LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 871
0 members and 871 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-25-2003, 02:09 PM   #11
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,147
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Perhaps one of you can explain what you're talking about. Clinton left us with the military that performed in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
by your rationale it would be George Washington's military Ty.

Quote:
And on intelligence factors, conservatives really ought to keep quiet. It's been widely reported that the incoming Bushies were had little time for the briefings on terrorism, and did nothing for the months leading up to 9/11. After that, they reacted, and who wouldn't? Since then, however, the Administration has trashed the intelligence community. Nothing Clinton did remotely compares.
Are you F. Supplstein?
Oh, Ty's going for 2 concessions in a single day!

Bush did quite a bit for a new President. A detailed plan to oust the Taliban hit Rice's in box 9/10. Remember Bush wasn't President that long before 9/11. What should he have done differently that shouldn't have been done in the 8 prior years? Should he have gathered up all illegals from Mid-East countries. You guys have a problem with that AFTER 9/11, so don't try that.

The only defensible thing you can say re. Clinton and terrorism is that until 9/11 he couldn't have garnered public support for any action. It's bullshit, but at least a defesible argument.
Hank Chinaski is offline  
 


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

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 AM.