The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 61

Thread: GOP decides ‘It’s the economy’ for 2010

  1. #31
    Senior Member limiman12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Red Oak Iowa
    Posts
    1,480

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    the economic crisis is almost over, at least obama stimulous is working. This is how the white house measures success these days...

    google searches

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25083.html

    a real crack economic team
    Google searches down, perhaps it is because people no longer have a house, or at least internet, or just have the sights earmarked so they don't have to search....

    Bottom line is that a government big enough to give all is big enough to take all. When party loyalty trumps common sense neither side is right.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntsmanTollers View Post
    Don't start praising Clinton's success record in conflict. He ignored most threats and attacks. For example the USS Cole and the Embassy bombing. He was also in charge when operations in Somalia began (aka Blackhawk Down) and we are still there too. "
    Let’s see, where to start.
     
    The USS Cole bombing took place in theYemeni port Of Aden. 17 sailors died and Clinton was President at that time. So if Clinton was President, he must have been responsible right?
    On 14 March 2007, a federal judge in the United States, Robert Doumar ruled that the Sudanese government was liable for the bombing. The ruling was issued in response to a lawsuit filed against the Sudanese government by relatives of the victims, who claim that Al-Qaeda could not have carried out the attacks without the support of Sudanese officials. The judge stated "There is substantial evidence in this case presented by the expert testimony that the government of Sudan induced the particular bombing of the Cole by virtue of prior actions of the government of Sudan." On 25 July 2007, Doumar ordered the Sudanese government to pay $8 million to the families of the 17 sailors who died. He calculated the amount they should receive by multiplying the salary of the sailors by the number of years they would have continued to work. Sudan's Justice Minister Mohammed al-Mard has stated that Sudan intends to appeal the ruling.
    If Clinton was “responsible” for the attack, he must have been responsible for the arrest and conviction of those who committed the attack on the USS Cole.
    By May 2008, all defendants convicted in the attack had escaped from prison or been freed by Yemeni officials.
    Hence, if all defendants convicted had escaped or been released by 2008, wouldn’t President Bush have to take responsibility for that?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing#Responsibility
    In the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in 1998, you say that President Clinton was responsible. Again, he must have also been responsible for the capture and conviction of most of those responsible.
    The indictment
    The current indictment[17] charges the following twenty-one people for various alleged roles in this crime.
    Muhammad Atef
    killed in Afghanistan in 2001
    Muhsin Musa Matwalli Atwah
    killed in Pakistan in 2006
    Wadih el Hage
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Mohamed Sadeek Odeh
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-'Owhali
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Khalfan Khamis Mohamed
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Khalid al Fawwaz
    held in the UK since 1998
    Ibrahim Eidarous
    held in the UK since 1999. Died in prison in 2008.
    Adel Abdel Bary
    held in the UK since 1999
    Mamdouh Mahmud Salim
    arrested in 1998, held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp[19]
    Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani
    arrested in 2004, held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp[19]
    Mustafa Mohamed Fadhil
    probably held, but may still be loose[citation needed]
    Osama bin Laden
    at large
    Ayman al Zawahiri
    at large
    Saif al Adel
    at large
    Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah
    unknown since attack
    Anas al Liby
    at large
    Fazul Abdullah Mohammed
    at large
    Ahmed Mohamed Hamed Ali
    at large
    Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam
    killed in Pakistan in 2009
    Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan
    killed in Pakistan in 2009

     
     
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_U.S._embassy_bombings

    At Black Hawk Down, One hundred-and-twenty-three U.S. troops were involved in the Mogadishu conflict. Nineteen were killed, and one thousand Somalis also perished.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265086/
     
    If President Clinton was “responsible” for these attacks, then President Bush has to be held “responsible” for the 2001 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center killing over 3,000 people and the killing of over 4,000 soldiers in Iraq plus the 100,000 plus maimed and injured. Not to mention all the innocent Iraq citizens killed and wounded.
    Our reason for invading Afghanistan was to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden who planned the attack on the WTC. I believe Osama is still running around loose and GWB said "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
    - G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
    Then, dear President said "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
    - G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
    "I am truly not that concerned about him."
    - G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
    3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
    http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html
    If we invaded Afghanistan in October, 2001 for the sole purpose of killing or capturing bin Laden, why in 2002 did dear leader say he did not care where bin Laden was?

  3. #33
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    Let’s see, where to start.
     
    The USS Cole bombing took place in theYemeni port Of Aden. 17 sailors died and Clinton was President at that time. So if Clinton was President, he must have been responsible right?
    On 14 March 2007, a federal judge in the United States, Robert Doumar ruled that the Sudanese government was liable for the bombing. The ruling was issued in response to a lawsuit filed against the Sudanese government by relatives of the victims, who claim that Al-Qaeda could not have carried out the attacks without the support of Sudanese officials. The judge stated "There is substantial evidence in this case presented by the expert testimony that the government of Sudan induced the particular bombing of the Cole by virtue of prior actions of the government of Sudan." On 25 July 2007, Doumar ordered the Sudanese government to pay $8 million to the families of the 17 sailors who died. He calculated the amount they should receive by multiplying the salary of the sailors by the number of years they would have continued to work. Sudan's Justice Minister Mohammed al-Mard has stated that Sudan intends to appeal the ruling.
    If Clinton was “responsible” for the attack, he must have been responsible for the arrest and conviction of those who committed the attack on the USS Cole.
    By May 2008, all defendants convicted in the attack had escaped from prison or been freed by Yemeni officials.
    Hence, if all defendants convicted had escaped or been released by 2008, wouldn’t President Bush have to take responsibility for that?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing#Responsibility
    In the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in 1998, you say that President Clinton was responsible. Again, he must have also been responsible for the capture and conviction of most of those responsible.
    The indictment
    The current indictment[17] charges the following twenty-one people for various alleged roles in this crime.
    Muhammad Atef
    killed in Afghanistan in 2001
    Muhsin Musa Matwalli Atwah
    killed in Pakistan in 2006
    Wadih el Hage
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Mohamed Sadeek Odeh
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-'Owhali
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Khalfan Khamis Mohamed
    serving life without parole since 2001[18]
    Khalid al Fawwaz
    held in the UK since 1998
    Ibrahim Eidarous
    held in the UK since 1999. Died in prison in 2008.
    Adel Abdel Bary
    held in the UK since 1999
    Mamdouh Mahmud Salim
    arrested in 1998, held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp[19]
    Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani
    arrested in 2004, held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp[19]
    Mustafa Mohamed Fadhil
    probably held, but may still be loose[citation needed]
    Osama bin Laden
    at large
    Ayman al Zawahiri
    at large
    Saif al Adel
    at large
    Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah
    unknown since attack
    Anas al Liby
    at large
    Fazul Abdullah Mohammed
    at large
    Ahmed Mohamed Hamed Ali
    at large
    Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam
    killed in Pakistan in 2009
    Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan
    killed in Pakistan in 2009

     
     
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_U.S._embassy_bombings

    At Black Hawk Down, One hundred-and-twenty-three U.S. troops were involved in the Mogadishu conflict. Nineteen were killed, and one thousand Somalis also perished.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265086/
     
    If President Clinton was “responsible” for these attacks, then President Bush has to be held “responsible” for the 2001 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center killing over 3,000 people and the killing of over 4,000 soldiers in Iraq plus the 100,000 plus maimed and injured. Not to mention all the innocent Iraq citizens killed and wounded.
    Our reason for invading Afghanistan was to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden who planned the attack on the WTC. I believe Osama is still running around loose and GWB said "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
    - G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
    Then, dear President said "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
    - G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
    "I am truly not that concerned about him."
    - G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
    3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
    http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html
    If we invaded Afghanistan in October, 2001 for the sole purpose of killing or capturing bin Laden, why in 2002 did dear leader say he did not care where bin Laden was?
    Details, details....I can't let those details cloud my perception of the world.

    Just remember....Bush good. Clinton bad.
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  4. #34
    Senior Member HuntsmanTollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Swansea, IL
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Did I state Clinton was responsible for any of the attacks? No I stated he ignored action in response to the attacks. There is a difference. Again, I recommend you all read "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll a editor for the Washington Post. I don't think the Post is often referred to for its conservative bias. I voted for Clinton and I think he did some good things, however I still believe that he shouldn't be praised for his success during crisis. It could be well argued that his inaction was responsible for allowing Bin Laden and others to continue to push the envelope to find the limit for what we would tolerate. We still haven't completely adapted from the end of the Cold War and changed our belief system to fit the current international dynamics.
    Last edited by HuntsmanTollers; 07-20-2009 at 01:54 PM.
    Huntsman Tollers
    Matt & Julie Martin

  5. #35
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntsmanTollers View Post
    Did I state Clinton was responsible for any of the attacks? No I stated he ignored action in response to the attacks. There is a difference. Again, I recommend you all read "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll a editor for the Washington Post. I don't think the Post is often referred to for its conservative bias. I voted for Clinton and I think he did some good things, however I still believe that he shouldn't be praised for his success during crisis. It could be well argued that his inaction was responsible for allowing Bin Laden and others to continue to push the envelope to find the limit for what we would tolerate. We still haven't completely adapted from the end of the Cold War and changed our belief system to fit the current international dynamics.
    I actually tend to agree with you on this, although I think one of the major factors was actually the impeachment activity. When Clinton, appropriately in my mind, involved us in Kosuvo, he was uniformly attacked by Republicans who said that he was attempting to manufacture conflicts to bolster his presidency. I think those attacks and the energy and attention that was diverted to defending against the impeachment efforts meant that the White House took its eyes off of terrorism when more attention was needed.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntsmanTollers View Post
    Did I state Clinton was responsible for any of the attacks? No I stated he ignored action in response to the attacks.

    I voted for Clinton and I think he did some good things, however I still believe that he shouldn't be praised for his success during crisis. .
    I did not vote for Clinton either time he ran for office. Clinton did respond to the attacks. The people responsible were caught and prosecuted. On Bush's watch, the people that killed the sailors on the USS Cole either escaped or were let go from prison.

