>> > > > On Jul 18, 7:23 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>> > > > > >>> We also had the certainty that there really were no WMD's
>
> > >>> > > > > Not true.
>
> > >>> > > > > >>> Urban warfare, their commitment to keep fighting people they
> > >>> viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any kind of
>
> > >>> > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation.
>
> > >>> > > > > Once again you show little understanding...   Both AQ and the
> > >>> > > > > Americans are outsiders...   As is the harsh form of Radical
> > >>> Islam...
> > >>> > > > > As is the lowland Pakistani...   The question here is not
> > >>> fighting the
> > >>> > > > > outsider BUT WHICH OUTSIDER...   The exit strategy?  Stability
> > >>> and a
> > >>> > > > > non Radical Islamic government in a nuclear nation-state...
>
> > >>> > > > > >>> I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border
> > >>> them. They had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics &
> > >>> technology have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful only 
> > >>> at
> > >>> blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's a mess
>
> > >>> > > > > and a mistake and we should get out.
>
> > >>> > > > > Tactics and technology make a huge difference...   As the fact
> > >>> the our
> > >>> > > > > WILLINGNESS and desire to be a long term occupying power is far
> > >>> less
> > >>> > > > > than the Russians or the Pakistanis as makes a difference...
> > >>> The
> > >>> > > > > Russian border aided in supplying their troops but harmed the
> > >>> "Soft
> > >>> > > > > Warfare" in being seen a a long term occupying power...
>
> > >>> > > > > >>> The only upside is at least we're actually going after 
> > >>> > > > > >>> people
> > >>> we have truthful cause to go after.
>
> > >>> > > > > Once again you proclaim Urban Lies...
>
> > >>> > > > > On Jul 18, 3:58 am, Frederick The Moderate
>
> > >>> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>> > > > > > I agree with you about Iraq. We had so many sanctions on Iraq
> > >>> before
> > >>> > > > > > invading, they couldn't import dental equipment (because it
> > >>> could
> > >>> > > > > > possibly be modified for weapons use - go figure). We also had
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > > > certainty that there really were no WMD's. So it was nothing 
> > >>> > > > > > to
> > >>> storm
> > >>> > > > > > right in. Like you said, cakewalk getting there. It was
> > >>> afterward the
> > >>> > > > > > problems started. Urban warfare, their commitment to keep
> > >>> fighting
> > >>> > > > > > people they viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any
> > >>> kind of
> > >>> > > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation.
> > >>> > > > > > I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border 
> > >>> > > > > > them.
> > >>> They
> > >>> > > > > > had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics &
> > >>> technology
> > >>> > > > > > have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful only 
> > >>> > > > > > at
> > >>> > > > > > blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's 
> > >>> > > > > > a
> > >>> mess
> > >>> > > > > > and a mistake and we should get out.
> > >>> > > > > > The only upside is at least we're actually going after people
> > >>> we have
> > >>> > > > > > truthful cause to go
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to