For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Lieberman warns of 2009 terrorist attack!
In describing the reasons he believes the Republicans' presumptive nominee for president would be better prepared than the Democrats' to lead the nation next January, Sen. Joe Lieberman said that history shows the United States would likely face a terrorist attack in 2009. "Our enemies will test the new president early," Lieberman, I-Conn., told Face The Nation host Bob Schieffer. "Remember that the truck bombing of the World Trade Center happened in the first year of the Clinton administration. 9/11 happened in the first year of the Bush administration."
Despite the likely political nature of this statement, is he right? Is this true only if Obama wins in November, or will al Qaeda offer a shot across the bow irrespective of who's in the White House? Does this make it even more imperative that bin Laden finally gets captured or killed?
Comments Policy
I believe that no matter
June 30, 2008 - 09:57 ET by futbolisgreat1I believe that no matter who the President is, there could be a terrorist attack.
That is the biggest mistake that Liberls make, they believe that if a Democrat is in the Presidency that some how, the terrorist will not attack.
How many times have I heard a Liberal Obamunist say, "If Al Gore was in the White House, 9/11 would have never happened." BS, 9/11, as well as any other major attack will happen regardless of who is President.
As for Liberman's comments, they are true. Who ever wins the Presidency in November, must be ready on his first minute as President to take on the terrorists. Somehow, I believe Obama will be more worried about holding hand with them than destroying them.
"That is the biggest
June 30, 2008 - 10:32 ET by Gothampc"That is the biggest mistake that Liberls make, they believe that if a Democrat is in the Presidency that some how, the terrorist will not attack."
Notice that liberals only consider 9/11 as a terrorist attack. They don't consider the first Trade Center as a terrorist attack or USS Cole or Khobar Towers as terrorist attacks. I think they try to downplay these events so that people don't realize how "asleep at the wheel" Clinton was.
Gothampc, Excellent
June 30, 2008 - 10:38 ET by futbolisgreat1Gothampc,
Excellent point!!!
1993-WTC bombing
1996-American base attacked in Saudi Arabia
1998-American embassies bombed in Africa
2000-U.S. Cole attacked
Clinton, a Liberal, was asleep at the wheel. If Clinton would have caputured or killed Bin Laden in the 1990s, maybe 9/11 would have never happened, just maybe.
I find it amusing when left wingers claimed, "those that carried out the WTC in 1993 are in jail today." I always tell them, "Geez, then please tell President Bush to stop hunting for Osama Bin Laden, since he is in our jails." All I get is insults from the Liberals. :-)
Actually I can give
June 30, 2008 - 10:52 ET by Dan The Man 2Actually I can give President Clinton a C+ on this because like any event there was just not enough support for a retaliation on the scale of Afghanistan or Iraq. He did not do an adequate job but he did what teh American public could stumache at the time. If you look at all the conflicts the public did not like Americans dying. It took a 911 event to galvanize support for action.
Support is waning because the effort is becoming tedius and the real work is hard. Thr american public is not used to such things and we are not the people we were during WWII and possibly will never be. Also all prior long engagements have had faces and countries to put with bad actions and now we dont.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Dan The Man 2, It is not
June 30, 2008 - 11:18 ET by futbolisgreat1Dan The Man 2,
It is not often that I disagree what you say on NB, but in this case, I believe you are wrong.
I give President Clinton a big fat F on this. The President of the United States is a leader, not a follower. He is not suppose to do the whim of the American people, he is suppose to protect us and do what is right for America, even if that means going against the will of the people.
I agree, in the 1990s people were way too complacent and American could and would not have stomached a war like today's. However, if President Clinton was the great leader that so many Democrats and even some Republicans claim he was, he would have done what was right, regardless if it cost him a second term in office.
The right thing was to go after Bin Laden like Bush has, not the way that Clinton did it.
Bush went after Bin Laden and after Hussein without caring if he was re-elected into office. Bush has certainly not followed the will of Americans in Iraq, rather he has done what he knows is right for America.
The difference between a leader and a politician. Bush vs. Clinton.
Leaders do what is right, what is moral, even if it is not popular. Politicians do whatever is going to keep them in office.
