ABCs

Let's not forget the mysterious missile strike on a Chinese Embassy where Clinton apologized for the "mistake". Hmm, out of the MILLIONS of buildings around there, it jsut so happens that US missiles hit a Chinese embassy? Interesting. That report got wiped from the media before people even knew the details.

After almost 2 weeks... I am back and better than ever.

Decker

Here is what wisdom looks like DOMS. You are engaging in a logical fallacy. Since Bush attacked an arbitrary country and no terrorist attack against the US has happened since that illegal invasion, then that illegal attack must have stopped all terrorist attacks against the US.

Why is that fallacious? First, the US is being attacked by terrorists on a daily basis in Iraq. Second, You offer zero factual support for your conclusion so that it follows from the assumptions. You offer only your unsupported conclusion as revealed gospel.

Why?

B/c you are following a national script of propaganda:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...n_and_hys.html

http://www.dojgov.net/Clinton_&_Terrorism-01.htm

http://www.conservativebookservice.c...?prod_cd=c6389

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/354

And on and on. You see DOMS, although you are quite bright, it is unlikely in my estimation that you would use the word "emboldened." So I did a simple search of the following terminology "emboldened", "Clinton", and "terrorists" and up popped a catalog of this right wing chestnut: "how Clinton emboldened the terrorists..."

Unsubstantiated propaganda ringing throughout the echochamber does not impress me.

That's too easy. Every single year the gov. releases a report on terrorist attacks/activities worldwide. Every year since Bush's illegal invasion, that number has grown exponentially.
http://oversight.house.gov/Documents...2209-29811.pdf

Look at the 5000% increase in terrorist attacks since Bush's invasion

Look at the 2000% increase in terrorist caused deaths.

Shit, just look at the first page of the report. You are stunningly misinformed on this matter.

By your logic, so is practically every other country in the world including the US. The US trained the "freedom fighters" or "contras" or as I called them, "deathsquads" of Nicaragua. We also mined their harbors during peace time B/c of that, the World Court has the US #1 on the docket for war crimes. That's why Hussein was not tried in the world court b/c the US won't recognize its jurisdiction.

Categorizing things is smart. Selectively applying the criterion of your category is not.
[/quote]Restating your propaganda doesn't make it true.

Look at how terrorism has literally exploded like dynamite over the planet and tell me again about presidential incompetence lighting that fuse.

DOMS

No, the logic failing is your own. Since the US has shown would happen to anyone that we felt was a threat (for any reason), the number of attack in the US has dropped to almost nil.

That's called a war, genius. You (like so many non-thinking liberals) also don't know what the terrorism means. Go look it up.

The facts are simple, look at the number of terrorist attacks since 9/11 and the number of terrorist attacks for the same period before 9/11. Yeah, that doesn't present the opportunity to spin bullshit numbers like you liberals are fond of, but it gets to the point quite well.


And, like many a liberal, you're wrong and full of shit. Free thinkers, such as myself, tend to have more words in their vocabulary than the average mantally regurgitative liberal.


I don't give a rats ass about terrorist attacks against anyone other than the US, which has dropped quite nicely since the US went on the offensive.


You're so full of shit that you're eyes are brown. You talk about how Clinton did this or that bullshit token gesture like it was worth anything, but 9/11 still happened. Yeah, he did such a great job...

Pianomahnn

Fucking wankers. Quit calling each other names like little boys on the playground and debate the facts.

Fact 1: Nothing ANYONE in the United States does will stop the crazy motherfuckers over there from blowing shit up.

Fact 2: This thread really blows.

DOMS

You're assuming about why I use profanity. I know Decker outside of IM. Do you think I'm serious when I call him names? Or perhaps, just perhaps, were having a bit of fun?

Oh, and saying "Fucking wankers. Quit calling each other names like little boys on the playground" makes you a hypocritical piece of shit.

IainDaniel

Shut the fuck up and go wash your Vagina, you sound like you have some sand stuck up there

Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.

Michael Jordan

Decker

That's not foreign policy, that's nihilism.
Now you're just being petty.
Number of terrorist attacks and murders is spinning? How would you spin the numbers?

All right. Endgame.

2001.Technically the perpetrators (as planners) of 9/11 escaped the grasp of the US gov.

Bush failed.

2001. The anthrax terrorists using US high grade anthrax to attack US congressmen were never identified or caught.

Bush failed.

2002. Bomb explodes outside of US embassy in Pakistan killing 12. Perpetrators at large.

Bush failed.

2003. Suicided bomber kills 34 including 8 americans in bombing of housing compounds for Westerners in Saudi Arabia.

Bush failed.

2004. Terrorists attack the foreign worker division of a Saudi oil company. An american is killed. Saudi Arabia.

Bush failed.

2004. Saudi Arabia. Terrorists capture and kill 3 american journalists. No one's arrested.

Bush failed.

2004. Terrorists storm the US consulate in Saudi Arabia killing 5.

Bush failed.

2005. Amman, Jordan, Suicide bombers hit 3 american hotels killing 57.

Bush failed.

2006. Syria. 4 gunmen attack the US embassy.

Bush failed.

2007. Greece. US embassy fired on with anti-tank weapon.

Bush failed.

2003-present: Iraqi Invasion where over 100,000 innocents are murdered and over 3000 US soldiers are no more.

Bush failed.


DOMS you picked out Clinton's 3 or so failings of combating terrorist attacks--most of which occurred on foreign soil.

Above is a like list of Bush's failures.

I'm sorry but isn't one of your theses: Clinton's lack of military retribution against terrorist attacks emboldened terrorists?

If I offered up this point of yours in an organized debate, I'd be laughed out of the building. But then again, it has to be devastating to you to have to defend the indefensible, namely Bush's/the republican's failures on, well, everything. So you do what a man cornered by his own frustrations would do, you lash out at your greates enemy (Clinton) to hit that bottom of the 9th home run to just show, goshdarnit, that you really were right all along and that the fault lies elsewhere.




Please list all the terrorist attacks on US soil under both Clinton and Bush's administration and show which was more successful in getting the terrorists.



PLEASE DO THE ABOVE.


Here's a start:

McVeigh was arrested for bombing the Murrah building.

On 26 February 1993, a car loaded with 1,200 pounds of explosives blew up in a parking garage under the World Trade Center, killing six people and injuring about a thousand others. The blast did not, as its planners intended, bring down the towers — that was finally accomplished by flying two hijacked airliners into the twin towers on the morning of 11 September 2001.
Four followers of the Egyptian cleric Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman were captured, convicted of the World Trade Center bombing in March 1994, and sentenced to 240 years in prison each. The purported mastermind of the plot, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, was captured in 1995, convicted of the bombing in November 1997, and also sentenced to 240 years in prison. One additional suspect fled the U.S. and is believed to be living in Baghdad.
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/clinton.htm

Could Clinton have done a better job? Yes. Is your criticism of his efforts fairminded? Not even close.

Lastly, can the attacks of 9/11 be dropped at the feet of one man?

Decker

I have been known to touch myself in my secret area....inappropriately.

But that's my business.

DOMS

In the real world that we live in, that is foreign policy.

No I'm not. Guerrilla warfare is not terrorism.



Wrong, this is Clinton's doing. I let you side track me from my point, but now I'm back on target. I know Bush is an asshat, but that's not what this discussion is about. This is about Bill Clinton. He took funding from China, he allowed 9/11 to happen, he fucked up the economy that culminated in the fiscal burst of 2000. It's about Slick Willie being a scum bag president yet so many liberals would like to suck his cock.

What a bunch of fucking morons.



Yes, it can. He set the policy for eight years that made 9/11 a reality. The problem with the Arabs didn't start with him, but he should did his best to make us a target.

goob

I think it's time for that William Lloyd Garrison signature again........

DOMS

Hey, I'm always me.

Decker

Ha ha hahahaaaaaaaaaa. Back on track with general misinformation, baseless allegations and ad hominem attacks.

Yep, you're firing on all cylinders. It's like watching a fucking fireworks display of errors, misunderstandings and flat out bullshit.

Clinton took funding from China. That's a scream. Is that how he got the money to hire the 9/11 terrorists?

True, Clinton was on vacation alot and he totally ignored the brief, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike inside US", he did fire Dick Clarke--the US gov.'s pre-eminent expert on terrorism, he totally blew off the prior administration's warnings that terrorism should be at the top of your 'to do' list, he also blew off the warnings of Dick Clarke and George Tenet and he canceled the daily meetings where they'd discuss battling terrorism.

Oh wait. That was Bush, not Clinton.

Anyways, unless you're a mind-reader reading the minds of the terrorists, and god how you've tried to show you are, you cannot possibly know if terrorists anywhere in the world were emboldened by Clinton's handling of terrorist activities.

Well, my work is done here.

DOMS

Yes, he did (that just one random link). But that doesn't fit into the fantasy world that liberals live in, so it isn't real.

You're the typical one-note fucking piano that I like to call a liberal.

Bill Clinton was a shitty president, but he had a good bed side manner. That would explain why so many liberals like you want smoke his pole.

Oh, and do you really think that he did a good job with the economy?

And his anti-terrorist efforts really paid off.

Pianomahnn

I think you place too much stock in the ability of the President to influence the economy. Yes, they have some. But to blame the horrific practices of investors (crazy out of control stock market) and C-suite persons (fraud, cooked books, etc.) on the President is foolish.

DOMS

The President sets the fiscal policy that trickles down through the government; which includes the Fed. Plus, Clinton had 8 years to set such policy.

Not to mention that so many liberal morons were trying to blame Bush for the bubble that burst in early 2000.

Pianomahnn

Oh come on, now what substance does that last part really have on this? Because they did it I have to do it back? Bitch, please. (im really looking for a "talk to the hand" emoticon here, can't find it, damnit)

I understand the President sets policies. But he doesn't have control/knowledge over the unknown practices of corporate executives, and can't limit investors from pouring money into inflatedeconomyintarnet.com stocks.

edit: unknown practices being things like Enron and Worldcom. Those things caused a lot of trouble, and simply cannot be blamed on the President.

DOMS

The president sets the fiscal policy and the Fed makes it so. BTW, do you even know what I'm referring to when I say "the Fed"?


Which is funny, because a lot of liberal blamed those on Bush.

Pianomahnn

Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
I'm going to assume you're referring to the Federal Reserve, that little central banking system, formerly chaired by the wonderful Alan Greenspan. This is a fact: 99% of everyone are morons and have no understanding of what they speak.

DOMS

You were very, very close. But not quite...

This is a sad truth. Most people simply regurgitate what they see on TV or read in a magazine and believe it a truth.

Pianomahnn

Fool, read what I wrote again. Formerly chaired by Alan Greenspan. I figured most people (see below) wouldn't know Bernanke from their own ass. I did it for the common folk. Ha!!
Which is why I like to ask for sources of information. Most won't, and it's a shame. It's why I so adamantly argued in that immigration thread and found the bills being mentioned. But I can't entirely blame them. They've grown up trusting the media, that it would provide them an unbiased truth of world events. And that's just not the case anymore. So they're being bombarded by figures, numbers, phrases, comments that they can't take the time to verify.

Oh well. It's the only way I can rationalize ~55M people voting for Bush.