Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virginia in 2010?

Posted in the Charleston Forum

Comments (Page 938)

Showing posts 18,741 - 18,760 of51,645
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Mayor Of Topix-Land”

Since: Sep 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20714
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

No. If bush was continuing Clinton's policies, he would have just bombed them every time the violated the no-fly zone. Bush spent billions we didn't have to accomplish nothing.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

That's been more than proven.
Hmm wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't realize 9/11 was just a war on Al Qaeda.
Maybe neither of them were lies? That both Presidents believed what they said?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_...
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[1][2] It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against the Iraqi government.
How did Clinton think it would happen?
Bush was just continuing Clinton's policies.
Not a Republican

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20715
Jul 29, 2013
 
Sundog512 wrote:
Actually, what senior did was correct. He knew that removing Hussein would upset the balance of power in the Mid East and he was correct. Look,what happened after Hussein was ousted from power. Iran started acting up. Syria started having political upheavals as did Egypt. Iraq is in shambles because of the power vacuum left by Hussein. It was a dumb idea and the world is still paying the price for it. Look how many trillion we spent there and how many billions we continue to spend.
<quoted text>
Is that what Bill thought too?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_...

“Mayor Of Topix-Land”

Since: Sep 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20716
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Hmm wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't realize 9/11 was just a war on Al Qaeda.
Maybe neither of them were lies? That both Presidents believed what they said?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_...
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[1][2] It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against the Iraqi government.
How did Clinton think it would happen?
Bush was just continuing Clinton's policies.
Again, who sent the troops in? Who went before the American people after 9/11 filling them with fear about WMD in Iraq?

Don't tell me you suffer fro blame Clinton syndrome.

“My morals return with sunrise”

Since: May 13

Ravenswood

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20717
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bush is a war criminal, not just for recklessly invading the wrong country and predicating it upon absolute lies, but for the way in which it was waged. A half million innocent people dead. Cities carpet-bombed. Torture prisons. It's a disgrace upon the history of this nation ranked with slavery and the internment of the Japanese. It was a financial blunder the likes of which have never been seen. Defending it or any part of it is foolish.
Not a Republican

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20718
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Sundog512 wrote:
No. If bush was continuing Clinton's policies, he would have just bombed them every time the violated the no-fly zone. Bush spent billions we didn't have to accomplish nothing.
Um, Clinton signed a bill into law to oust Saddam out of power. How did he think that was going to be accomplished?
Sundog512 wrote:
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
That's been more than proven.
Good thing the war on Terror had more to do with terrorism in general, and not just the 9/11
Not a Republican

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20719
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

bacon hater wrote:
Bush is a war criminal, not just for recklessly invading the wrong country and predicating it upon absolute lies, but for the way in which it was waged. A half million innocent people dead. Cities carpet-bombed. Torture prisons. It's a disgrace upon the history of this nation ranked with slavery and the internment of the Japanese. It was a financial blunder the likes of which have never been seen. Defending it or any part of it is foolish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

And your post is hyperbolic. I presume you are slathering at the mouth.
Not a Republican

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20720
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The War on Terror (also known as the Global War on Terrorism) is a term commonly applied to an international military campaign which started as a result of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. This resulted in an international military campaign to eliminate al-Qaeda and other militant organizations. The United Kingdom and many other NATO and non-NATO nations participate in the conflict

"Primarily groups that could hurt Saddam's regional foes. Iraq has helped the Iranian dissident group Mujahadeen-e-Khalq, the Kurdistan Workers' Party, a separatist organization fighting the Turkish government, and several far-left Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel. Iraq also hosted the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Saddam was a secular dictator, and his regime generally tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamists such as al-Qaeda, experts say. But Iraq also supported some Islamist Palestinian groups opposed to Israel, and before the 2003 war, the CIA cited Iraq's increased support for such organizations as reason to believe that Baghdad's links to terror could continue to increase."
Not a Republican

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20721
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

So lets recap. Clinton not only said Saddam had WMDs, and NUKES!(He must have lied?) But he signed a bill to OUST Saddam out of power. To get rid of him. How did he think he was going to do that? So Bush did it for not only reasons Clinton gave, but security ones. But he's the war criminal.

lol

“My morals return with sunrise”

Since: May 13

Ravenswood

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20722
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Not a Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
And your post is hyperbolic. I presume you are slathering at the mouth.
Nice name, tea bagger. I'd be ambarassed to call my self a republican too. Lemme guess - you're a "Libertarian" like Bloomberg. Hilarious.

Guantanamo? Really? Blame the tea baggers.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3438347
Nice

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20723
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice name, tea bagger. I'd be ambarassed to call my self a republican too. Lemme guess - you're a "Libertarian" like Bloomberg. Hilarious.
Guantanamo? Really? Blame the tea baggers.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3438347
So Obama was unable to close it because he was stopped?

And it's not just the tea party, who represents very few in Congress.

"President Barack Obama's hardest sell in his renewed push to close the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, may be members of his own party moderate Senate Democrats facing tough re-election bids next year in the strongly Republican South."

What happened when he had the majority? Why not just force it closed like he forced Obamacare through?

No one to blame then when it failed I guess. Seems to be more Democrats worried about their political career. And less about closing it.
Nice

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20724
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

My only point here is to show it's just not one sided like a few partisan Obama shills claim it is. It's sad that our very own people turn a blind eye to lying and wrong doing, as long as "their team" is the one doing it. It doesn't matter what is best for the country. It's what is best for THE TEAM.(Political Party) And this will be the ruin of the nation. Partisan bullcrap.
operators s ck

Kenova, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20725
Jul 29, 2013
 
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice name, tea bagger. I'd be ambarassed to call my self a republican too. Lemme guess - you're a "Libertarian" like Bloomberg. Hilarious.
Guantanamo? Really? Blame the tea baggers.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3438347
even the one at braskem
Well Duh

Harrisonburg, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20726
Jul 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

Bacon Hater.....so when someone comes with there evidence, you go into attack mode instead of proving them wrong. So instead of proof you use name calling to mask your inability to mount a rebuttal. Both parties have proven that neither can be trusted. But you become so blind that you go to blamedisplacement and can not take responsibility for the sctions of your parties mistakes too

“My morals return with sunrise”

Since: May 13

Ravenswood

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20727
Jul 29, 2013
 
Well Duh wrote:
Bacon Hater.....so when someone comes with there evidence, you go into attack mode instead of proving them wrong. So instead of proof you use name calling to mask your inability to mount a rebuttal. Both parties have proven that neither can be trusted. But you become so blind that you go to blamedisplacement and can not take responsibility for the sctions of your parties mistakes too
Like I've said, our mistakes surround a lack of liberalism, not an overabundance of it. He should've pushed it through. He should end the drug war. He never should've compromised a single-payer healthcare plan. He should've used executive orders to force investment in infrastructure and jobs. Our mistake was thinking that dumb tea baggers would still want the economy to be successful. We were wrong. But those days are over. Working with republicans isn't something that Obama will try again, and Hillary won't even think about it. The GOP can't win a national election - it's impossible. There is no candidate crazy enough to win the primary among tea baggers and rational enough to win with the general electorate. Obama has destroyed the party for what they did to the country, not just to him. Hillary will be the one to reap the benefits. She'll ram everything she wants through, and there won't be anymore compromising. On anything. Can't wait.

“The Black Flame”

Since: Oct 09

Albany, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20728
Jul 29, 2013
 
Well Duh wrote:
<quoted text> I know you must be kidding. Yes the war is going to be Bush's staple of his presidential term. But remember he could not go to war without approval. So the people whom voted for it, including Hilary Clinton, are also responsible. So all the people who voted to go are to stupid or no backbone. So they said yes and look into it later. Sounds like how Obama care was passed too. Another couple of reasons why both sides are no good.
A lot of intelligent people have been deceived by convincing lies exp when the lies are told by people in positions of authority and trust.

“Tears of a Clown”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20729
Jul 29, 2013
 
That was why Hillary did not get the 2008 nod over Obama, the war vote was the reason and during the primary debate she defended it, Obama was not in congress at the time and the war was the big subject in 08.

“My morals return with sunrise”

Since: May 13

Ravenswood

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20730
Jul 29, 2013
 
Weepy wrote:
That was why Hillary did not get the 2008 nod over Obama, the war vote was the reason and during the primary debate she defended it, Obama was not in congress at the time and the war was the big subject in 08.
Yep. And her defense was that the president blatantly lied. I remember all the talk surrounding whether or not Obama would seek to prosecute or investigate Bush's war crimes, and I remember how even hardcore democrats were willing to let bygones be bygones. That was a collosal mistake. I think Hillary should revisit that option for both Bush and Cheney, knowing the full cost of his lies are more apparent today than they were in '09.

“Mayor Of Topix-Land”

Since: Sep 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20731
Jul 29, 2013
 
So, Clinton did not invade Iraq. Bush did. Clinton did not spen trillions. Bush did.

Too bad there was no terror coming out of Iraq at the time.
Not a Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, Clinton signed a bill into law to oust Saddam out of power. How did he think that was going to be accomplished?
<quoted text>
Good thing the war on Terror had more to do with terrorism in general, and not just the 9/11

“Tears of a Clown”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20732
Jul 29, 2013
 
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. And her defense was that the president blatantly lied. I remember all the talk surrounding whether or not Obama would seek to prosecute or investigate Bush's war crimes, and I remember how even hardcore democrats were willing to let bygones be bygones. That was a collosal mistake. I think Hillary should revisit that option for both Bush and Cheney, knowing the full cost of his lies are more apparent today than they were in '09.
Actually there is no statute of limitations on prosecution for war crimes, I really believe Obama sees that as a distraction and prosecuting Bush would be a political circus even with the DOJ who Bush used as political pawns to go after people, remember Bush had an Atty General resign in disgrace and they dont want their sheep remembering this. War crimes can be sought at a later date but it my belief this country's power structure wants to protect its past presidents from prosecution, gives a bad name to the US worldwide, there are many countries out there that looks up to the USA and wants all leaders to have had integrity or such.

No GOP opinion on these subjects faze me and should never be taken serious by anyone.

These witchhunts by carjacker Issa are distractions to prevent their sheep from looking at the causes of these meeses and just focus on the current occupant.

“Mayor Of Topix-Land”

Since: Sep 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20733
Jul 29, 2013
 
So,what? He didn't close Guantanamo, big deal. Bush told us he was going to get Osama dead or alive.

How'd that work out for him?
Nice wrote:
<quoted text>
So Obama was unable to close it because he was stopped?
And it's not just the tea party, who represents very few in Congress.
"President Barack Obama's hardest sell in his renewed push to close the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, may be members of his own party moderate Senate Democrats facing tough re-election bids next year in the strongly Republican South."
What happened when he had the majority? Why not just force it closed like he forced Obamacare through?
No one to blame then when it failed I guess. Seems to be more Democrats worried about their political career. And less about closing it.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 18,741 - 18,760 of51,645
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

59 Users are viewing the Charleston Forum right now

Search the Charleston Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
B.W. Jones -Charleston City Police Officer (May '12) 15 min CHAD 25
Wvwho season tickets at a 9 year low 32 min wolfknives 4
Trash that live in white one story house one le... 55 min wolfknives 5
Robin Godfrey 1 hr stallings 2
i miss him 2 hr wifey 16
Rockets fired at Isreal....all because of.... 2 hr IND 11
Judge D Mark Snyder (Feb '12) 3 hr sammy 55
•••
•••
•••
•••

Charleston Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Charleston People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Charleston News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Charleston
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••