Moderator: Dictators in Training
Zanchief wrote:I'll side with the guy that didn't let 3000 of his people die because he was too busy trying to trump up a war elsewhere. Things worked out in the end. 9-11 was all he needed to convince people that Iraq was to blame. It seems ignorance is Bush's greatest asset against terrorism, and it seems his minions are oozing it as well. Oh right, you're a moderate, Lyion. I keep forgetting that amidst your fanatically right wing posts of centrist moderation.
Zanchief wrote:Harrison wrote:Please inform me oh wise Zanchief, knower of all facts!
How much did Clinton know of the threat that Osama posed to the U.S. and its people?
*gets popcorn*
Clinton knew enough to give the Bush administration detailed information saying that his top security priority should be Bin Laden. What did Bush do? Completely ignored him in typical Republican "I know better than you attitude".
The Clinton administration was completely on top of the Bin Laden situation. It was when the government got handed off to Monkey Face that everything went to shit. Things worked out well for him though, he got the war he was looking to get into since the day he took office, and it only took 3000 lives.
Put the popcorn down, Ignatius, you're out of your league.
In 1999, U.S. President Bill Clinton convinced the U.N. to impose sanctions against Afghanistan in an attempt to force the Taliban to extradite Osama.
Zanchief wrote:Narrock wrote:Harper is the best leader Canada has had in years.
I've never heard a stronger endorsement for his opposition.
Fin, frozen assets and sanctions kept him under control. Ignoring him all together to persuit a 10 year old fuid started by pops? That didn't work out so well.
lyion wrote: Especially ones who vote for incompetent corrupt administrations without an inkling of their own governments huge inadequacies ..... it's no surprise to not hear anything original, factual, or correct coming out. Just more regurgitated facist drivel from another hater who never saw a fact he couldn't ignore.
Zanchief wrote:It's funny because in 2000, right before the change of power happened, the Clinton administration had pictures of Bin Laden and knew his exact whereabouts. A few months later Bush had no clue what was going on. After being told the severity of the situation, Bush completely ignored him. He went after Iraq from day one, neglected the threat at hand and 3000 people died because of it. Now you're defending him over the Internet, Lyion. How is that for personal responsibility? Oh right, you're a hypocrite. I keep forgetting that.
Fin, frozen assets and sanctions kept him under control. Ignoring him all together to persuit a 10 year old fuid started by pops? That didn't work out so well.
Harrison wrote:Fin, frozen assets and sanctions kept him under control. Ignoring him all together to persuit a 10 year old fuid started by pops? That didn't work out so well.
I'm going to try to do this the best I can. I am not so skilled at educating the ignorant though.
Sanctioning AFGHANISTAN doesn't help when IRANIANS are the ones funding his little "group". The Taliban didn't give a flying fuck if sanctions were put upon their country when their funding came from an outside source in the end.
Clinton knew his "exact whereabouts" and yet Bin Laden was still at large. You in your infinite wisdom, blame Bush for the lack of action taken against him? You scare me with that staggering stupidity.
Clinton and his administration tore down the ability for our intelligence agencies (CIA and FBI) to work together in an efficient manner. Yet somehow Bush is the devil incarnate for "ignoring" the threat Bin Laden and Al'Qaeda posed to us.
It is of no surprise to me that your complete lack of knowledge in the situation overall poses no hinderance to your vendetta against everything relating to Bush and his administration. That is pretty much par for the course when you're an ignorant foreigner though.
Zanchief wrote:Fin, if it was so clear Iran was the one funding Al-Qaeda, why did we only hear about the link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda? Doesn't that concern you?
Zanchief wrote:Let me spell it out for you. Clinton in office, Bin Laden's where abouts known. Bush takes office, he doesn't give a shit anymore.
Diekan wrote:Believe it or not, there are some countries for which democracy wont work. Muslims can't even stop killing themselves long enough to work out their differences let alone to fully accept and institute a peaceful democracy.
We've removed a blood dictator and now the very country we "freed" is now on the brink of civil war. The police force is corrupt and the two main factions are fighting over who has ultimate control.
Zanchief wrote:Fin, if it was so clear Iran was the one funding Al-Qaeda, why did we only hear about the link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda? Doesn't that concern you?
Harrison wrote:
I would argue that Pakistan and Turkey are relatively peacuful Islamic countries overall.
Harrison wrote:Let me spell it out for you as best I can.
That pretty much does fuck all when you sit idly by while he plots to attack your country. (again I might add!)
As clearly stated and proven earlier, applying sanctions on Afghanistan does NOT count as "doing something".
For fuck's sake, do you even bother to read up on what's going on outside in "the world"?
LOL. Have ever been to Turkey? Have you ever been ANY WHERE outside your state? I have and for you to say that Turkey is relatively peaceful shows just how little you really know about what's really going on over there.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests