Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-16-2004, 04:18 AM   #11
Chewbacca
Zartan
 

Join Date: July 18, 2001
Location: America, On The Beautiful Earth
Age: 50
Posts: 5,373
Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:


The problem I'm having with these blame Pres. Bush crowd is they ingor the Fact that by 1996 the Clinton administration had the intel outlining the Exact plan that was used, and did little for at least 4 years!!!!!!!!!!!!
But they want to blame Pres. Bush who had just been in office for 8 months! I'm not a math wiz but 4 years=48 months 8 months=8months, so in order to Blame Pres. Bush they must place 6 times the blame on Pres. Clinton. That's just on a time basis, not even taking into account that there was an administration change and the Bush White House had to form a new cabinet, appoint people to positions, review what info was left them by the Clinton White House, in short come up to speed. "Hale" Pres. Clinton wrote a 45,000 word memo and NOT ! SINGLE WORD mentioned Al Queda and any threat from them.

IMHO These Bush haters can not see clearly enough to admitt things like that because their desire to prove Pres. Bush is wrong is greater then their desire think logicly. They will complain about being called a Bush hater, instead of addressing why their complaint against Pres. Bush is valid using their evidence. But evidence against Pres. Clinton is not Valid!!!
I'll take the bait.

My "complaints" against Bush are based on his policy desicions, the consequences of those decisions, the people he has chosen as his cohorts, and his general ideaology. I have a list somewhere of nearly 1,000 reasons why I disagree with Bush policy/ideology/cohorts ranging from economics to foreign policy. I don't hate him and I dont blame him either, and as much as you would rather change the subject from Bush's shortcomings to the people who notice them, I now could careless if you call me a Bush-hater. I'll simply refute that as a giant red herring, smoke and mirrors and a big dodge of the real issues at hand. So go ahead and try to paint a general picture of Bush critics as a bunch of haters lacking mental faculties. Your wrong, its obvious- and thats is that. Assigning blame is pointless- assigning responsiblity and holding people accountable is what really counts.

All the evidence is valid, and I await the 9-11 commissions final report.

I don't disregard evidence Bush wasn't on point with regards to pre-9/11 counter-terror and I dont dis-regard any evidence that Clinton wasn't on point either.

Here I'll try my hand at it:

Why is it Bushies feel the need to invoke Clinton whenever a little bit of critisim, a wee call for full disclosure and accountabiltiy is pitched their guys way? You would think the Bush administration could stand on it's own without compare to the last one.
__________________
Support Local Music and Record Stores!
Got Liberty?
Chewbacca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 10:18 AM   #12
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Quote:
Getting back to the real world that the President is supposed to be living in, hijacking is a commonplace crime which rarely ends without severe loss of life and economic disruption and can never be corrected after the act
Getting back to the real real world, prior to 9/11, the way I saw it, I'd rather have my gummint spend time trying to make decisions regarding the economy, environment, etc. that affect thousands every day rather than spend a ton of money just to stop a terrorist from killing 20, 40, or 60 people. Prior to 9/11, terrorism really was, quite rightly, seen as something that was less important than most other things by several magnitudes.

In fact, while it's a single tragedy of awesome proportions, even the 3000+ that died during 9/11 are minor blips on the "social health and welfare" radar when compared to the people who die from pollution, car wrecks, smoking, etc. What makes it so much more important now, is the terror itself has a widespread effect on the population, over and above the deaths of individuals.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 10:35 AM   #13
Skunk
Banned User
 

Join Date: September 3, 2001
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Age: 62
Posts: 1,463
Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:

What makes it so much more important now, is the terror itself has a widespread effect on the population, over and above the deaths of individuals.

It was always important - it's just that with the previous and more vigilant presidents at the helm, it was kept at bay to such an extent that no-one else in the US realised the extent of the threat. It was only when the current President failed in his duty to give it due consideration that Americans began to fully appreciate the sterling efforts of previous Presidents to protect them.
Skunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 10:44 AM   #14
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Quote:
Originally posted by Skunk:

It was always important - it's just that with the previous and more vigilant presidents at the helm, it was kept at bay to such an extent that no-one else in the US realised the extent of the threat. It was only when the current President failed in his duty to give it due consideration that Americans began to fully appreciate the sterling efforts of previous Presidents to protect them.
What utter BS. You post so many thoughtful things, and then you reveal your underlying premises which are so shoddy they are laughable. The other presidents skated by on luck. Just luck. Bush was doing no more or less than they were. He was in office for 8 whole months.

I hope your post was a tongue-in-cheek remark, because it really makes me doubt your overall capacity to debate these issues.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 11:17 AM   #15
Davros
Takhisis Follower
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
I have to mostly agree with TL on this one Skunk (cough cough splutter ). The other presidents were lucky to avoid this and Bush was not as fortunate.

I support the opinion that is coming through from Clarke and O'Neill that Bush was obsessed with completing Daddy's War and that this took much of his focus, but in regard to the twin towers you can't pin that on the unfortunate schmo who happened to be in office at the time.

Mind you, I am betting the repugs would have gone just as hard after Slick Willie if it had happened on his watch, and that some (not all) of the repug debaters on this thread would be arging different and more aggressive approaches in that case.
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD
Davros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 05:40 PM   #16
Skunk
Banned User
 

Join Date: September 3, 2001
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Age: 62
Posts: 1,463
Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
quote:
Originally posted by Skunk:

It was always important - it's just that with the previous and more vigilant presidents at the helm, it was kept at bay to such an extent that no-one else in the US realised the extent of the threat. It was only when the current President failed in his duty to give it due consideration that Americans began to fully appreciate the sterling efforts of previous Presidents to protect them.
What utter BS. You post so many thoughtful things, and then you reveal your underlying premises which are so shoddy they are laughable. The other presidents skated by on luck. Just luck. Bush was doing no more or less than they were. He was in office for 8 whole months.

I hope your post was a tongue-in-cheek remark, because it really makes me doubt your overall capacity to debate these issues.
[/QUOTE]For EIGHT WHOLE MONTHS the country was left wide open to attack - and thus the attack on domestic soil became inevitable. You provide the points that counter your own arguments so I hope your post was a tongue-in-cheek remark, because it really makes me doubt your overall capacity to debate these issues.
Skunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2004, 06:11 PM   #17
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
*bangs head on desk*

I'm done with you for a while. Wide open? You're wrong, and so wrong that it's not worth my time to try to explain it to you. This is a mistake at the remedial level. Which I don't understand because you say some smart things. Never mind, if you don't get it, you don't get it.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:37 AM   #18
John D Harris
Ninja Storm Shadow
 

Join Date: March 27, 2001
Location: Northport,Alabama, USA
Age: 62
Posts: 3,577
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewbacca:
I'll take the bait.

My "complaints" against Bush are based on his policy desicions, the consequences of those decisions, the people he has chosen as his cohorts, and his general ideaology. I have a list somewhere of nearly 1,000 reasons why I disagree with Bush policy/ideology/cohorts ranging from economics to foreign policy. I don't hate him and I dont blame him either, and as much as you would rather change the subject from Bush's shortcomings to the people who notice them, I now could careless if you call me a Bush-hater. I'll simply refute that as a giant red herring, smoke and mirrors and a big dodge of the real issues at hand. So go ahead and try to paint a general picture of Bush critics as a bunch of haters lacking mental faculties. Your wrong, its obvious- and thats is that. Assigning blame is pointless- assigning responsiblity and holding people accountable is what really counts.

All the evidence is valid, and I await the 9-11 commissions final report.

I don't disregard evidence Bush wasn't on point with regards to pre-9/11 counter-terror and I dont dis-regard any evidence that Clinton wasn't on point either.

Here I'll try my hand at it:

Why is it Bushies feel the need to invoke Clinton whenever a little bit of critisim, a wee call for full disclosure and accountabiltiy is pitched their guys way? You would think the Bush administration could stand on it's own without compare to the last one.
Chewbacca, in your reply there are approx. 50 of the words, that could be said to explain your difference with President Bush. The next approx. 195 words are addressing the Bush hate, a ratio of 4:1 you make the call, I calls'em like I sees'em. I don't care if anybody hates President Bush because they think his eyes are to close together, don't like the way he walks/talks, parts his hair/etc. I eagerly await the 6:1 words about not being on point for the previous administration, to what has been posted so far for the current one. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Here's the main difference twix me and thee: I don't give damn about who's at fault, I give a damn about fixx'n it. We can play the blame game all the way back to Adam & Eve, because if Adam hadn't bumped uglies with Eve none of us would be around to even debate this.

Because the Clintonnestas ingor their boy's role is matters while trying to focus only on President Bush's role.
__________________
Crustiest of the OLD COOTS "Donating mirrors for years to help the Liberal/Socialist find their collective rear-ends, because both hands doesn't seem to be working.
Veitnam 61-65:KIA 1864
66:KIA 5008
67:KIA 9378
68:KIA 14594
69:KIA 9414
70:KIA 4221
71:KIA 1380
72:KIA 300

Afghanistan2001-2008 KIA 585
2009-2012 KIA 1465 and counting

Davros 1
Much abliged Massachusetts
John D Harris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 11:51 AM   #19
John D Harris
Ninja Storm Shadow
 

Join Date: March 27, 2001
Location: Northport,Alabama, USA
Age: 62
Posts: 3,577
Skunk you said you were in the military right? So the intire time you were in the military every exercise you were on was done immedietly(sp?) every war game you were in was started as soon as the words left the commanding officers mouth? Or did all those have to be planned and have logistics gather everthing first? If the exercises had to have logisics first how long did that take? Unless you are saying you had a teliportation device, that could instantly transprot the resources and personnel to where they were needed, it took time to get them there, AFTER A PLAN WAS FORMED!!!!!. In forming the plans are you saying it was instantious(sp?)? no working out of problems , no looking for potinial problems? everything was correct and right in the very instant the thought of a possible plan entered the comanding officer's mind?
__________________
Crustiest of the OLD COOTS "Donating mirrors for years to help the Liberal/Socialist find their collective rear-ends, because both hands doesn't seem to be working.
Veitnam 61-65:KIA 1864
66:KIA 5008
67:KIA 9378
68:KIA 14594
69:KIA 9414
70:KIA 4221
71:KIA 1380
72:KIA 300

Afghanistan2001-2008 KIA 585
2009-2012 KIA 1465 and counting

Davros 1
Much abliged Massachusetts
John D Harris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2004, 12:05 PM   #20
skywalker
Banned User
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: VT, USA
Age: 63
Posts: 3,097
Tell me John, what is your summation of Bill Clinton as President and otherwise?

Mark
skywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NWN2 - Hats/Helms (Item & Minor Plot Spoilers?) slimjimosu Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 Also SoU & HotU Forum 8 01-05-2007 02:51 PM
Liberals win in Australia wellard General Discussion 21 10-12-2004 01:59 PM
Liberals Want Their Own Network Grojlach General Discussion 11 08-12-2004 10:01 AM
Liberals cheering the enemy? Iron_Ranger General Discussion 30 04-22-2003 04:06 PM
Hats? Istaron Baldurs Gate II Archives 13 10-02-2001 11:49 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved