sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6753|Argentina
Visit these links and then tell me the guy sucks.  I don't understand why people criticize him.  Do you think GWB would do something like this?  Don't tell he's supporting his wife for 2008.  While GWB is destroying thousands of lifes for oil, this guy does charity.  And this is not propaganda, this is a real fact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr29Lx8dUpg

http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/ … ;srcid=346
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6593|Seattle

Oil?
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6753|Argentina

King_County_Downy wrote:

Oil?
Well, it took you less than a minute to see the 9 minutes video and to visit the site below.  You are damn quick.
Oil, crude oil or petroleum, hydrocarbons??  The thing you put in the car to make it work?
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6487|Northern California
Damn I miss him too.  He's no model family man, but he was a superb president.  When he screwed up, he made attempts to fix them.  When he acheived things, he didn't stump with them rubbing in everyone's face what a god he was! 

Yeah, it's amazing to see what ex presidents do.  So far, I've only known the dem presidents to be productive after their terms.  Bush Sr. just went right back into making more corrupt millions for himself, Reagan..who knows what he did, it's just obvious he was not a servant of the public anymore.  Carter has made a name for himself doing productive things world wide, as Clinton is doing.  Kennedy would have been productive after his terms no doubt. 

I like how Stewart calls him the president.  And rightly so, he's the last elected president our countryhas had.
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6593|Seattle

sergeriver wrote:

King_County_Downy wrote:

Oil?
Well, it took you less than a minute to see the 9 minutes video and to visit the site below.  You are damn quick.
Oil, crude oil or petroleum, hydrocarbons??  The thing you put in the car to make it work?
I saw the show when it was on TV...I just can't believe some people think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over oil. Why do I pay $3/gallon if we were there to take their oil?
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
M1-Lightning
Jeepers Creepers
+136|6727|Peoria, Illinois

King_County_Downy wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

King_County_Downy wrote:

Oil?
Well, it took you less than a minute to see the 9 minutes video and to visit the site below.  You are damn quick.
Oil, crude oil or petroleum, hydrocarbons??  The thing you put in the car to make it work?
I saw the show when it was on TV...I just can't believe some people think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over oil. Why do I pay $3/gallon if we were there to take their oil?
Don't ask them questions like that. It confuses them.
BMW330i
Banned
+20|6459|Montreal, Canada
clinton is the ultimate sugar daddy.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6487|Northern California

King_County_Downy wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

King_County_Downy wrote:

Oil?
Well, it took you less than a minute to see the 9 minutes video and to visit the site below.  You are damn quick.
Oil, crude oil or petroleum, hydrocarbons??  The thing you put in the car to make it work?
I saw the show when it was on TV...I just can't believe some people think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over oil. Why do I pay $3/gallon if we were there to take their oil?
Are you suggesting the main reason for destroying the middle east isn't because of oil?  Just because Bush has completely screwed everything up with Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't mean it's not for the oil.  And why would you think the price of gas has anything to do with why we're slaughtering people in the middle east?  Even if Bush completed his reign of terror and got those pipelines running from the caspian sea, through afghanistan, through Iran, and to the persian gulf (which is what is going on if you didn't pay attention)..and even if he succeeded in installing slave governments in those countries, why would you think the gas price would go down?  If you hadn't noticed, Bush isn't exactly in it for his people.  He doesn't pay for gas, never will.
BMW330i
Banned
+20|6459|Montreal, Canada
watch the movie Syriana... it gives a pretty good argument that the biggest contributor to the strife in the middle-east is Oil.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6487|Northern California
Yep, excellent movie.  Black gold!  Texas Tea!  Why else would we have an interest there?  Why else would we ignore things like Darfur, Somalia, etc?
BMW330i
Banned
+20|6459|Montreal, Canada

IRONCHEF wrote:

Yep, excellent movie.  Black gold!  Texas Tea!  Why else would we have an interest there?  Why else would we ignore things like Darfur, Somalia, etc?
Because nobody cares about Africa. There is nothing there to profit from which is a necessity for the west to operate...

People NEED to drive their cars to work. People don't need diamonds.

Last edited by BMW330i (2006-09-19 13:22:01)

ATG
Banned
+5,233|6525|Global Command
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he had done his job the Trade centers would likely still be standing.
He was a  pathetic disgrace of a president.
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6705|Wilmington, DE, US
Wasn't Nepal crying out for democracy?
PRiMACORD
Member
+190|6621|Home of the Escalade Herds
I miss having a coherent president.
BMW330i
Banned
+20|6459|Montreal, Canada

ATG wrote:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he had done his job the Trade centers would likely still be standing.
He was a  pathetic disgrace of a president.
His economic initiatives while president built up more skyscrapers than you could count.
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6593|Seattle

So our mission is to "destroy" everything and take all their oil?


hmmm...why don't we just destroy everything and take their oil then?

Last edited by King_County_Downy (2006-09-19 13:30:28)

Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6487|Northern California

ATG wrote:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he had done his job the Trade centers would likely still be standing.
He was a  pathetic disgrace of a president.
Oh great.  Another fool who watched Path to 9/11 and believed it as if it were historically accurate and actually based on the 9/11 commission....

FACT:  Clinton DID attack Bin Laden directly, narrowly missing him.  he ordered at least 50 tomahawk cruise missles to be fired at bin Laden..he did this when it wouldn't have received public support..when it wasn't a source for getting fellow democrats reelected, and he didn't do it after lieing to the world and desiring oil.  He did it as an adequate response to the embassy bombings. 

FACT:  BUSH read the August 6th presidential daily breifing telling him specifically that bin laden was going to attack inside the country using airplanes...and Bush did not do anything with airline security..he didn't even call Secretary Mineta to inform him that terrorists would be using aircraft.  He instead went to his freshly stocked lake and fished.

FACT: Secty Berger did not tell any CIA operative to NOT take a shot at bin laden

FACT: Secty Albright did not warn Pakistan that cruise missiles were inbound from the gulf en route to afghanistan.

FACT: BUSH did sit on his ass for 7 minutes reading "My Pet Goat" after being told "The country is under attack."

I could go on..  But instead, I'll leave you with this site to illustrate the abounding inadequacies of Fuehrer Bush. http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6577|SE London

I thought he was a great president. He also comes across as a nice guy, who actually cares about the state of the world.

But come on, the Iraq war was not for oil. Although you could call it a factor, because no one would care about stability in the middle east if it wasn't for all the oil they export. But oil did not directly motivate the war in Iraq.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6525|Global Command

IRONCHEF wrote:

ATG wrote:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he had done his job the Trade centers would likely still be standing.
He was a  pathetic disgrace of a president.
Oh great.  Another fool who watched Path to 9/11 and believed it as if it were historically accurate and actually based on the 9/11 commission....

FACT:  Clinton DID attack Bin Laden directly, narrowly missing him.  he ordered at least 50 tomahawk cruise missles to be fired at bin Laden..he did this when it wouldn't have received public support..when it wasn't a source for getting fellow democrats reelected, and he didn't do it after lieing to the world and desiring oil.  He did it as an adequate response to the embassy bombings. 

FACT:  BUSH read the August 6th presidential daily breifing telling him specifically that bin laden was going to attack inside the country using airplanes...and Bush did not do anything with airline security..he didn't even call Secretary Mineta to inform him that terrorists would be using aircraft.  He instead went to his freshly stocked lake and fished.

FACT: Secty Berger did not tell any CIA operative to NOT take a shot at bin laden

FACT: Secty Albright did not warn Pakistan that cruise missiles were inbound from the gulf en route to afghanistan.
Then why did Sandy Burgler get caught trying to sneak out of the nation archives with documents in his socks???
Obviously because they revealed Clinton for what he was; a poll drivven, do nothing, take no chances president.

And I never saw path to 9-11.
I don't watch television. Ever. I read like mad including the L.A. Times ( aka as the democratic times of L.A. ) and the Orange county register.
I view a lot of Arab news sites also, to keep up with what they are thinking.
I'm 38  and suffered through that mans terms as an adult. Your most likely reciting garbage you've heard other people say.

Last edited by ATG (2006-09-19 13:44:40)

ncc6206
=BIG= BAD AND UGLY
+36|6475
OMG.  Yall really believe ole slick willy was better than Bush. Lets talk about jobless rates and national security. During Ole Billy's term we missed a chance to take out Osama yo mama.  Do you think Bill could have taken us out of the economic catastrophe we endured after 9/11. Not Bloody Likely!  Facts not fantasty gentlemen.  If you prefer a socialist president then I totally understand. By the way, this is always a fun topic!
BMW330i
Banned
+20|6459|Montreal, Canada

ncc6206 wrote:

OMG.  Yall really believe ole slick willy was better than Bush. Lets talk about jobless rates and national security. During Ole Billy's term we missed a chance to take out Osama yo mama.  Do you think Bill could have taken us out of the economic catastrophe we endured after 9/11. Not Bloody Likely!  Facts not fantasty gentlemen.  If you prefer a socialist president then I totally understand. By the way, this is always a fun topic!
There are apparently 59 million people like you in your country.

For shame.
ncc6206
=BIG= BAD AND UGLY
+36|6475
And your point is?  Just understand. This issue is charged with emotional triggers.  Either you liked ole Willy or you didnt.  Doesnt mean I have to be shamed because my opinions are different.  I just defended my stance. I didn't attempt to change your view.  There is no right or wrong on this topic.  I just enjoy the debate.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6577|SE London

IRONCHEF wrote:

ATG wrote:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If he had done his job the Trade centers would likely still be standing.
He was a  pathetic disgrace of a president.
Oh great.  Another fool who watched Path to 9/11 and believed it as if it were historically accurate and actually based on the 9/11 commission....

FACT:  Clinton DID attack Bin Laden directly, narrowly missing him.  he ordered at least 50 tomahawk cruise missles to be fired at bin Laden..he did this when it wouldn't have received public support..when it wasn't a source for getting fellow democrats reelected, and he didn't do it after lieing to the world and desiring oil.  He did it as an adequate response to the embassy bombings.
Very true. There were many, many missile strikes against terrorist targets and probably other strikes against terrorist targets under Clinton. But they weren't part of the over hyped war on terror, so did not recieve much media attention, unless something went wrong - we heard all about it when a cruise missile hit a mosque.

IRONCHEF wrote:

FACT:  BUSH read the August 6th presidential daily breifing telling him specifically that bin laden was going to attack inside the country using airplanes...and Bush did not do anything with airline security..he didn't even call Secretary Mineta to inform him that terrorists would be using aircraft.  He instead went to his freshly stocked lake and fished.
That's not all he did. He (well, Cheney did, 01/06/01) actually implemented measures that made it easier for that type of terrorist attack to suceed, such as removing the ability of generals to take steps to shoot down hijacked planes over US airspace without authorisation. The AP had reported on exercises involving jets being flown into the world trade centre taking place in August 2001. This does not fit in with the claims by the Bush administration that they had never heard of a plan to fly planes into the world trade centre. They had heard about it and considered it a sufficient threat to run multiple exercises simulating it, yet Bush has said "Nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could have envisaged flying aeroplanes into buildings", when his administration recommended that NORAD conduct drills of exactly these sort of attacks, with the world trade centre high up on the list of priorities. So Bush lied about that.

Bush's negligence was certainly a contributary factor in the 9/11 attacks. Fighter jets were only minutes away from New York when the 2nd plane hit, if orders had been given more quickly, as they would have been under the previous system the 2nd plane would most likely have been shot down before reaching the WTC.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6577|SE London

ncc6206 wrote:

OMG.  Yall really believe ole slick willy was better than Bush. Lets talk about jobless rates and national security. During Ole Billy's term we missed a chance to take out Osama yo mama.  Do you think Bill could have taken us out of the economic catastrophe we endured after 9/11. Not Bloody Likely!  Facts not fantasty gentlemen.  If you prefer a socialist president then I totally understand. By the way, this is always a fun topic!
Clinton has the best economic record of any president I can think of. Under Clinton there were record budget surpluses, under Bush there are record deficits, in fact one of the recent budget deficits broke Bush's own record that he set a couple of years earlier. No other countries have suffered such a sudden turnaround as a result of 9/11. It is the fact that Bush's economic policies do not make sense. He has cut taxes and increased spending drastically. Which to be honest, does not look good for the American economy - hence the decreasing value of the dollar.

Clinton managed the economy well - he has a well proven track record. Whereas Bush has completely fucked it up. He doesn't seem to understand you can't cut taxes and increase spending.
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6626|Washington, DC

Let's vote me President. Clinton was OK, Bush is terrible, and I wouldnt have placed my bets on Kerry either.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard