Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-09-2004, 08:16 PM   #1
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Default I'm going to tell you what happened!!!

This is what happened with 9/11.
There is evidence that Clinton's top foreign policy objective was terrorism. Every attempt he took at improving counterterrorism the Republican tried to knock his attempts down.
Evidence for you cons---
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
Here you go- this is a gov. document.
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/dpr40014.htm

And we all know how the Republicans demeaned Clinton for attacking the Afghan terrorist camps.

POINT 1- The Republicans politicized Clinton's foreign policy decisions.
POINT 2- The Republican mindset became "Whatever Clinton does is wrong"
POINT 3- Hardcore Conservatives still stuck in a Cold War mentality decided that they knew more about what was going on in foreign policy than the president.
POINT4- Ideologues ran the Republican party.
POINT 5- Ideological beliefs about foreign policy were the MOI while the Republicans had no real idea of the real threats.
POINT 6- The Bush administration is run by ideologues.
POINT 7- The Bush administration dismisses the foreign policy continuum that had continued since FDR and continues instead on its own outdated and idealistic version of foreign policy (look up my posts on gov documents showing how much they were concerned with missile defense and not terrorism)
POINT 8- Because Bush dismissed anything that Clinton had done out of both ideology and out of anti-Clintonism, Clarke was demoted, meetings were delayed, policy was put aside, and many other actions were not put on the front burner as they were in the Clinton admin.
POINT 9- The terrorists were basically able to go unchecked as they were up against an admin that wasn't concerned with terrorism but instead concerned with dissolving missile treaties to strengthen their missile defense position.
POINT 10- 9/11
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2004, 09:37 PM   #2
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
This is what happened with 9/11.
There is evidence that Clinton's top foreign policy objective was terrorism. Every attempt he took at improving counterterrorism the Republican tried to knock his attempts down.
Evidence for you cons---
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
Here you go- this is a gov. document.
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/dpr40014.htm

And we all know how the Republicans demeaned Clinton for attacking the Afghan terrorist camps.
Your wrong again.

Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 1- The Republicans politicized Clinton's foreign policy decisions.
The liberals politicize on one side. They don't want you to know the truth.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 2- The Republican mindset became "Whatever Clinton does is wrong"
Your mindset is "conservatives are always wrong. Even when you agree.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 3- Hardcore Conservatives still stuck in a Cold War mentality decided that they knew more about what was going on in foreign policy than the president.
Reagan? He ended the cold war. What did your party do to help?
Your the one who is stuck.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT4- Ideologues ran the Republican party.
While feelings ran your's. We know that.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 5- Ideological beliefs about foreign policy were the MOI while the Republicans had no real idea of the real threats.
You're the consequential liberal phoney. You wouldn't know a threat if you popped
herpie warts on the wang you were sucking on.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 6- The Bush administration is run by ideologues.
You said that already.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 7- The Bush administration dismisses the foreign policy continuum that had continued since FDR and continues instead on its own outdated and idealistic version of foreign policy (look up my posts on gov documents showing how much they were concerned with missile defense and not terrorism).
I'll give you a (2) for effort.
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 8- Because Bush dismissed anything that Clinton had done out of both ideology and out of anti-Clintonism, Clarke was demoted, meetings were delayed, policy was put aside, and many other actions were not put on the front burner as they were in the Clinton admin.
You're the quintessential usefull idiot of the year. Grats
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
POINT 9- The terrorists were basically able to go unchecked as they were up against an admin that wasn't concerned with terrorism but instead concerned with dissolving missile treaties to strengthen their missile defense position.
POINT 10- 9/11
Oh why bother. Your always right Bumbleroot. You got me. Us conservatives
are all liars and idiots. Did I mention wealthy beyond your liberal means?
OH! har,har, I just did.


I love you Bumble, but only as far as the ground is when you toss yourself from the roof.
The higher you jump from, the more I'll appriciate your super-human powers.



God Bless America
Zolmaz Zo'Boto (Without certain idiots, intelligent people would never know what stupid was)
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2004, 09:44 PM   #3
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Zolmaz even you can do a better job arguing points than that. All you have done is attempt to put me down on each point. Not a single attempt to refute any of the points. I am sorry, but this is one of your lamest posts.

You also mention Reagan as ending the cold war. He did not do this alone. It was the continuum that ended it. There was buildup under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter as well as the other Republican presidents which helped to allow Reagan to go full force towards winning the Cold War. I give credit to Reagan for seeing the finish line and going after it.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2004, 10:08 PM   #4
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Zolmaz even you can do a better job arguing points than that. All you have done is attempt to put me down on each point. Not a single attempt to refute any of the points. I am sorry, but this is one of your lamest posts.
I cannot respect your assumption that you argue better then me. mostly because
your a hand puppet of the leftist media. Hows the CNN lube?

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
You also mention Reagan as ending the cold war. He did not do this alone. It was the continuum that ended it. There was buildup under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter as well as the other Republican presidents which helped to allow Reagan to go full force towards winning the Cold War. I give credit to Reagan for seeing the finish line and going after it.
Oh bullshit. Don't even try to be condescending with me.

Are you saying that Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, were all Republicans?
HAaahahahaha. Other republican presidents haaahahahahahaa *slaps hand on knee*


GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 06:07 AM   #5
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
your a hand puppet of the leftist media.
Another put down there Z without an argument.

And Z- I mention all of the Dem presidents and then I say the OTHER Republican presidents, this means the other presidents were Republican. I also am not taking anything away from Reagan, he did not fail his duty in this regard. He saw the finish line and surpassed it.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 07:26 AM   #6
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
There was buildup under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter as well as the other Republican presidents ....


No, that reads that Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter ARE Republicans. Had you phrased it, "There was buildup under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter well as Republican presidents..." it would be understood that the first four were not Republicans. Throwing the word "other" into that sentence implies the former four were Republican. If you are going to argue that it was grammatically correct, it wasn't. If it was read by someone who did not have knowledge of the American presidents' political affiliations, they would have read it as such.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 08:18 AM   #7
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
What is really happening is this. We are sad for even responding to Bumbleroots delusion's.

I read about 3 lines of his post and moved on. Same ole, same ole. Clinton did good, Bush did bad.

Both did a little, neither did enough. Move along.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 09:10 AM   #8
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Here ya go Bumbleroot, read it closely. It's from Fox so you'll come up with some kind of BS that it's a lie but it tells me what I need to know.
Originally Posted by from article
Several people who have seen the memo have told The Associated Press there were various reports Usama bin Laden (search) had wanted to strike inside the United States as early as 1997 and continuing into spring of 2001
Notice the dates Bumbleroot.
Originally Posted by from article
Current and former officials also say that in August 2001, intelligence officials had two uncorroborated reports suggesting terrorists might use airplanes. They say one report suggested Al Qaeda members were considering flying a plane into a U.S. embassy
Notice the reports use the word suggested. This report was one month before 9/11. What would you have suggested? To shut down every airport and embassy from August 2001 until something actually happened?
Originally Posted by from article
The officials say the reports — among thousands of varied and uncorroborated threats the government gets every month — weren't deemed credible enough to tell the president or the national security adviser. They say neither report involved the details of the plot that shook the country on Sept. 11.
The reports weren't deemed credible enough to tell Bush or Rice. Clearly states that neither knew of the reports. Who droped the ball? Can't blame Bush or Rice for something they didn't get advised on.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,116655,00.html
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 09:16 AM   #9
Tuan00Dorf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,224
POINT 2- The Republican mindset became "Whatever Clinton does is wrong"
Hahaha, I didn't even bother reading any further. Every single thing you ever say is in the entire and never changing mindset that "Whatever Bush does is wrong". Thanks for showing us all the hypocrisy of the day.
__________________
Tuan {Cupcakes} the Vicar
Tuan00Dorf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 10:03 AM   #10
Chiteng
Supporter
 
Chiteng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,240
Tuan,

That didnt refute his assertion. In fact, you validated it.
__________________
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest
Chiteng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 10:22 AM   #11
K1SSK1nG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 353
but...really...

Everything bush does is wrong.

The Idiot child has invaded our country, and behind him, rides hell.

In all honesty, though....Bush needs another DUI and possibly some more drug busts. Just for shits and giggles.

I will gladly admit that i think everything bush does is wrong. Do i agree with Bumble's reasoning? hell no, not most of it. He brings up some valid points, some....But most of it just seems rehashed democratic mudslinging, not to say that the Republicans aren't fully capable of slinging harder.

You want leftist? Go green and we'll talk.

Darmu
K1SSK1nG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 10:36 AM   #12
Tuan00Dorf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,224
Oh goody, Chiteng logic! Can someone translate it to english for me?
__________________
Tuan {Cupcakes} the Vicar
Tuan00Dorf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 03:03 PM   #13
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
*Bangs his head on the keyboard*




Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 03:08 PM   #14
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
I lost interest when I realized this was fiction somewhere inbetween point 1 and 2...
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 04:21 PM   #15
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
You want leftist? Go green and we'll talk.

Darmu
Word up to us borderline hippies! /beer Darmu

Seriously, though, there are two outcomes that both side is completely ginoring.

First, you can admit that Bush wasn't able to prevent 9/11. Hoever, and this is the major point, you cannot then blame Clinton for it. Why? Because they had the same intel. If you blame Clinton, the blame also falls on Bush.

The other thing you can say, as Bumble seems to be, is that Bush did not do everything in his power to stop it. If this is the case then you must admit Clinton could have done more. This is not the same as saying he is at fault, but rather than he did not pursue all available intel to the fullest extent.

Anything else, whether it is Bumble's persecution of Bush with unmoving defense of Clinton, or the Republican protection of Bush while blaming Clinton, is a bunch of fucking shitbrained hypocrisy.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 06:01 PM   #16
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
I'm a Republican AresProphet and I don't blame the Clinton Administration. I said both administrations did a little and neither did enough.

Bumbleroot hates Bush so bad that he can't see there is no one administration to blame without his blinders on.

To me it's a matter of hindsight is 20/20. We can't go back and undo what's been done, but we can certainly go forward and learn from our mistakes about how to improve our national security.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 06:09 PM   #17
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Bumbleroot hates Bush so bad that he can't see there is no one administration to blame without his blinders on.
No Caelie- IF you would take your fingers out of your ears and listen you will see that I NEVER said Clinton was faultless.
I do, however see the mistakes that Bush made. They are so obvious. I am pointing them out to you. You don't like them because they don't bode well for his political chances. A Real leader would admit his errors, such as Kennedy did when he fucked up.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 06:26 PM   #18
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
A Real leader would admit his errors, such as Kennedy did
when he fucked up.
Please educate us on this admission of a F-up by Kennedy.
I'm holding you to this one!

I demand a strait and factual answer Bumble. Not opinion or theory.




GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 06:34 PM   #19
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
No Caelie- IF you would take your fingers out of your ears and listen you will see that I NEVER said Clinton was faultless.
I do, however see the mistakes that Bush made. They are so obvious. I am pointing them out to you. You don't like them because they don't bode well for his political chances. A Real leader would admit his errors, such as Kennedy did when he fucked up.
Ok so you are saying you never said Clinton was faultless but you choose to point out Bush's mistakes.
Why not be a real man and point out the faults of everybody involved? You need to take your hands away from your eyes and read what you are typing. Nobody pays attention to you because you are so biased.

FYI, I am not worried about this 9/11 commission and their findings hurting Bush's political chances. Before they could blame Bush they would have to go way back to previous administrations with the finger pointing. I'm sure they'll find and note things that could have been done differently going way back to previous administrations, further back than Clinton and all the way up till Bush.

There was a caller on the radio and he said he blames the American people if he blames anybody. If prior to 9/11 they had of beefed up security in the airports to the point it is now, we would have gone balistic. The sad thing is he is correct. It takes us getting slapped in the face with tragedy before we accept changes.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 08:32 PM   #20
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
I'm still waiting Bumbleroot.

Don't make me start a new thread!
I'll embarrass you.




Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 09:31 PM   #21
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Sorry - I don't read these boards 24/7
Here ya go-
JFK admitting he was wrong about the Bay of Pigs invasion- you really need to learn something about history before you start thinking you know something about it.

http://www.cs.umb.edu/jfklibrary/jfk...r_editors.html
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 09:38 PM   #22
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Ok so you are saying you never said Clinton was faultless but you choose to point out Bush's mistakes.
Why not be a real man and point out the faults of everybody involved?
Because Bush is not admitting his fault and he IGNORED IT against Clinton's warnings. In fact, Clinton did keep terrorist acts from happening here. Also Bush is trying to use this for his re-election campaign and it is a LIE. Clinton never used this for is election campaign in the same way.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 11:07 PM   #23
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Sorry - I don't read these boards 24/7
Here ya go-
JFK admitting he was wrong about the Bay of Pigs invasion- you really need to learn something about history before you start thinking you know something about it.

http://www.cs.umb.edu/jfklibrary/jfk...r_editors.html
I need to learn?

You have a source that say's
On that unhappy island, as in so many other arenas of the contest for freedom


Give me a break. You have yet to answer my question factually, 'Bumbleroot.

I will hound you untill you do. And your lies will keep you from sleeping at night.

Yes, there is a code, it's called integrity.




GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2004, 06:41 AM   #24
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Z- since you don't understand what Kennedy said I will give you references to it from historical summations of Kennedy's career.

http://sc94.ameslab.gov/TOUR/jfk.html
The actual invasion was Kennedy's decision, however, and he properly took the blame for its total failure.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2004, 04:48 AM   #25
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
You also mention Reagan as ending the cold war. He did not do this alone. It was the continuum that ended it. There was buildup under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter as well as the other Republican presidents which helped to allow Reagan to go full force towards winning the Cold War. I give credit to Reagan for seeing the finish line and going after it.
This struck me as funny, for some reason.

You see, Bush isn't the first president to have to deal with this particular group of terrorists. It was a hand-me-down present from other administrations. If Reagan can't be fully credited for ending the Cold War, why should Bush be fully credited for the problems in the Middle East?

You do credit Reagan with "seeing the finish line and going after it." One could say that that's the same thing Bush is after. You might not necessarily agree with his tactics - there are many different perspectives on that argument - but you can at least say that he's attempting to do something about it.

If you can see the difference in Reagan's situation, why not Bush's?
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:58 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.