Oh really?
June 30, 2008 - 12:49 ET by Dooper"Leaders do what is right, what is moral, even if it is not popular. Politicians do whatever is going to keep them in office."
And just what would you call the process by which Bush was elected to a second term? Probably the most orchestrated "election" to keep a President in office in American history.
Move along troll, we don't
June 30, 2008 - 12:52 ET by dscottMove along troll, we don't debate truther type foolishness.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Hmm, so I guess you're only open to one-sided debates
June 30, 2008 - 13:00 ET by DooperInteresting how you can so quickly disregard other opinions. That says alot more about the mindset here than your definition of a 'troll.'
Nope, see below
June 30, 2008 - 13:04 ET by bassndudeNope, see below Doop.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Dooper...please cite proven
June 30, 2008 - 12:58 ET by bassndudeDooper...please cite proven and correct orchestrations that you refer to. Also, please include democrat attempts to disqualify military absentee ballots.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Dooper....that is exactly
June 30, 2008 - 13:11 ET by bassndudeDooper....that is exactly what I thought. Your long on mouth and short on facts. A word of advice, liers and fabricators do not last long here. You might consider cutting your losses and refrain from making false statements.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Umm...
June 30, 2008 - 13:13 ET by DooperHow about the Supreme Court and the Florida Attorney General (?), don't remember her name. My point was responding to the line about "leaders who do what is right and politicians who do whatever it takes to stay in office."
It seems to me that the Republicans did whatever it took to keep Bush in office thus presenting a difference of opinion to the prior author's line. That's all.
Dooper, what did that have
June 30, 2008 - 13:15 ET by bassndudeDooper, what did that have to do with the 2004 election? Nothing that I know of.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
bass
June 30, 2008 - 13:22 ET by BlondeMerely a tad more liberal cluelessness on display.
Here ya go, dooper....Katherine Harris, 2000, Gore sued for inequitable recounts in democratic counties (ad nauseum), butterfly ballots in Palm Beach, courtesy of a Dem Supervisor of Elections, the tossing of military ballots. Poor John Kerry!
Oh yeah, I digress. Liberals....sheesh!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde, Dooper specificaly
June 30, 2008 - 13:31 ET by bassndudeBlonde, Dooper specificaly called out the Florida Attorney General, who was Bob Butterworth in 2000. The only way he was involved in the 2000 election was this little ploy to count ballots the dems did not want counted.
Katherine Harris Secretary of State of Florida during the 2000 Presidential Election. The dems were angry because she certified the Florida election results, according to the law. She was required to certify and submit the vote tallys, as reported by all of the districts in the state, by a specific time and date. Thats what she did.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Thanks, Bass
June 30, 2008 - 13:48 ET by BlondeI live in the heart of liberal Broward County...home of the hanging chad, pregnant chad, and innumerable recounts.
It's still a nightmare.
Katherine Harris is an ironclad broom rider, but she followed the law and did her job.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Again, Dooper...the
June 30, 2008 - 13:32 ET by bassndudeAgain, Dooper...the crickets are chirping.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
This is exactly teh point
June 30, 2008 - 13:33 ET by Dan The Man 2This is exactly teh point Bass was making "How about the Supreme Court and the Florida Attorney General (?), don't remember her name" because you present no arguments or facts to back up your claims. It appears you were throwing bombs and leaving teh scene, which is troll behavior, but if you present facts and thesis we will engage.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
2000 election...
June 30, 2008 - 14:04 ET by DooperDoesn't take away from my point. The Supreme Court and Katherine Harris did what they had to do to have Bush elected. Again, I'm countering the line about 'leaders do what is right and politicians do what they have to stay in office.'
Anyway...I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy "nuke 'em this" and "club 'em that." Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it.
Where America is going???
June 30, 2008 - 14:38 ET by BEGRUNT" Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."
Hmmm....America is going?.....hmmm, you mean towards a socialistic government? Just as most countries are shedding their socialistic governments? Socialism....a failure everywhere it has been tried.
"If a man does his best, what else is there"?
General George S. Patton Jr.
Dooper, on the contrary, it
June 30, 2008 - 14:46 ET by bassndudeDooper, on the contrary, it refutes your point. Again, your ignorance is beyond belief. The state statutes of Florida give specific time lines for the certification of and submission of state vote tallies. Mrs. Harris waited as long as she could and certified the vote, according to the tallies submitted by the counties. She did not fabricate them, she did not skewer them in anyway.
The Supreme Court simply ruled according to the Constitution of the United States. The Florida court was ruling according to the Constitution of Florida. Not valid for recounting National elections. National elections are governed by the Constitution of the United States.
By the way. Even with the recounting of the ballots in Gores selected counties, Gore still lost. Gore droped his challenge when the Supreme Court ruled that in the national election, the entire contested state must be recounted. Gore selected only liberal strongholds in Florida to recount. The Constitution states that in the presidential election, you can contest the count, but you contest the state. Gore knew that, but tried to pull a fast one.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Sarcasm.
June 30, 2008 - 16:16 ET by FoolicanConstitution, Shmonstitution! It's just a piece of paper that can be changed at any time. Why bother following silly things like "original intent"?
"Doesn't take away from my
June 30, 2008 - 17:19 ET by ckc1227"Doesn't take away from my point. The Supreme Court and Katherine Harris did what they had to do to have Bush elected."
Yeah....they followed the law, lol. How dare they not ignore the law and give it to Gore.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
June 30, 2008 - 19:43 ET by contraryHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Wait a minute (breathes deeply)
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I'm going to replace my sig line with that one...
BTW, if you intellectually honest enough, you would leave this forum and never return.
"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy (with) "nuke 'em this" and "club 'em that." Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."
-- Dedicated and open NB poster known at "Dooper"
if you intellectually honest enough, you would leave this forum
July 1, 2008 - 08:20 ET by DooperIsn't that exactly what you people want. There's what, maybe 20-25 of you who think you're so much smarter than everyone else and need a paranoid website (oh yeah, to combat the left-wing media bias...RIGHT!!) to make you all feel better about your diminishing place in the world? I'll say it again, you do not represent the mindset of America and where its going so get used to it. I'm not being liberal, I'm not trying to rub it in by saying "Ha, ha, ha", I'm just stating fact. Your time is up. Cute girl in the T-shirt ads, BTW.
OMG, Dooper!
July 1, 2008 - 08:38 ET by BlondeDude, you need to put a warning on your posts, here...spew alert.
Seriously, that is about the most immature argument I've ever seen here....what are you, about twelve?
Dooper: "Blah, blah, blah (DKos talking points)"
NB'ers: "Facts, facts, facts".
Dooper: Delusionally..."That's just the way it's going to be, get used to it"
Next time, try facts, not talking points and emotions. But thanks for the laugh.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Hmm, facts...
July 1, 2008 - 09:15 ET by DooperThere are just as many left-wing websites who think the media is biased to the right. That's a fact. I guess that makes them not so much different than yours, from the standpoint that extreme views tend to be angry and defensive. That's an opinion but one has only to read the attack posts here to see that is true.
For example, I'm reading one of the recent articles here on Sting and how he is so hypocritical for talking up pro-environment issues while he rides solo in a private plane. I mean, it then becomes open season on Sting to berate him on everything from his name to his music!! You people are unbelievable.
Dooper...how fitting
July 1, 2008 - 09:59 ET by dvdaughtryThere are just as many left-wing websites who think the media is biased to the right. That's a fact.
We would ALL love to see them, rook.
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
So, the quantity of websites
July 1, 2008 - 10:00 ET by Roger the ShrubberSo, the quantity of websites devoted to supposed "right-wing media bias" makes it fact?
Using THAT logic, we can all now safely accept as fact that 9/11 was an inside job, we never landed on the moon, Neiman Marcus charges $250 for their chocolate cookie recipe, and Ron Paul will be the next president.
You make another illogical comment, equating people pointing out your rather insipid statements to being "angry and defensive"? Let's face it, Doop, your short track record here hs not exactly been one that would dazzle even the least descriminate reader.
Oh, the door is right behind you. You are most welcome to leave at your leisure. Or, you could stay, grow a pair, use better discretion before posting, and we will get along fine.
