BuckinBoro - Yes I have caught some of the hearings and like you some of what I am hearing is disturbing. In fact Clarke today ripped into both the Clinton and Bush administrations. In a nutshell, in 1998 (post the African embassy bombings) we knew about the camps in Afghanistan and Clinton ordered cruise missiles sent in. What then happened was some Rep. on the Hill claimed it was "Wag the Dog" and Clinton was simply trying to divert attention away from Monica. According to Clarke, Clinton lost the resolve at that time to continue bombings. He also stated that Clinton gave the order to the CIA to assassinate Osama and his underlings. Supposedly Tenet was asked if he understood the orders and he said yes, but the CIA was unable to locate him or any others. (Another intel breakdown?). We are probably familiar with his rips on the Bush administration.
Ashland - Where to begin?
Does the possibility of misleading statements by a president discount the overthrow of this despot?
I was pissed when Clinton lied about a hummer in the Oval Office. But that lie ultimately did no harm to anyone else in this country except his family. So to answer your question, I do not like misleading statements period.
Are you seeking to do damage to the president and is this more important than Saddam's overthrow?
How am I damaging this president with what I say or ask? My questions are serious. The questions that Clinton went through were meant to damage him. Now, lives are on the line. Then, it was only someone's reputation.
It is rather obvious that for you libs, politics doen't end at the waters edge. You will spread your venomous bias to the ends of the earth, even if it undermines America as a whole.
As far as spreading venomous bias, no one can come close to the king of the ditto-heads, Mr. Bimbo.
The current President, (with the facts concerning WMD aside) did what should've been done. He rid the world of an immediate threat.
Saddam was not an immediate threat to the US.
You seem ungrateful for their sacrifice solely on the premise that it was based on a (supposed) lie.
This is where I get a little pissed. It seems that whenever the president gets criticized, too often some conservatives grasp for the "you aren't patriotic" card. I believe that it was Teddy Roosevelt who said, "Standing behind the president isn't patriotic. Standing behind the country is patriotic" (I may not have the quote exactly correct). I have no idea how you could come up with such a completely false statement based on my posts.
The American people do not buy your argument because there is something about it that is inherently unamerican.
It seems that whenever the president gets criticized, too often some conservatives grasp for the "you aren't patriotic" card.
Your concern is not about the safety of the American people or the Iraqi people. Your concern is getting rid of a president you hate.
I believe you posted these words about Clinton earlier in this thread: "
I had come to the conclusion that he was less than desirable as both a human being and a president but I was willing to merely wait out his time in office and say good ridance." Sounds like you were concerned not with the safety of America but with getting rid of a president you hated. (I know, it was his second term but I'm sure you hated him before 1996 voted against him and didn't think of the safety of the American people)
BTW, in case you haven't noticed, this country is extremely polarized right now. Many people do not like Bush. I believe the latest poll had Kerry 48%, Bush 44%, Nader 3%. I don't think it is so much that people really like Kerry but he is any besides Bush. When the Dems take control of the White House and Congress will you do that self examination that you demand of others? I think not nor should you. That is what is great about this country!
When th Iraqi people are able to govern and police themselves, do not be surprised if they become a great source of tracking and killing these new and potential future Osama's.The future is not as bleak as you often claim as a result of Saddam's removal
I believe just today Rums said that al-quaida has become multi-headed and that more terrorists are being produced than we could possibly hope to keep up with. And you say I paint a bleak future?
I tired of the pasting of your quotes. The last paragraph is simply beyond belief with such blather. It comes across as simple propaganda. (And for the record, my party is neither of the main two. Just because I may rag on the Republicans doesn't mean that I'm a Democrat.)
