Bill Clinton pwns Fox News

[edg]

I'm not worried. I keep the bullet with my name on it in my wallet - I'm safe.

edg

[MeatPuppet]

How so?......

There were numerous terrorist training camps in Iraq. They are no longer there. Iraq is no longer a safe place for wounded terrorist leaders to recover from their wounds. The government of Iraq is no longer giving large sums of money to the families of suicide bombers.

Yes the terrorists we are killing are being replaced. There may be(probably are) more "terrorists" now than before we started knocking over countries. But the terrorist's who are stepping up to fill the vacuum we are creating are far less of a danger to us than the ones we are killing.

The new terrorist's have not been trained by our own CIA. They are not battle hardened by years of fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. They are not battle hardened from the Iran/Iraq war. They have not had 30 years to build a network and a methodology. They are disorganized, fractured and have more passion than experience.

That's why we are safer now than before we took out Iraq and Afghanistan.

[edg]

So where's the war with Saudi? Training camps : Check. Paying suicide bombers : Check. Funding terrorism : Check. A role in 9/11 : Check.

edg

[Buster Highmen]

There were numerous terrorist training camps in Iraq. They are no longer there. Iraq is no longer a safe place for wounded terrorist leaders to recover from their wounds. The government of Iraq is no longer giving large sums of money to the families of suicide bombers.

Yes the terrorists we are killing are being replaced. There may be(probably are) more "terrorists" now than before we started knocking over countries. But the terrorist's who are stepping up to fill the vacuum we are creating are far less of a danger to us than the ones we are killing.

The new terrorist's have not been trained by our own CIA. They are not battle hardened by years of fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. They are not battle hardened from the Iran/Iraq war. They have not had 30 years to build a network and a methodology. They are disorganized, fractured and have more passion than experience.

That's why we are safer now than before we took out Iraq and Afghanistan.

So we should disregard the intelligence when it doesn't fit our agenda, huh?

Honestly, what's a nincompoop like you playing an expert on this stuff doing?

There were no remaining WMDs. Saddam didn't support al-Qaeda. These were the foundations for the Iraq war which have since been shown to be bogus fabrications of the current administration.

[edg]

And whilst we're at it, what about the terrorists, from the UK, who decided to blow people up on the underground. Where were the US during the Irish troubles? OH WAIT! YEAH! Funding the fucking terrorists.

edg

[Tuckerman]

Why the fuck are we still arguing about Bill Clinton.

Because the thread topic is Bill Clinton blahblahblah...

[MeatPuppet]

So we should disregard the intelligence when it doesn't fit our agenda, huh?

Honestly, what's a nincompoop like you playing an expert on this stuff doing?

There were no remaining WMDs. Saddam didn't support al-Qaeda. These were the foundations for the Iraq war which have since been shown to be bogus fabrications of the current administration.

You will never find a post from me saying we should have gone into Iraq because of WMD. That was a political stunt by Bush to try to garner public support for the war. I thought it was a bad move on his part at the time. I haven't changed my opinion in the interim.

I never said Saddam supported al-qaeda. Saddam supported terrorist's. After 9/11 that was enough to take him out.

This administration reminds me of the 12 circus clowns stuffed onto a small fire engine looking for fires to put out. That doesn't mean that I disaprove of the outcome of some of their actions, namely the overthrow of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The fact that you failed to address the substance of my post and instead resorted to name calling and attacking straw men(that I have never had anything to do with) is exhibit "A" that you have nothing to contribute on this topic.

[Grange]

Mr. Wallace looked like a deer in headlights. That was great. I watched the clip with his take on the interview afterwards and he acted surprised that Clinton brought up Somalia which I almost couldn't believe. Somalia was part of his speech/question.

[MeatPuppet]

So where's the war with Saudi? Training camps : Check. Paying suicide bombers : Check. Funding terrorism : Check. A role in 9/11 : Check.

edg

Everybody has to be delt with differently.

Besides, I'm not defending any political figure/party. I am supporting some of the actions of our current administration, nothing more.

[rideit]

There were numerous terrorist training camps in Iraq.

Proof, please. I smell bullshit.

[MeatPuppet]

Proof, please. I smell bullshit.

My lunch break is over, but I'll get back to you on that.

[Buster Highmen]

You will never find a post from me saying we should have gone into Iraq because of WMD. That was a political stunt by Bush to try to garner public support for the war. I thought it was a bad move on his part at the time. I haven't changed my opinion in the interim.

I never said Saddam supported al-qaeda. Saddam supported terrorist's. After 9/11 that was enough to take him out.

I resort to the tactics because you come across like the above matter of fact statement: "It was enough to take him out".

Taking out Saddam has led to the current rats nest and while the guy is a was a dictator of our own brewing, that action does not warrant the consequences. We would have been a lot better off following up on bin Laden and attempting to spend our resources in Sudan and the Congo.

This administration reminds me of the 12 circus clowns stuffed onto a small fire engine looking for fires to put out. That doesn't mean that I disaprove of the outcome of some of their actions, namely the overthrow of Iraq and Afghanistan.


The fact that you failed to address the substance of my post and instead resorted to name calling and attacking straw men(that I have never had anything to do with) is exhibit "A" that you have nothing to contribute on this topic.

I don't think there is any substance to your post. All there is is a statement that we're safer when reports that at least have some credibility say the opposite. As did Madrid and London.

The price has been poorly calculated.

[creaker]

Seriously, he seemed off his meds or something. And the gap between his socks and pant cuffs made him look like a copier salesman. I just couldn't get past that.

Don Imus has this right when he suggests they let Saddam go, slap him on the wrist and make him say 'I'm sorry I was such a brutal dictator", and return him to run the country. He'd get it back under control in no time.

And by the way, anyone who doesn't think that Saddam and his pals were not cooking batches of WMDs has had a little to much Kool - Aid. Those were some really stealthy searches, I mean how could they have possibly known in advance that anyone was coming for a looksee?

Also, anyone expecting intellegent political commentary on a website like this really needs a bigger worldview.

Me, I just want to go skiing, and would prefer not to be nuked whilst in the process.

[Mcwop]

Fact is that neither Clinton or Bush did/is doing enough. They are both putzes in their own unique ways.

I am looking forward to the next presidential election where we are presented with two new putzes to select from. Hey, maybe we will get lucky with some decent candidates.

[craigmont]

you're quoting an article from the BBC, that references a NYT article that is taking leaked inteligence out of context?

No, It's a National Intelligence Estimate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...gence_Estimate

[rideit]

Did anyone watch Bush being interviewed by Wolf Blitzer?

What a bitter little mental midget in Denial. Wolf kept trying to call him out, and he kept being a dick back. Painful.

[BigKuba]

Weak sauce: all the youtube clips have been removed, just as I was getting to part 3. Anyone know of analternate place to get them?

[Natedogg]

And by the way, anyone who doesn't think that Saddam and his pals were not cooking batches of WMDs has had a little to much Kool - Aid. Those were some really stealthy searches, I mean how could they have possibly known in advance that anyone was coming for a looksee?

When you post your credentials for making such a incriminating statement, I'll listen. Were you there? Do you know any of the inspectors? Are they idiots? Do you know how many locations in such a small, mostly desolate country are suitable for creating WMDs? Do you know that WMD byproducts, wastestreams, proxy indicators were tested for or were not tested for? Do you know how easy it is to move every trace of a WMD-producing plant to a location where you cannot be tracked or observed? Since you are so sure of yourself, please, for the love of god, enlighten us.

[creaker]

I guess those thousands of bodies stacked in big holes all over the country were the result of a nation of naturally curious hobbiest chemists.

[f2f]

I work for Clinton; So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about. But trust me.... You don't. I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about. This is how bad info gets passed around. If you dont know about the topic.... Dont make yourself sound like you do. Cos some Republicans believe anything they hear.

[CUBUCK]

are you a chubby chick?

[Buster Highmen]

I work for Clinton; So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Pinko!....

[Arty50]

I guess those thousands of bodies stacked in big holes all over the country were the result of a nation of naturally curious hobbiest chemists.

The thousands of bodies stacked in big holes in former Yugoslavia didn't get there from WMDs. Why do you assume it's different in Iraq?

[skiski]

[QUOTE=creaker;915163]Seriously, he seemed off his meds or something. And the gap between his socks and pant cuffs made him look like a copier salesman. I just couldn't get past that.

[QUOTE]

Maybe you should have looked beyond the pant cuffs. Clinton spoke passionately, while staying rational and coherent. He was pissed, so he said what was on his mind. - not like Bush, who just sits there, speechless, with that angry look on his face when faced with a similar situation (see his first debate with Kerry).

[Will]

Two points:

1) Meat Puppet is thinking of Ansar al-Islam when he refers to "terrorist training camps". Ansar al-Islam was an anti-saddam group based in the kurdish north. So yes, there were terrorists in Iraq. No, they were not working with Saddam (they were trying to overthow him). No, Saddam did not have control of the area in which they operated. Incidently, who was chilling with these guys post 9/11 and pre-invasion? Just some schmoe named Zarqawi; of course, once the government fell to the Americans and chaos reigned he suddenly became very very important.

MP might also be thinking of Abu Nidal and "some other guy" whose name I forget. Both were terrorists active in the 80s. Once Bush listed these two as "terrorists in Iraq" the second dude turned up in Baghdad with two bullets in the back of his head. Seems the Iraqi security services were trying to kill any US justification for the war. Nidal disappeared, and was later caught by Americans.

2) Rep. Dick Armey, GOP majority leader:
"The suspicion some people have about the president's motives in this attack [on Iraq] is itself a powerful argument for
impeachment," Armey said in a statement. "After months of lies, the president
has given millions of people around the world reason to doubt that he has sent
Americans into battle for the right reasons."

Rep. Gerald Solomon, R-N.Y.:
"It is obvious that they're (the Clinton White
House) doing everything they can to postpone the vote on this impeachment in
order to try to get whatever kind of leverage they can, and the American people
ought to be as outraged as I am about it," Solomon said in an interview with
CNN. Asked if he was accusing Clinton of playing with American lives for
political expediency, Solomon said, "Whether he knows it or not, that's exactly
what he's doing."

GOP Sen. Dan Coats Coats, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said"
in a statement, "While there is clearly much more we need to learn about this
attack [on bin Laden] and why it was ordered today, given the president's
personal difficulties this week, it is legitimate to question the timing of this
action."

Sen. Larry Craig, U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee: "The foregoing, the
premise of the recent film 'Wag the Dog,' might once have seemed farfetched. Yet
it can hardly escape comment that on the very day, August 17, that President
Bill Clinton is scheduled to testify before a federal grand jury to explain his
possibly criminal behavior, Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton has ordered U.S.
Marines and air crews to commence several days of ground and air exercises in,
yes, Albania as a warning of possible NATO intervention in next-door Kosovo ...

"Not too many years ago, it would not have entered the mind of even the worst of
cynics to speculate whether any American president, whatever his political
difficulties, would even consider sending U.S. military personnel into harm's
way to serve his own, personal needs. But in an era when pundits openly weigh
the question of whether President Clinton will (or should) tell the truth under
oath not because he has a simple obligation to do so but because of the possible
impact on his political 'viability' -- is it self-evident that military
decisions are not affected by similar considerations? Under the circumstances,
it is fair to ask to what extent the Clinton Administration has forfeited the
benefit of the doubt as to the motives behind its actions."

GOP activist Paul Weyrich: "Paul Weyrich, a leading conservative activist, said
Clinton's decision to bomb on the eve of the impeachment vote 'is more of an
impeachable offense than anything he is being charged with in Congress.'"

Wall Street Journal editorial: "It is dangerous for an American president to
launch a military strike, however justified, at a time when many will conclude
he acted only out of narrow self-interest to forestall or postpone his own
impeachment."

Sen. Trent Lott, GOP majority leader: "I cannot support this military action in
the Persian Gulf at this time," Lott said in a statement. "Both the timing and
the policy are subject to question."

Rep. Gerald Solomon: "'Never underestimate a desperate president,' said a
furious House Rules Committee Chairman Gerald B.H. Solomon (R-N.Y.). 'What
option is left for getting impeachment off the front page and maybe even
postponed? And how else to explain the sudden appearance of a backbone that has
been invisible up to now?'"

Rep. Tillie Folwer: "'It [the bombing of Iraq] is certainly rather suspicious
timing,' said Rep. Tillie Fowler (R-Florida). 'I think the president is
shameless in what he would do to stay in office.'"

Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle Forum: "First, it [intervention in Kosovo] is a 'wag the
dog' public relations ploy to involve us in a war in order to divert attention
from his personal scandals (only a few of which were addressed in the Senate
trial). He is again following the scenario of the 'life is truer than fiction'
movie 'Wag the Dog.' The very day after his acquittal, Clinton moved quickly to
'move on' from the subject of impeachment by announcing threats to bomb and to
send U.S. ground troops into the civil war in Kosovo between Serbian authorities
and ethnic Albanians fighting for independence. He scheduled Americans to be
part of a NATO force under non-American command."

Jim Hoagland, Washington Post: "President Clinton has indelibly associated a
justified military response ... with his own wrongdoing ... Clinton has now
injected the impeachment process against him into foreign policy, and vice
versa."

Wall Street Journal editorial: "Perceptions that the American president is less
interested in the global consequences than in taking any action that will enable
him to hold onto power [are] a further demonstration that he has dangerously
compromised himself in conducting the nation's affairs, and should be
impeached."