Rog, the Doop will only
July 1, 2008 - 10:04 ET by bassndudeRog, the Doop will only make doopy statements and will not engage once the facts are presented. In other words, "troll".
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Roger The Husseiner
July 1, 2008 - 10:33 ET by Jack Bauershrubbo -- and he doesn't even have the redeeming quality of being funny!
Jack Hussein Bauer -- RECLAIM THE NAME! Roger the Husseiner?
Indeed!
July 1, 2008 - 14:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberI proclaim a JIHAD on all shrubbery!
Derka derka!
You're right...
July 1, 2008 - 12:38 ET by DooperOf course you're right. How could anyone think you could be wrong. You people are so caught up in your righteousness that everyone else is a 'troll' or 'needs balls.' Well, I hate to tell you this co-dependents but you're so focused on the trees with your 'facts' that none of you are seeing the forest.
I hate to digress but you people are pitiful. You would continue to perpetuate a direction this country is headed which is leading to economic ruin. A trillion dollar war of which this country is getting virtually no economic benefit out of has destroyed our dollar and is causing an inflationary spiral in commodities. And no, don't blame it on liberals. The only people that are benefitting are foreigners and they are buying up American assets as we speak. The rest of the world is moving forward while America's future has been put on a credit card by GW Bush. So take a look at the forest there co-dependents...America doesn't need to worry about 'terrorists' attacking us again. Why should they? They're going to own us at this rate.
Sooo Dooper. You again
July 1, 2008 - 12:47 ET by bassndudeSooo Dooper. You again change your subject. Of course, it is what I expected, a change of argument, at this point. So, what direction is it you would recommend? What is your solution to the energy needs in this country? How would you reduce the price of oil in the next month?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Droopy Drawers
July 1, 2008 - 12:47 ET by dvdaughtryAll we have asked is for you to support your position.
If you can't do that, just say so and stop with the emotional dribble. If you can, then we can have a sensible debate that you will lose.
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
You should have stopped at
July 1, 2008 - 14:33 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou should have stopped at your first sentence: Of course you're right. How could anyone think you could be wrong.
That was that was needed to be said. Thank you.
You may go now.
→ Can't help it Drooper
July 1, 2008 - 10:08 ET by Cool ArrowThere are just as many left-wing websites who think the media is biased to the right. - Drooper
radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America. Rosie O'Donnell
You certainly have the template right.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE
Why quote "left-wing"
July 1, 2008 - 10:26 ET by Jack BauerWhy quote "left-wing" websites who think the MSM is biased to the right, despite the fact that 80-90% of journalists openly admit Democrat/liberal leanings?
Why not give us some examples YOU HAVE PERSONALLY READ or heard -- on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the AP, et al that show a clear and consistent "bias" to the "right."
I personally am quite
July 1, 2008 - 14:39 ET by Ruths husband BenI personally am quite believable, thank you. Just ask my imaginary friends.
“it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Antonin Scalia
so dooper
July 1, 2008 - 09:43 ET by candanceAre you going to defend your inuendo about 2004 now, or what? We've been asking for details for a while now and all you can do is wander off subject.
There is a time and place to talk about the changing mood of the country....but *you* brought up the election here with no solid assertions to explain yourself.
Explain your position with candor or be labeled as a troll. Your choice.
My point was to counter the
July 1, 2008 - 10:10 ET by DooperMy point was to counter the argument at the top of this thread that 'leaders do what is right and politicians do what they have to do to get re-elected.'
I stated that I believe, as do many others, that the re-election of GW Bush constituted more along the lines of political partisanship than leadership. I did not remember the name of the woman (Katherine Harris) or her title (why I put a question mark) and I was in error that it was the election of GW Bush rather than the re-election. Guess that makes me a troll. I can live with that.
Dooper, your argument was
July 1, 2008 - 10:18 ET by bassndudeDooper, your argument was still wrong. Your permise for the statement was wrong. And I cited the only questions in the re-election that was noted in Florida. And that was the dems trying to elect Kerry. Your time line was wrong, your assumptions were wrong, your facts were confused, (if, indeed you had any). The short reply to you is, you didn't know what you were talking about.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Dooped's feelings of things
July 1, 2008 - 10:24 ET by SemperrightDooped's feelings of things are all that matter. They (Libs) don't need facts to support emotions. They create facts to support emotion not the other way around.
It's very sad
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985
this is hilarious
July 1, 2008 - 16:54 ET by candanceSo....
you confused two different elections, didn't know the name or position of the woman you complained about, and can't describe exactly how the SC allegedly screwed you over.
But the people who corrected you are the ostriches. Nice.
Thanks for the laugh - it's been a while since I've seen such a ridiculous discussion.
You're not a troll just because you got your facts wrong. What makes you a troll is posting a vague complaint about 2004, waiting for someone to ask for details, lazily mentioning people without bothering to check their names, and going off on a tirade about the "direction of the country" when pressed for an explanation.
Please dooper. You can't be this lazy and/or stupid in real life. Tell me you're being obtuse on purpose.
I told you so... Nancy
July 1, 2008 - 18:55 ET by dscottI told you so...
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
wait just a second
June 30, 2008 - 16:27 ET by candanceWhat does Katherine Harris (you couldn't even be bothered to wiki her name) have to do with re-election in 2004? You say Republicans cheated to keep him in office and then, when pressed for details, you bring up inuendo from 2000.
And what about the Supreme Court? Gore's attempt in 2000 was to win the state by ignoring military and absentee ballots, which SCOTUS said was illegal. I fail to see how Gore pressuring us to ignore military votes qualifies as Republican schemes.
That kind of winking and nodding won't cut it on NB. We can debate this if you really want to, but please bring more ammo than "that one chick who worked in Florida."
This is why I don't debate
June 30, 2008 - 16:48 ET by dscottThis is why I don't debate trolls. I knew he was a troll from the first post using a truther type conspiracy theory. Such people aren't interested in facts, just their conspiracy theories to validate their world view. It's all about the assertion being truth until it is concretely put it down, then up pops another assertion.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
John Kerry
June 30, 2008 - 13:07 ET by Gothampc"Probably the most orchestrated "election" to keep a President in office in American history."
Because we all know that elitist John Kerry was the right choice for America. Yes, a bitter soldier who had "testified" years before in front of Congress was exactly the person we needed as POTUS during a war.
Oops, Goth
June 30, 2008 - 13:11 ET by BlondeYou used the "bitter" word.
Which reminds me of Kerry carrying the shotgun looking clueless.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Oops
June 30, 2008 - 13:22 ET by GothampcIt's just a typo. I really meant to type "better". [crosses fingers].
Emmmmm, I have to disagree
June 30, 2008 - 12:51 ET by dscottEmmmmm, I have to disagree on the not enough support part since Clinton's actions in Somalia with the Black Hawk Down incident is specifically what galvanized OBL regarding the Will of the US when confronting a hostile enemy. Clinton had the support of the country in Somalia. Clinton squandered that support when he cut and run due to the Black Hawk down incident. OBL said plainly it was the US action in Somalia, namely Clinton's squeemishness, that emboldened him to fight against US interests all over the Globe. Clinton's actions showed the US to be a paper tiger during his watch. Had Clinton hung tough on Somalia, 911 would never have occured and OBL would be just another terrorist among many.
BTW- Saddam Hussein was involved in the Black Hawk Down incident with al Qaeda's allies. As far as I am concerned that was more than enough pretext to invade Iraq. No one kills a US soldier and gets to walk away unscathed, without such concern the world would become even far more dangerous than it is now.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Clinton and Terrorism
June 30, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Gothampc"Actually I can give President Clinton a C+ on this because like any event there was just not enough support for a retaliation on the scale of Afghanistan or Iraq."
Let's face it, Democrats are not good leaders when it comes to confrontation. (Kennedy and Bay of Pigs, Carter and Iran hostages, Clinton and terrorism).
Back then, Clinton wouldn't have needed retaliation on the scale we see today. He should have stopped it early on. The terrorists became emboldened at his non-response. And he would have had more support because the media loved him more than they do a Republican. Clinton could have found the support if he wanted to. After all, he did bomb Iraq, which resulted in a couple of dead camels.
Unfortunately, Clinton fiddled while the US burned.
Goth, that has to be a C+
June 30, 2008 - 13:03 ET by bassndudeGoth, that has to be a C+ for supporting terrorism and helping them build their foundation. Certainly, it cannot be for combating terrorism.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Don't Forget NY Senator Hillary
June 30, 2008 - 13:20 ET by GothampcOh silly me, thanks for the correction.
I'll also give Hillary a C+ for her 9-11 lies regarding where Chelsea was on that day. While thousands were running for their lives, Chelsea was in a Park Avenue apartment and Hillary was scheming how best to get her daughter Photoshopped into one of the pictures of the fleeing crowd.
Agreeded Goth. Liberals
June 30, 2008 - 10:47 ET by bassndudeAgreeded Goth. Liberals seem to think that a terrorist attack is not a "terrorist" attack on America, unless it takes place in the US, and kills an untold number of Americans. Anything else is a crime and the jurisdiction of law enforcement. Anything outside the borders of the US is not an attack on the US, even if it is Americans that are the target.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I believe you are correct.
June 30, 2008 - 10:38 ET by mjgI believe you are correct. The terrorists do not like our way of life, they mean to destroy us. They never liked us before 9/11, and they don't like us now. I agree with you whoever wins the presidency must be ever vigilant towards them, and not try to talk with rogue terrorist nations..
I don't know...
June 30, 2008 - 09:59 ET by BlondeAbout any imperative to kill or capture bin Laden poste haste, he has been marginalized for quite a while. While symbolic, as pulling Saddam out of the spider hole, showing him to be the cowering coward he was, I don't think it's that important. Plus, the dems would be crowing "game over" (and yes, I chose that word on purpose, they think this is all a big video game...maroons).
As for AlQ, yes, they'll test Obama early and often. Not so McCain, they remember Carter & Reagan.
Speaking of rememberances....does anyone remember last summer, when asked a question about a frisky Iran, McCain's reaction: Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran (to the tune of the Beach Boy's Barbara Anne)...don't think for a minute those lunatic Iranians have forgotten it.
Looking back on it, that may have been one of the most effective campaign quips on record, as we all know, hindsight is 20/20.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
"Speaking of
June 30, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Hero SquadHistorical note: McCain actually was singing the parody version, "Bomb Iran," that was written and recorded by Vince Vance and the Valiants in 1979.
McCain must still have his ol' 45 RPM copy.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Thanks, Hero!
June 30, 2008 - 13:30 ET by BlondeI didn't know that.
But I believe it was a prescient quip. And should keep the Iranians bottled up on their own side of the sandbox.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Al-Qaeda
June 30, 2008 - 10:10 ET by Prester JohnGot burned big time after 9/11--I'm convinced they never expected Bush to react the way he did and with the Dems and the MSM essentially neutral in this battle will not do anything short of the "big one" i.e. a dirty nuke or a mass casualty type biological or chemical attack. Anything small would only rally the people to the president, whoever it is, and would force said president to react aggressively against them.
I agree. My impression is
June 30, 2008 - 10:30 ET by BDI agree. My impression is that the AQ leadership made some significant mistakes.
1.) THey expected that the US would be loathe to commit ground troops to a fight and would NEVER significantly attack them in Afghanistan. I think they expected us to launch a batch of Cruise missiles against them which they expected to weather with minor casualites while baskingi n the islamic glory of the post 9/11 attack.
2.) When we did attack, they expected us to use conventional methods which they expected to defeat in the same manner they did against the SOV's in the 80's. THey expected their casualties to be higher than previously thought when they only expected a cursory bombing, but they expected the final results to be the same.
3.) When we dropped in a handful of SF ODA and began to route their forces handily, they decided to drop back into the mountains and out of Kandahar. THey decided that their mountain sanctuaries would be impregnable.
4.) Upn being chased into Pakistan and noticing all of the abuse they were taking around the world, and how tough it was becoming to operate, they decided that an urban guerrilla operation would be just the thing to take us on since the mountains of Afghanistan were not helping much. SO the publicly proclaimed that Iraq was the central front and they pinned their hopes on beating the US forces in the city blocks of Anbar Province.
5.) In Anbar, they decided that they would re-instill the form of government they supported the Taliban with. THey would cow the population into support by threats and islamic fascism. THeystacked bodies of the innocent around them and proclaimed their islamic worthiness.
6.) That didn't work as well as they expected as the populations of Iraq saw them as much of a threat as they saw in the western forces and have actively begun huntint them. Even their co-religionists hate them now.
In other words, at every step of the way the AQ leadership has made mistakes which have been explotied. The last thing we need now is to lessen the pressure on them that the libs will undoubtedly attempt to do.
Terrorist Attack
June 30, 2008 - 11:20 ET by merlin61I believe firmly that Osama Bin Laden is not
alive. I believe he was killed in Afghanistan
under th heavy bombing. I believe that Al Queda
is being led by other terrorists using Bin Laden's
name as the villain here. I wouldn't put it past
Pakistan and Iran for using videos they give to
the news media to keep the lie that Bin Laden is
still alive going. Even if Bin Laden were still
alive, Al Queda still exists and other terrrorists
will try to attack us again. Too much focus
on Bin Laden's capture, not enough focus on
what's really happening regarding terror from
Iran.
Merlin
June 30, 2008 - 11:25 ET by shawn228I would have to disagree with you on this one, the CIA and many other government tech guys have confirmed that the Bin Laden tapes are authentic.
Some folks can dish it out, but cannot take it
Merlin.......I have been saying that since..........
June 30, 2008 - 12:28 ET by BEGRUNTthe battle of Tora Bora......Tapes of him,,,,ya, right, voice recordings wont convince me. The only way your going to convince me is to see him on video tape, smiling holding an edition of a major newspaper with a recent date on it. The reason we haven't been told he's dead, is that they dont want him to be made a martyr in the arab world, and a recruitment tool. The guy is DEAD!!
"If a man does his best, what else is there"?
General George S. Patton Jr.
We live in dangerous times
June 30, 2008 - 10:11 ET by Dan The Man 2We live in dangerous times where any little problem could loom large. The big problem is we dont really know who we are fighting as we had definite enemies in teh post WWII years and through the cold war era but now all teh actors wear masks and have no alliegence to any countries. This makes it hard to protect us and cut the cancer from the patient.
The WOT is ambigues and we as a western society are realizing what the world bordering Isalm has known for years. Islam cannot be trusted and may need to be culled or transformed, its choice.
President Bush thank God recognized teh evil and acted accordingly to protect teh USA. Obama will make teh mistake of the first WTC bombing and try teh actors in civil courts and emasculate teh USA.
We live in interesting times taht just happen to be deadly in each mistake.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
And now, today's Shrub
June 30, 2008 - 10:22 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd now, today's Shrub Report®:
Are you having a Night of the Long Knives party tonight? I am dressing as Kurt von Schleicher. Carl Kolchak, who will you be this year? Your Gregor Strasser last year was amazing!
Here's a fun story to start your week out.
Mugabe barely wins scandal-free election. UN will be drafting a sternly-worded letter any day now. As usual, Huffpo is on the case!
OMG! I got a lock of the Messiah's hair!
R.I.P. Windows XP.
Crackwhore rats out pimp for a pizza.
Murder most foul! Abuse most foul! Wow.
It's been a 100 years to the day since the "Tunguska Incident". Obviously the work of Karl Rove and his time machine.
Shocking news of the week: Duke football sucks. Really bad.
I thought only whitey commits hate crimes?
Sure, everybody knows N Korea cannot be trusted for crap, but, hopefully, their people might not starve this year, thanks to Chimpy McHalliburton.
Huh?
Happy 45th birthday, my master…
Today's Religion of Peace Update.
France rocks!
The Picture of the Day.
And finally, get your Obama Mood Ring!
Roger
June 30, 2008 - 12:23 ET by ricklailDOOK SUX !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not just football
“A debate is a conflict which clarifies a position. A dialogue is a conversation which compromises a position.” –John E. Ashbrook, The New Neutralism II, P. 7
Yeah, but they kick butt in lacrosse...
June 30, 2008 - 14:07 ET by Roger the ShrubberHahah! I thought of you when I saw that article!
Me too, Rog.
June 30, 2008 - 14:12 ET by BlondeI knew Rick would find that.
Where's my obgligatory Gator story, hmmmm? We haven't tased anyone lately, bro, so I dunno....although supposedly the "Obama vandals" in Orlando were Gator fans (or maybe not, they may have been the Criminoles in disguise).
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Here you go, Blondie! Not
June 30, 2008 - 15:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberHere you go, Blondie!
Not as impressive as DOOOOK, but, I guess it will have to do for now!!! :)
BB Guns for Obama
June 30, 2008 - 15:11 ET by Blonde(Betcha didn't know that's what kind of "gun rights" Obambi supports...BB guns for basketball players).
Thanks, Rog.
Those sneaky Criminoles....
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
SNL with Carlin
June 30, 2008 - 13:41 ET by Hero SquadHey Rog, did you catch SNL this past Saturday? They went into the vault and showed the very first episode as a tribute to George Carlin.
I'd never seen it before. It was painfully unfunny. Even Carlin seemed off his game, the skits were short and banal. The most interesting part was Billy Preston's performance. Almost amazing that they lasted one full season, let alone 30.
Probably not the best "Carlin Tribute." Still, it was cool to see the germination of what developed into a pretty darn good show.
And Carlin told one joke that was rather timely. "Did you ever watch an old movie and wonder if the people in the crowd scenes were still alive?"
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Missed it, HS. turned it on,
June 30, 2008 - 14:58 ET by Roger the ShrubberMissed it, HS. turned it on, caught the last 20 seconds of his dialogue, admired his outfit, and then promptly fell asleep during the following commercials!
Ah yes, the suit with a
July 1, 2008 - 11:09 ET by Hero SquadAh yes, the suit with a t-shirt underneath. The brass wanted him to wear a suit, he wanted to wear a t-shirt, so they compromised and wore both.
Carlin wins, 1-0.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
This year's event
June 30, 2008 - 13:46 ET by Carl Kolchak"Carl Kolchak, who will you be this year? Your Gregor Strasser last year was amazing! "
I won't be dressing as Ernst Rohm that's for sure. You ought to check out my costume for Nikolai Yezhov who was in charge of the NKVD during the Great Terror.
LOL Carl.....Ernst Rohm.........
June 30, 2008 - 14:32 ET by BEGRUNTAh yes....the "Night of the Long Knives"....the demise of the SA, and Hitlers consolidation of power.
"If a man does his best, what else is there"?
General George S. Patton Jr.
Not sure
June 30, 2008 - 10:44 ET by 10ksnookerI think you have to see who is President, then if the safeguards are removed. The drive by media is silent on the fact that there have been no attacks in the US or on US interests around the world since 9/11 -- A remarkable record in itself.
It may take some time, even if the Comrade Obama Communist party takes over America, for the safeguards to be relaxed. Then it will come. Maybe 2010 if the Communists win.
60 minutes
June 30, 2008 - 11:23 ET by garykrasnerDid anyone watch the first segment of 60 minute yesterday?
It was about the genocide of Christians in Iraq. It presented views indicating Saddam's kindness towards christians.
the narrator said that Iraq was tolerant towards christians; that christians were safe in Iraq, UNTIL THE AMERICAN OCCUPATION. Those exact words, without explanation.
It described how the Bush admin was doing nothing for Christian refugees.
It went on and on about the murders and kidnappings of christians, without one word about who was doing it and why.
Finally, this anti Bush, anti american diatribe ended with the pastor there admitting in one sentence that something "went wrong with Islam", then quickly went on to describe that Christianity had done some terrible things in history. All religions, he said done bad things.
Always the moral equivalence. One can see why 60 minutes did a story around this pastor!
Gary Krasner
...yes, because 60 minutes
June 30, 2008 - 15:55 ET by TruthMonger...yes, because 60 minutes cares so much for Christians, don't they?
thanks to the ACLU - Iraq is still a better place for Christians than the US is...