Who Will You Vote For..?

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by That Guy

oh, and now the CIA thinks russia helped moved weaponry out of iraq before the war... (russia's always kinda thought or iraq as its red-headed step child in a way)...

No wonder Russia's intelligence showed they had weapons!

That's almost as funny as the weapons (which Iraq claimed never existed) containers that had French and German writing on them. Imagine that...

[redrock-skins]

Bush is the biggest coward on the planet. Oh yeah, I'm gonna feel real safe with him in charge for another 4 years. No would dare bomb us with him in charge (oh yeah, I forgot they already did on his watch). I'm sure Osama and Al Qaeda will be real scared if Bush is still around. I bet they will just shut down operations and wait for a democrat to take office before they try something.

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by redrock-skins

Bush is the biggest coward on the planet. Oh yeah, I'm gonna feel real safe with him in charge for another 4 years. No would dare bomb us with him in charge (oh yeah, I forgot they already did on his watch). I'm sure Osama and Al Qaeda will be real scared if Bush is still around. I bet they will just shut down operations and wait for a democrat to take office before they try something.

A Kerry administration would make it easier for them. They will enjoy the kind of existance they had under 8 years of Clinton. You should read some of Dick Morris' stuff on terrorism/Clinton/Bush.

[firstdown]

chounsman, you must have one scourse for your misinformation. If we have control of all this oil why wouldn't all of Bushes so called oil buddies reduce their prices to make him look good.

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by firstdown

chounsman, you must have one scourse for your misinformation. If we have control of all this oil why wouldn't all of Bushes so called oil buddies reduce their prices to make him look good.

The left's argument is flawed from the beginning. Take a look at the person they've heralded in their war on George W. Bush - Michael Moore. That should tell you something right there.

[Daseal]

Cpayne if they enjoy the 8 years they had under clinton, I'll enjoy 8 years of no attacks on our soil and a strong foreign policy. I'm fine with that.

[NY_Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Cpayne if they enjoy the 8 years they had under clinton, I'll enjoy 8 years of no attacks on our soil and a strong foreign policy. I'm fine with that.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but weren't we attacked while Bush was president...so eight years under him without any attacks would be incorrect....also, wasn't 9/11 the worst attack on our soil ever. Go figure. Sounds like a great foriegn policy to me.

[redrock-skins]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Cpayne if they enjoy the 8 years they had under clinton, I'll enjoy 8 years of no attacks on our soil and a strong foreign policy. I'm fine with that.

In fairness, we were attacked at the WTC under Clinton too. It just wasn't as catostrpohic. We will be attacked under any president regardless of party. The whole notion that we will "be safer" under either candidate is flawed.

"clinton was handed osama bin laden and said no thanks, so they let him go... hmm, no thanks"

So was Bush and he didn't finish the job of getting Osama and then focused on Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11. He was told from day 1 of his presidency, Osama was a threat, but Bush was too worried about his golf game and his ranch in Crawford. Now we get to watch Osama's latest video on TRL. But we do have Saddam and don't you all feel so much safer now? I was lying awake at night worried about a dictator who controlled only 1/3 of his own counrty, since we ONLY had the other 2/3 under the "no fly zones".

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Cpayne if they enjoy the 8 years they had under clinton, I'll enjoy 8 years of no attacks on our soil and a strong foreign policy. I'm fine with that.

Here's a list of attacks against US interests attributed to Al-Qaeda under Clinton's watch.

February 26, 1993: An explosion in the basement of the World Trade Center towers in New York kills six people and injures about 1,000. The blast causes major damage to the buildings' foundations; some 55,000 people are working in the towers at the time.

November 13, 1995: A car bomb explodes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in front of a building of the Saudi National Guard where US military advisors work. Five US soldiers and two Indian nationals are killed and more than 60 people wounded.

June 25, 1996: A truck loaded with two tonnes of explosives destroys a building at the US military base of Khobar near the town of Dhahran in Saudi Arabia. Nineteen US nationals are killed and 386 are wounded.

August 7, 1998: US embassies in the east African cities of Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam are hit by near-simultaneous bomb attacks which kill 224 people, almost all of them Africans, and injure over 5,000. The toll in Nairobi is 213 dead and over 5,000 injured; in Dar-es-Salaam 11 dead and over 70 injured. Of the total dead, 12 are US nationals.

October 12, 2000: A suicide attack on the destroyer USS Cole kills 17 US sailors and injures 38 in the Yemeni port of Aden.

The research, communication, and planning for attacks on 9/11 were conducted for years prior to 9/11. The Clinton administration cut funding to the CIA, the FBI, and the military in general. September 11, 2001 comes and we're attacked. You can blame 8 months on Bush all you want, but you also have to blame 8 years on Clinton to be fair.

Louis Freeh, FBI director from 93-01, came to Clinton in the oval office one day during Clinton's second term seeking support in changing some restrictive laws. He found it wrong that if the CIA knew something about a terror plot it was legally barred from informing the FBI about it. Freeh wanted this wall to be broken. Clinton said there was nothing he could do and refused. Freeh then asked if there if he could make it so that the agencies could share information to stop terror plots, but just not be able to prosecute the plotters. Clinton also refused this request.

Under George W. Bush, this is no longer the case. Agencies can now share information. An example of this is the plot to blow up the Brooklyn bridge. The FBI heard some 'chatter' with Brooklyn bridge in it. It then informed the NYPD who put up 24 hour surveillance on it. The FBI in the meantime tracked down the guy who was going to execute the plot. He had aborted the mission because of the surveillance being applied by the police. The FBI found detailed engineering and explosive diagrams in the guy's apartment. If this had taken place in 2000 the person in the FBI who gave the order to inform the local police would have been charged and prosecuted with a felony. Kind of rediculous, don't you think?

[That Guy]

No would dare bomb us with him in charge (oh yeah, I forgot they already did on his watch).

oklahoma (not arab, still a terror attack), trade center (twice), USS cole... very very minimal retaliation made them bolder... clinton was handed osama bin laden and said no thanks, so they let him go... hmm, no thanks.

bush on science - I personally believe scientific positions should be chosen by merit, not political affiliation... bush disagrees, and he's replaced many positions with people that will support his dogma (ie, he makes a decision and they figure out a way to spin data to support it.. not very objective), that's what happened to stem cells, all the drilling/de-foresting stuff... i could find more specific examples if you want, but every time i go through some of the sh*t thats gone down i get kinda pissed off... Kerry doesn't promise to be any better on science, but it'd be hard to top what's already happened.

and btw, i think banning things like stem-cells and cloning before we even know what the really are is dumb... cause the rest of the world doesn't care about our ban (ie china which has opened a lot of labs since they found out the US gov isn't going to give money for such research to US schools)... and it could definately bite us in the arse... its not just science, eventually its economy too...