What's your take on this? (9/11 related)

[aaron_mag]

Here we go again....

First off lets get something straight. Economies are controlled by far more than the president. Could it be that all the technological advances in the 90s had something to do with our massive economic growth?

So please don't credit Clinton, Reagan, or Bush for all of this stuff.

Second I don't think we went in the for oil. I think we went in there for incredibly stupid reasons (and we are going to be stuck there for awhile mind you). We should have concentrated on Afghanistan and finished the job there of rooting out Bin Laden (my personal opinion). Many of us on this board were saying, "Wait. This doesn't make sense. Why are we going over there? Shouldn't we focus on that bastard Bin Laden before we commit to something like Iraq?"

Of course it was going to be 'so easy'. We could easily do both. We wouldn't even have to break promises to our troops on how long the deployments would be. Our military wouldn't be strained a bit.

It also made perfect sense why Iraq and N. Korea were not immediate threats to the U.S. The leaders there had alot to lose. They didn't want to lose control of their country. They had it good. If any WMD was sold to terrorists and traced back to them they would be done. Bye bye.

So the real threat was someone who was actually insane and had nothing to lose. Someone like Bin Laden. So many people (who all of you insist upon labelling liberals) kept saying, "Hey. Lets focus on that guy. He is both the guy responsible for the 9/11 attacks and the biggest immediate threat."

But we had to get diverted by Iraq. Good move.....

[taylor492]

If any WMD was sold to terrorists and traced back to them they would be done. Bye bye.

That was the problem. We couldnt get any straight answers out of Iraq. The U.N weapons inspectors were gettin led on a wild goose chase.

[FactsOfLife]

First off lets get something straight. Economies are controlled by far more than the president. Could it be that all the technological advances in the 90s had something to do with our massive economic growth?

So please don't credit Clinton, Reagan, or Bush for all of this stuff.

Second I don't think we went in the for oil. I think we went in there for incredibly stupid reasons (and we are going to be stuck there for awhile mind you). We should have concentrated on Afghanistan and finished the job there of rooting out Bin Laden (my personal opinion). Many of us on this board were saying, "Wait. This doesn't make sense. Why are we going over there? Shouldn't we focus on that bastard Bin Laden before we commit to something like Iraq?"

Of course it was going to be 'so easy'. We could easily do both. We wouldn't even have to break promises to our troops on how long the deployments would be. Our military wouldn't be strained a bit.

It also made perfect sense why Iraq and N. Korea were not immediate threats to the U.S. The leaders there had alot to lose. They didn't want to lose control of their country. They had it good. If any WMD was sold to terrorists and traced back to them they would be done. Bye bye.

So the real threat was someone who was actually insane and had nothing to lose. Someone like Bin Laden. So many people (who all of you insist upon labelling liberals) kept saying, "Hey. Lets focus on that guy. He is both the guy responsible for the 9/11 attacks and the biggest immediate threat."

But we had to get diverted by Iraq. Good move.....

You suffering from heat stroke or something Aaron?

Ronaldus Magnus had EVERYTHING to do with the boom economy in the eighties. By cutting the top marginal tax rates from the 70% range nearly in half, the people that create jobs, i.e. entrepreneurs, put their monies in businesses instead of looking for loopholes in the tax codes.

I am sick to friggin death of revisionist histories of the eighties.

And as far as your analysis of the Iraq war, you couldn't be further from reality if you tried.

Hey guess what? Know where all the terrorists are right now? Bottled up in the mid east instead of on our soil. And in case you missed the news lately, we're STILL IN AFGHANISTAN.

I swear, the closer we get to November, the loonier you libs get.

At this rate, you're all going to have a massive meltdown about August 13th or so....

[aaron_mag]

Yes, I forgot. Reagan and Bush put us on the path to steller growth that Clinton just happened to ruin just in time for Bush Jr. to take over the reins and put us on the right track again.

And you think that 'we' (and I use the term loosely, because I don't know who 'we' are) are the ones that are delusional.

Yeah. We still are in Afghanistan. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have focused on Afghanistan a little more?

Don't go counting election results before they are hatch. I have a feeling I'm going to be listening to you moan. I wonder what your fevered, heat-stroked, brain will come up with as a conspiracy theory as to why your boy lost. (note smiley face. Just joking around with the 'fevered, heat-stroked, bit. I know in that constricted conservative heart of yours there is still some room for laughter.... )

-Later

[1stdeadeye]

Yes, I forgot. Reagan and Bush put us on the path to steller growth that Clinton just happened to ruin just in time for Bush Jr. to take over the reins and put us on the right track again.

And you think that 'we' (and I use the term loosely, because I don't know who 'we' are) are the ones that are delusional.

Yeah. We still are in Afghanistan. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have focused on Afghanistan a little more?

Don't go counting election results before they are hatch. I have a feeling I'm going to be listening to you moan. I wonder what your fevered, heat-stroked, brain will come up with as a conspiracy theory as to why your boy lost. (note smiley face. Just joking around with the 'fevered, heat-stroked, bit. I know in that constricted conservative heart of yours there is still some room for laughter.... )

-Later

Clinton did not spoil the party. His bureaucrats weren't minding the store. It is a shame. Enro, Adelphia, K-Mart and MCI were all blamed on Bush, but the problems that caused them were created under Clinton and caught under Bush!

Don't forget you owe me a BC when Kerry loses!

As for Bin Laden, he is bottled up and will be caught sooner or later. I think Iraq was necessary to show the world we were dead serious about our war on terror! Beating up Afghanistan is like the quaterback of the football team roughing up a special ed kid. Sure you kick his arse but you look foolish doing it! Beating up Iraq served notice to despots around the world. Look at how quickly Libiya fell into line! So many liberals refuse to acknowledge that!

[FactsOfLife]

Yes, I forgot. Reagan and Bush put us on the path to steller growth that Clinton just happened to ruin just in time for Bush Jr. to take over the reins and put us on the right track again.

And you think that 'we' (and I use the term loosely, because I don't know who 'we' are) are the ones that are delusional.

Yeah. We still are in Afghanistan. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have focused on Afghanistan a little more?

Don't go counting election results before they are hatch. I have a feeling I'm going to be listening to you moan. I wonder what your fevered, heat-stroked, brain will come up with as a conspiracy theory as to why your boy lost. (note smiley face. Just joking around with the 'fevered, heat-stroked, bit. I know in that constricted conservative heart of yours there is still some room for laughter.... )

-Later

aaron, You fianlly got something right! Clinton DID fall into the most amazing growth period of our nations economy and promptly squandered it. Of course he did everything he could to cut our taxes for the first three days in office, but then he saw fit to instead give us the single largest tax increse in HISTORY.

as far as the election goes, you willing to put your money where your DONKEY is?

I've got a bottle of Glen Livet Single malt that says John Effing Kerry, the french looking candidate goes down harder than Monica did.

[Buff]

In regards to Osama Bin Laden. Clinton wanted him dead, ever since the embassy bombings. But, Clinton couldn't just authorize a whole Bond style license to kill, he had to make it a capture mission, which would most likely end up in Bin Laden dead, because he would fight back. This is because of a bunch of legal reasons.

omfg
And I thought the french couldn't be surpased.....

[cphilip]

Somehow we all forgot the topic on this one. Me included!

Closed. Became Political and not allowed.