    The reason we invaded Afghanistan was to go after Osama bin Laden. A year later Bush said he did not know where bin Laden was and didn't care. Now, please tell me how Bush took action against the attack on 9/11 and completed the goal he was after.

  7. #37
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    I did not vote for Clinton either time he ran for office. Clinton did respond to the attacks. The people responsible were caught and prosecuted. On Bush's watch, the people that killed the sailors on the USS Cole either escaped or were let go from prison.

    The reason we invaded Afghanistan was to go after Osama bin Laden. A year later Bush said he did not know where bin Laden was and didn't care. Now, please tell me how Bush took action against the attack on 9/11 and completed the goal he was after.
    It made for a great comedy routine at the press roast. Remember Bush looking under sofa cushions asking "where are those WMDs?"...while at the same time real sons and daughters were putting their lives on the line, and at that time, about 2500 had died. As a veteran and father, I will never forgive him for that, nor forget what a betrayal of the trust our uniformed soldiers endured under his regime.

    His first test came when our sub-chaser had to make an emergency landing in China-held territory. I remember the chest thumping attitude of "no apology", while our crewmen and women were held for what? 20 days? Finally, he had Colin Powell say, we're not apologizing, but we're sorry..or something like that to end the standoff. Very weak, and that, I believe laid the groundwork for how other countries viewed his presidency. Not many people remember that, as the news media let that one slide into history with little discussion.
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  8. #38
    Senior Member Hew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    Finally, he had Colin Powell say, we're not apologizing, but we're sorry..or something like that to end the standoff. Very weak, and that, I believe laid the groundwork for how other countries viewed his presidency. Not many people remember that, as the news media let that one slide into history with little discussion.
    Let me just see if I have this straight...

    An event that "not many people remember" laid the groundwork for how Bush's presidency was perceived by other countries. And that perception was one of weakness. And because of that weakness, bin Laden was emboldened to send 20 hijackers back in time (in a time machine no doubt funded by the CIA and Bush Senior's Saudi contacts) a few years before the grounded Chinese surveillance flight in order to receive flight training in America so that they could then crash some jets around our east coast. And then, because Bush was so weak, after we were attacked (thanks to the weakness Bush projected), Bush thumbed his nose at the rest of world and we went into A-Stan and Iraq. Bush was perceived as so weak (HOW WEAK WAS HE???)....that the rest of world, so we're told, called his brand of foreign relations "Cowboy Diplomacy." You know, because cowboys are perceived as so weak. And, umm, yeah...that's why Bush was a weak president...because he negotiated the return of our naval personnel from China.

    Is that about right?
    I'll take the river down to still water and ride a pack of dogs.

  9. #39
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    Let me just see if I have this straight...

    An event that "not many people remember" laid the groundwork for how Bush's presidency was perceived by other countries. And that perception was one of weakness. And because of that weakness, bin Laden was emboldened to send 20 hijackers back in time (in a time machine no doubt funded by the CIA and Bush Senior's Saudi contacts) a few years before the grounded Chinese surveillance flight in order to receive flight training in America so that they could then crash some jets around our east coast. And then, because Bush was so weak, after we were attacked (thanks to the weakness Bush projected), Bush thumbed his nose at the rest of world and we went into A-Stan and Iraq. Bush was perceived as so weak (HOW WEAK WAS HE???)....that the rest of world, so we're told, called his brand of foreign relations "Cowboy Diplomacy." You know, because cowboys are perceived as so weak. And, umm, yeah...that's why Bush was a weak president...because he negotiated the return of our naval personnel from China.

    Is that about right?
    Except for a little embellishment, you pretty much got it right.

    I don't mind him "negotiating", and if we landed on their property, I don't even mind an apology (which is where we ended up)...but you can't go grandstanding, and laying down ultimatums, when you know you may eventually have to capitulate. That makes you look like a bully, who can't back up what he says. Who quoted Ron White...."can't fix stupid!"

    He took a simple mishap, and through misguided bravado, made us look bad. Diplomacy at its WORST!
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  10. #40
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    Except for a little embellishment, you pretty much got it right.

    I don't mind him "negotiating", and if we landed on their property, I don't even mind an apology (which is where we ended up)...but you can't go grandstanding, and laying down ultimatums, when you know you may eventually have to capitulate. That makes you look like a bully, who can't back up what he says. Who quoted Ron White...."can't fix stupid!"

    He took a simple mishap, and through misguided bravado, made us look bad. Diplomacy at its WORST!
    Unlike now, where we look real good!!
    Especially after the apology tour!!
    Stan b & Elvis

Similar Threads

  1. Who decides?
    By Bustin' in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-30-2009, 12:03 PM
  2. Dems to GOP: Where's your plan?
    By Roger Perry in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-03-2009, 06:52 PM
  3. What should the GOP do?
    By Matt McKenzie in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 11:57 AM
  4. Who Decides That........
    By road kill in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 09:51 AM
  5. GOP picks Mccain
    By DSO in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 08:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •