You are overstepping reality on this one. Bush supporters are way overmatched in this forum from what i see.
Add link: China and the Middle East: A New Patron of Regional Instability
(Heritage Foundation - Sep26- Ji Hye Shin and John J. Tkacik Jr.)
You are overstepping reality on this one. Bush supporters are way overmatched in this forum from what i see.
[/quote]
In numbers, perhaps… but, not in quality… Haha! 
Already posted on another link that the generals at the time had sufficient troops for Afghanistan and did not view the effort in Iraq as in any way taking forces that were needed from them away.
Oh.
[url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09272006/postopinion/opedcolumnists/bill_pardoned_terror_opedcolumnists_joseph_f__conner.htm]In 1999, the Clinton adminstration cravenly offered pardons to 16 hard-core, remorseless terrorists of the Puerto Rican terror group Armed Forces for National Liberation - the FALN.
During the 1970s and '80s, the FALN waged a war against the people of the United States that included 130 plus bombings. Their most heinous attack was the January 1975 lunchtime bombing of Fraunces Tavern here in New York City. It killed four people…[/url]
No, I meant in quality and substance. I would have said “outnumbered” if otherwise.
Sorry to burst your balloon, but Bush supporters are only fooling themselves. The joke is on you.
BTW: How do you assume that since I am anti Bush, I am a pro Clinton? Clinton also pardoned Marc Rich and was doing backdoor deals with the Chinese. Do you think I don’t realize that he was up to his neck in rotten deals and compromises? At least he had some brains between his ears and didn’t bring us to the verge of WW3.
no that was courtesy of our best “expresident” Carter, a man who “meant well” and has “served as our nation’s conscience.” Did I miss any of the PR lines that he and his supporters are spouting to rewrite history. Trace all this Islamofascist nonsense back to one seminal event: that event is the Iranian revolution. Afghanistan merely added fuel to the fire when the Russians invaded in 1980. We will be cleaning up this mess for a LONG time. Pity. Reagan managed to engineer peaceful revolutions in Thailand, Indonesia, Korea, Taiwan, Philippines and throughout Latin America and the legacy he left ensured the peaceful demise of the Soviet Union and its relaxation of its grip on Eastern and Baltic Europe.
Do you believe that there would be peace in the Middle East or that the incessant demands that the Muslims dish out would be any less worse or would they have slowly increased before boiling the frog? Better to have this all out in the open. Even Europe knows what it faces now despite dysfunctional denials for the past 30 years. Welcome to the party pal!
Yeah, sure, I bet they did. Good one.
"There are not nearly enough U.S., Western or Afghan troops or resources in the field to counter them. At a time when the American president has resurrected Osama bin Laden as public enemy No. 1—comparing him recently to Lenin and Hitler—Bush’s own top commander in the field, Army Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, says not enough money is being invested in creating a new Afghanistan. Improving Afghan lives is the only way to drive a stake through the Taliban or put the elusive Qaeda leader out of action, he says. “We need more in terms of investment in Afghan infrastructure. We need more resources, for road building, counternarcotics, good governance, a justice system,” . . . "
sorry spook -
Can you put a date on this sourcing?
This link is from an article dated - "Oct. 2, 2006 issue " - that really doesn’t nail down when this action might have occurred.
An article on “The Rise of Jihadistan” from Newweak just rings hollow.
The money quote you seem to have missed -[quote]NATO officials say the Taliban seems to be flush with cash, thanks to the guerrillas’ alliance with prosperous opium traffickers. The fighters are paid more than $5 a day—good money in Afghanistan, and at least twice what the new Afghan National Army’s 30,000 soldiers receive.[/quote] speaks volumes asto the true motivation of the fighters.
Don’t care to address this?
OOPS!..My Bad… this thread is about slapping down the lies of former President Clinton* in his recent attempt at re-writing his legacy
sorry to deviate off topic.
Legacy? This ain’t about no stinkin’ legacy! look at the calendar!.. the midterms are coming! the midterms are coming! Nothing like a little righteous indignation to motivate those Democratic voters to go out and support the party message which is… umm… ? 
Oh crap, you know…just… different! :s
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]sorry spook -
Can you put a date on this sourcing?
This link is from an article dated - "Oct. 2, 2006 issue " - that really doesn’t nail down when this action might have occurred.
An article on “The Rise of Jihadistan” from Newweak just rings hollow. . . .[/quote]
" . . . according to a paper prepared for a Ministry of Defence thinktank . . . the British government sent troops into Afghanistan “with its eyes closed.” . . .
It claims that a secret deal to extricate UK troops from Iraq so they could focus on Afghanistan failed when British military leaders were overruled. . . ."
Bob,
Clinton could have known LOTS more about OBL and al Qaeda had he accepted offers from the Sudanese to take files and files on OBL and al Qaeda.
That’s one of the major differences in the way the Dems and the GOP have looked at the problem of terrorism… the Dems regard the problem as a legal matter to be dealt with primarily throeugh laws and police actions, while the GOP regards terrorism as a military threat to be dealt with primarily via military means.
Had Clinton regarded OBL and terrorism as a military threat (al Qaeda had long previously declared war on the US), then he might well have accepted the Sudanese offer to take possesion of OBL.
How might that have changed future events?[/quote]
Yeah, TM, and our military response has gotten us where in Afghanistan (can you say resurgent Taliban, record poppy yields, increasing violence, Musharref’s peace pact with the Taliban’s hosts)? in Iraq (Can you say civil war, sectarian violence, Iranian influence)? That worked REALLY well, not!
Thank god we have had Presidents who actually believe they are not ABOVE the law - don’t think GWB and his compadres can say that. And, no, I don’t count lying about some ridiculous sexual shenanigans as being in the same league as disregarding the constitution (spying on US citizens without proper warrants, Presidential signing statements where GWB picks and chooses which laws he’ll abide by, etc.), and international as well as military law (torture).
Bodo
Oh.
[url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09272006/postopinion/opedcolumnists/bill_pardoned_terror_opedcolumnists_joseph_f__conner.htm]In 1999, the Clinton adminstration cravenly offered pardons to 16 hard-core, remorseless terrorists of the Puerto Rican terror group Armed Forces for National Liberation - the FALN.
During the 1970s and '80s, the FALN waged a war against the people of the United States that included 130 plus bombings. Their most heinous attack was the January 1975 lunchtime bombing of Fraunces Tavern here in New York City. It killed four people…[/url][/quote]
Whatever, and Bush allows Posada, and Bosch to live in Miami - they happened to terrorize the right folks, and keep the constituents in Florida happy. Is this getting us anywhere - this ridiculous tit for tat. Those who see Bush’s Iraq/terror policy as flawed have legitimate arguments, and no Bush hasn’t gotten it ALL wrong either - he did whup ass on those pricks, the Taliban.
Bodo
no that was courtesy of our best “expresident” Carter, a man who “meant well” and has “served as our nation’s conscience.” Did I miss any of the PR lines that he and his supporters are spouting to rewrite history. Trace all this Islamofascist nonsense back to one seminal event: that event is the Iranian revolution. Afghanistan merely added fuel to the fire when the Russians invaded in 1980. We will be cleaning up this mess for a LONG time. Pity. Reagan managed to engineer peaceful revolutions in Thailand, Indonesia, Korea, Taiwan, Philippines and throughout Latin America and the legacy he left ensured the peaceful demise of the Soviet Union and its relaxation of its grip on Eastern and Baltic Europe.
Do you believe that there would be peace in the Middle East or that the incessant demands that the Muslims dish out would be any less worse or would they have slowly increased before boiling the frog? Better to have this all out in the open. Even Europe knows what it faces now despite dysfunctional denials for the past 30 years. Welcome to the party pal![/quote]
Fred, :bravo:
You give Reagan too much credit. What about the people and leaders of the above cited countries? They didn’t have anything to do with the changes that took place in their countries? I think those changes were more about the people of said geographical locale than Mr. Reagan engineering it all. You make him sound like GOD herself.
And you forgot to mention the violent insurgencies that he supported in Central America. Did that work out well? I guess if you’re not one of those who got killed or who lost family.
Bodo
[quote]Fred,
You give Reagan too much credit. [/quote]
Do I? Notice you do not disagree about Carter…
Well, most of the leaders of Eastern Europe who emerged after the fall of the Soviet Union credited Reagan so why shouldn’t I?
Yeah. I notice that you forgot to mention that those violent insurgencies were mostly anti-communism campaigns. Guess you forgot that the Communists in Nicaragua, El Salvador and elsewhere were the aggressors. Right? Anyway, they were fighting for communism at the time. We were fighting against it. Today, communism has been relegated to the dustbin of history and is widely pilloried for its foolish policies and systemic abuses especially regarding human rights. But do we hear any mea culpas from those that supported such policies and governments? Carter? the left? No. We hear an up-the-ante shrillness about Guantanamo. Give me a f***ing break.
But anyway, I am always pleased at EVERY opportunity to vent about our “best expresident” and a man “who meant well” who has become the “conscience of our nation.” I wonder how long these “titles” will last once the public relations machine dries up? How long will the Carter brigade stick around to support its hero? I live with a smirk on my face and a skip in my step. Champagne on me when the day comes that we no longer have to listen to such tripe! Viva la Carter! haha
There is a powerful movement towards socialist principles occuring now in South America and you know it. Why do you even bother?
Bob, he can’t help it… the words from his computer keyboard are basically the final muscle spasms of a creature dying from humiliation. He wants to blame Carter for everything on the planet; most hilarious was when he tried to blame Carter for Pol Pot’s efforts in Cambodia. One might as well blame Ike for starvation in Mao’s China, but of course with so little credibility left Fred’s got to clutch at straws.
Regarding Clinton’s smack-down of Fox, it was hilarious. While gasping for breath, that poor Wallace guy made some pretty pathetic faces. Thought the sucker was going to start crying then and there as it all started sliding away from him.
TM, interesting comparison, but does that really only hold true post 911 rather than prior ?
Had 911 occured prior to Clinton being advised where to find OBL etc, then i expect that the reaction would have been somewhat different.
911 has changed the way that many people around the world, not just US citizens regard OBL and his like, hell even Fred admits that it was 911 that turned him into the thing that he has become. How hard did Bush go after OBL prior to 911, and without wishing to detract from the troop efforts in Afghanistan, he does not seem exactly to keen on really pursuing him even now, and this from the person that rated him as the no. 1 menace in the world.
TM, interesting comparison, but does that really only hold true post 911 rather than prior ?[/quote]
Actually, that’s a good point you raise Traveller – once upon a time you could count on the Republicans to start screaming their heads off anytime Clinton tried to do anything about Osama Bin Laden and his buddies. Keep in mind that when Clinton launched 60 cruise missiles against OBL (which narrowly missed killing the man, even in the period before armed Predator drones), it was the Republicans who insisted Clinton was only trying to distract the nation from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Sen. Coats of Indiana and Specter of Pennsylvania had lots of questions about his timing – the answer to which was fairly simple and straightforward. After all, OBL’s killers had tried to blow up our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya 13 days before. Note that Bush waited nearly a month to try to do anything in Afghanistan. One would think that the Republicans and the Taliban were best buddies by the treatment Bush gave them – red-carpet treatment when Bush was governor and $43 million in payoffs when Bush was president.
[quote=“fred smith”][quote]Fred,
You give Reagan too much credit. [/quote]
Do I? Notice you do not disagree about Carter…
Well, most of the leaders of Eastern Europe who emerged after the fall of the Soviet Union credited Reagan so why shouldn’t I?
Yeah. I notice that you forgot to mention that those violent insurgencies were mostly anti-communism campaigns. Guess you forgot that the Communists in Nicaragua, El Salvador and elsewhere were the aggressors. Right? Anyway, they were fighting for communism at the time. We were fighting against it. Today, communism has been relegated to the dustbin of history and is widely pilloried for its foolish policies and systemic abuses especially regarding human rights. But do we hear any mea culpas from those that supported such policies and governments? Carter? the left? No. We hear an up-the-ante shrillness about Guantanamo. Give me a f***ing break.
But anyway, I am always pleased at EVERY opportunity to vent about our “best expresident” and a man “who meant well” who has become the “conscience of our nation.” I wonder how long these “titles” will last once the public relations machine dries up? How long will the Carter brigade stick around to support its hero? I live with a smirk on my face and a skip in my step. Champagne on me when the day comes that we no longer have to listen to such tripe! Viva la Carter! haha[/quote]
Fred,
Merely pointing out that not all of Reagan’s overseas adventures were non-violent - which is what I would prefer. I think violence and resorting to the military are last options when nothing else works - and I mean you actually have tried and exhausted all other means, not simply paid lip service.
Frankly, I don’t know much about Carter’s admin. I was still a wee little girl then. The only Carter I know is the guy they gave the Nobel Peace Prize to - and that’s the impression I have of the man. ::shrug:: But, if your pokes at Carter were meant to get to me, don’t waste your time - really. I have nothing invested in Mr. Carter or Clinton or the Bushes or Reagan. I would just like to have honest, effective politicians who are truly looking out for the average gal - sort of a utilitarian philosophy. I’m not married to a political party - I do have fun disparaging the neocons and GWB from time to time because they have provided plenty of fodder for ridicule.
Bodo