Rhino
03-09-2001, 04:53 AM
MsMonty
New Member
posts: 8
(2/17/01 10:47:08 am)
| Del All Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could not believe my ears when the head NOW gal, Patricia Ireland, made that comment last night on Hard Ball. She said Bush was tired of Clinton getting the headlines so decided he would take the spot light with a little bombing raid on Iraq! The rest of the panel got a kick out of it and pretty much laughed at her. She went on to say that if Bush really wanted to 'move on' he would instruct Ashcroft to NOT grant immunity to Denise Rich. OMG did the panel ever tear her up on that one. The AG is supposed to act independently of the President, something we have not seen for 8 long years. I was happy to see her look stupid and to continue to lose her credibility! What a moron!
Monty
wolfplus3
Forum Host
posts: 73
(2/17/01 11:11:40 am)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My local radio host was discussing this subject Friday afternoon as I was coming home from work. Predictably, a certain segment of society was all for it. These are the ones who stuck by Sick (yep, no typo, I mean sick) Willie no matter what he did. I'm talking about the black community. WTH people? Is there something about the black community that demands total toeing of the line? I find it incredible that an entire section of people can be so blatantly blind to anything that does not fit their preconcieved notions. I realize there are exceptions, Drs. Williams and Sowell most readily come to mind, but the vast majority certainly underscore the term "sheeple".
I know PRESIDENT BUSH is trying to come to terms with their community, as they are, and will remain, a viable part of America. It just seems to me that when a group is constantly trying to put their foot in your behind (while still holding their hands out for goodies), you need to cut bait and move on. My humble advice to the White House is: continue your policies, make amends where you can, but boot these hucksters out on their tushies now. They're going to hate you regardless of what you do, so **** 'em!
As to any wagging of the dog, simply tell them that they've shown the ability in the past 8 years to "swallow" anything, so why should we be surprized at this load of hooey now.
AtomicLibSmasher
ezOP/TaskMaster
posts: 1125
(2/17/01 11:31:58 am)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Things just aren't working out well for the gorons these days... no?
``I tried to walk a line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish this goal" - Slick Clinton
MikeNite
Forum Host
posts: 150
(2/17/01 12:18:46 pm)
| Del President Bush Loves This Country........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MsMonty...........get a life !!!
Maggie T
Forum Host
posts: 309
(2/17/01 12:23:36 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My humble advice to the White House is: continue your policies, make amends where you can, but boot these hucksters out on their tushies now. They're going to hate you regardless of what you do, so **** 'em!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't agree more, Wolf. That's what I got tired of saying during the impeachment period.
What I want to know is, why do they ask people (term used loosely) like Patricia Ireland to opine on this kind of subject? To me, she on the same (low) level as Babwa Streisand, Susan Sarandon and the rest of Hollyrot. What authority do they have on politics? Sheesh!
WarLady1
Owner/ezOP/Moderator
posts: 1837
(2/17/01 6:57:10 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GW wasn't wagging the dog he was just mailin' Saddam a Valentine.
**Don't forget to check out our other great forums!!
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 165
(2/17/01 7:08:39 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George W. Bush wants a war with Iraq so desperately. He wants to wipe off the blemish on his daddy's war.
Iraq will strike back. What tells you that they wouldn't bomb a embassy or do something else as revenge?
Bush is playing high-stakes poker, ala John F. Kennedy.
There is no rational reason to bomb Iraq at the moment. About every nation on the earth condemned us for this attack.
I guess his name would be George Warhawk Bush.
I will not support an invasion of Iraq, that doesn't mean that my heart won't be with the boys sent to Iraq. I may oppose the cause but I will not oppose the soldiers. I may detest the real reason for this (more Oil) but I will not wish death on the boys sent to Iraq.
If Saddam was so unpopular in Iraq, we would know it. If we overthrow him, Iraq will not be stable for another 20 years, even after the last 20 years of Saddam.
I will give those pilots (god bless them) credit for not bombing the Iraqi 'babyfood' depositories.
This may seem a bit odd to say, I am not hating the players (Soldiers) but I am hating the game (War)
Wolfcounsel
Gold Star Member
posts: 243
(2/17/01 7:40:36 pm)
| Del Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I guess his name would be George Warhawk Bush." --RKfalken
I like it already!
"Iraq will strike back. What tells you that they wouldn't bomb a embassy or do something else as revenge?" --RKfalken
No telling what cowards will do until they get their ass annihilated.
PRES GEORGE W BUSH
New Member
posts: 4
(2/17/01 7:42:58 pm)
| Del
Re: Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
you have no idea what is in the sands that reagen has put together and has yet to be used. people still call it a war. it was a slaughter.
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 175
(2/17/01 7:46:23 pm)
| Del
Re: Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we have to topple Saddam to make sure we get more oil, let it happen with the minumium of deaths.
I do think it will be very hard to march men into Baghdad.
I also believe that if we just kill Saddam, some other man like him would take over.
I am a bit pacifistic and a bit anti-communist. Those seem to contradict each other alot.
Wolfcounsel
Gold Star Member
posts: 245
(2/17/01 7:52:44 pm)
| Del Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I also believe that if we just kill Saddam, some other man like him would take over." --RKfalken
What if Saddam were to be publicly exhibited with his genitals in his mouth, one of his feet cut off and stuck in his rectum, and have a note pinned on his chest with a bayonet, with the note asking, "who wants to be the next dictator?"
Only an opinion, heh heh.
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 178
(2/17/01 7:55:12 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we just shoot him, they won't give him the Mussolini treatment.
If we just shoot him, they will give him a dignified funeral (ha! like he really deserved it), he can go up to Heaven and then find out he was praying to the wrong god.
Aren't a few of his relatives more crazy than he is?
Maybe if we could pick them all off.
WarLady1
Owner/ezOP/Moderator
posts: 1841
(2/17/01 8:10:01 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Falken the only countries criticizing the US/British attack on the new radar towers was Russia and China. Get a clue. Those new radar installations were enabling Saddam to shoot at our pilots.
**Don't forget to check out our other great forums!!
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 181
(2/17/01 8:15:14 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've heard that India and Iran are also condemning the attack.
If the rest of the world was with us.. they are playing silent. The only country to side with us is England.
and something to paste..
'Nations Criticize Attacks on Iraq
By CHIKAKO MOGI, Associated Press Writer
TOKYO (AP) - Muslim nations on Saturday slammed U.S.-British air strikes against Iraqi targets near Baghdad, saying prior attacks failed to topple the nation's leader and victimized innocents.
Friday's raid, the largest in years, brought quick criticism from Russia and China - and a cold response even from some U.S. allies, particularly France, which once patrolled Iraqi skies alongside the United States and Britain.
Turkey, a close U.S. ally which allows U.S. and British planes to use its bases to patrol a no-fly zone in northern Iraq, voiced dismay over the raid and said it was time for Washington to review its policy towards Baghdad.
``It is sad that a need was felt to resort to such an action against Iraq and that civilians as well as military targets were harmed,'' Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit said.
``Yesterday's events show that 10 years after the Gulf War (news - web sites), peace, calm and stability have still not been established in Iraq,'' Ecevit said. ``That is why it would be of use for the new U.S. administration to review the Iraqi problem with Turkey at the earliest opportunity.
Israel said it was not worried about a possible flare-up in the region in the wake of the attack. ``We don't need to be concerned about the events overnight,'' Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh told Israel radio. ``This doesn't mean that we should disregard Iraq, which is a growing threat.''
But Palestinians held protests in support of Iraq in the Palestinian areas. In the West Bank town of Ramallah, about 200 Palestinians took to the streets late Friday after word of the U.S. strike spread, waving Iraqi flags and posters of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) and chanted ``Death to America'' and ``Long live Iraq.'' In Nablus, about 1,500 protesters burned American and Israeli flags and pictures of President Bush (news - web sites).
Observers elsewhere questioned the effectiveness of using military might to force Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein out of office.
South Korea's national news agency Yonhap cautioned the United States to be mindful of mounting international criticism against its use of power in resolving conflicts overseas.
``Its policy of strangling Iraq has failed to topple Hussein and often resulted in sacrifices of innocent civilians,'' Yonhap said.
Iraq's state-run media reported that two people were killed and 11 people were injured in the attack. Iraq has said that some 300 people have been killed and more than 800 injured by allied strikes since Iraq began challenging the no-fly patrols in December 1998.
The United States said the attack targeted air defense installations in order to damage Iraq's capabilities to threaten allied planes patrolling a no-fly zone in southern Iraq. Washington and London said Iraqi attacks on allied patrols had gotten more frequent and sophisticated in recent months.
No-fly zones were established in northern and southern Iraq after the Gulf War, which ended in February 1991 with the end of Iraq's occupation of Kuwait.
``Saddam Hussein remains a threat to stability in the Middle East,'' British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) said in a statement. ``I am determined to prevent his tyrannical regime from once again attacking Iraq's neighbors, and to ensure that the humanitarian crises we witnessed after the Gulf War should not be repeated.''
France, which took part in setting up the zones but has since stopped participating in the patrols, said it had ``often expressed our incomprehension and our discomfort in regards to the repeated airstrikes carried out by American and British aviation.''
``In addition to the victims they create among the civilian population, these operations maintain a tension that is damaging the implementation of a mutually agreed-upon solution to the Iraq problem, in conformity with the goals of the Security Council,'' the French Foreign Ministry said Saturday.
Russia and China were also quick to condemn the strikes.
``What the American militarists are doing at the start of the new administration's activity is a challenge to international security and the entire world community,'' said Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, chief of the Russian Defense Ministry's international cooperation department, as quoted by news agency Interfax.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao said, ``We condemn the air attacks launched by the United States and Britain against Iraq, and express deep regret over the deaths and injuries of innocent civilians resulting from the action.''
China called on the United States and Britain to stop military action in Iraq immediately to create a favorable atmosphere for upcoming talks between Iraq and the U.N. secretary-general slated for later this month.
In Japan, where ties with the United States have been strained by a string of gaffes by American military officials stationed in Japan, a short statement by the prime minister's office said only that it ``hopes the situation over (Iraq) will not get strained further.'''
PaulRevere98999
Gold Star Member
posts: 133
(2/17/01 8:22:11 pm)
| Del Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RKFalken:
Consider the possibility that most of our friends in the Middle East hate and fear Saddam Hussein, but are obliged to criticize the US-British attack so as to counter any extremist outrage amongst those segments of their population. In other words, its a PR ploy to appeal to their plebian masses just as the Democrats appeal to their plebian followers at any opportunity.
PS - Liberal socialists or not - God bless the British. If this country has only one friend and ally in the world it is they.
New Member
posts: 8
(2/17/01 10:47:08 am)
| Del All Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could not believe my ears when the head NOW gal, Patricia Ireland, made that comment last night on Hard Ball. She said Bush was tired of Clinton getting the headlines so decided he would take the spot light with a little bombing raid on Iraq! The rest of the panel got a kick out of it and pretty much laughed at her. She went on to say that if Bush really wanted to 'move on' he would instruct Ashcroft to NOT grant immunity to Denise Rich. OMG did the panel ever tear her up on that one. The AG is supposed to act independently of the President, something we have not seen for 8 long years. I was happy to see her look stupid and to continue to lose her credibility! What a moron!
Monty
wolfplus3
Forum Host
posts: 73
(2/17/01 11:11:40 am)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My local radio host was discussing this subject Friday afternoon as I was coming home from work. Predictably, a certain segment of society was all for it. These are the ones who stuck by Sick (yep, no typo, I mean sick) Willie no matter what he did. I'm talking about the black community. WTH people? Is there something about the black community that demands total toeing of the line? I find it incredible that an entire section of people can be so blatantly blind to anything that does not fit their preconcieved notions. I realize there are exceptions, Drs. Williams and Sowell most readily come to mind, but the vast majority certainly underscore the term "sheeple".
I know PRESIDENT BUSH is trying to come to terms with their community, as they are, and will remain, a viable part of America. It just seems to me that when a group is constantly trying to put their foot in your behind (while still holding their hands out for goodies), you need to cut bait and move on. My humble advice to the White House is: continue your policies, make amends where you can, but boot these hucksters out on their tushies now. They're going to hate you regardless of what you do, so **** 'em!
As to any wagging of the dog, simply tell them that they've shown the ability in the past 8 years to "swallow" anything, so why should we be surprized at this load of hooey now.
AtomicLibSmasher
ezOP/TaskMaster
posts: 1125
(2/17/01 11:31:58 am)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Things just aren't working out well for the gorons these days... no?
``I tried to walk a line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish this goal" - Slick Clinton
MikeNite
Forum Host
posts: 150
(2/17/01 12:18:46 pm)
| Del President Bush Loves This Country........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MsMonty...........get a life !!!
Maggie T
Forum Host
posts: 309
(2/17/01 12:23:36 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My humble advice to the White House is: continue your policies, make amends where you can, but boot these hucksters out on their tushies now. They're going to hate you regardless of what you do, so **** 'em!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't agree more, Wolf. That's what I got tired of saying during the impeachment period.
What I want to know is, why do they ask people (term used loosely) like Patricia Ireland to opine on this kind of subject? To me, she on the same (low) level as Babwa Streisand, Susan Sarandon and the rest of Hollyrot. What authority do they have on politics? Sheesh!
WarLady1
Owner/ezOP/Moderator
posts: 1837
(2/17/01 6:57:10 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GW wasn't wagging the dog he was just mailin' Saddam a Valentine.
**Don't forget to check out our other great forums!!
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 165
(2/17/01 7:08:39 pm)
| Del
Re: Did Bush 'wag the dog'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George W. Bush wants a war with Iraq so desperately. He wants to wipe off the blemish on his daddy's war.
Iraq will strike back. What tells you that they wouldn't bomb a embassy or do something else as revenge?
Bush is playing high-stakes poker, ala John F. Kennedy.
There is no rational reason to bomb Iraq at the moment. About every nation on the earth condemned us for this attack.
I guess his name would be George Warhawk Bush.
I will not support an invasion of Iraq, that doesn't mean that my heart won't be with the boys sent to Iraq. I may oppose the cause but I will not oppose the soldiers. I may detest the real reason for this (more Oil) but I will not wish death on the boys sent to Iraq.
If Saddam was so unpopular in Iraq, we would know it. If we overthrow him, Iraq will not be stable for another 20 years, even after the last 20 years of Saddam.
I will give those pilots (god bless them) credit for not bombing the Iraqi 'babyfood' depositories.
This may seem a bit odd to say, I am not hating the players (Soldiers) but I am hating the game (War)
Wolfcounsel
Gold Star Member
posts: 243
(2/17/01 7:40:36 pm)
| Del Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I guess his name would be George Warhawk Bush." --RKfalken
I like it already!
"Iraq will strike back. What tells you that they wouldn't bomb a embassy or do something else as revenge?" --RKfalken
No telling what cowards will do until they get their ass annihilated.
PRES GEORGE W BUSH
New Member
posts: 4
(2/17/01 7:42:58 pm)
| Del
Re: Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
you have no idea what is in the sands that reagen has put together and has yet to be used. people still call it a war. it was a slaughter.
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 175
(2/17/01 7:46:23 pm)
| Del
Re: Cool!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we have to topple Saddam to make sure we get more oil, let it happen with the minumium of deaths.
I do think it will be very hard to march men into Baghdad.
I also believe that if we just kill Saddam, some other man like him would take over.
I am a bit pacifistic and a bit anti-communist. Those seem to contradict each other alot.
Wolfcounsel
Gold Star Member
posts: 245
(2/17/01 7:52:44 pm)
| Del Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I also believe that if we just kill Saddam, some other man like him would take over." --RKfalken
What if Saddam were to be publicly exhibited with his genitals in his mouth, one of his feet cut off and stuck in his rectum, and have a note pinned on his chest with a bayonet, with the note asking, "who wants to be the next dictator?"
Only an opinion, heh heh.
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 178
(2/17/01 7:55:12 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we just shoot him, they won't give him the Mussolini treatment.
If we just shoot him, they will give him a dignified funeral (ha! like he really deserved it), he can go up to Heaven and then find out he was praying to the wrong god.
Aren't a few of his relatives more crazy than he is?
Maybe if we could pick them all off.
WarLady1
Owner/ezOP/Moderator
posts: 1841
(2/17/01 8:10:01 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Falken the only countries criticizing the US/British attack on the new radar towers was Russia and China. Get a clue. Those new radar installations were enabling Saddam to shoot at our pilots.
**Don't forget to check out our other great forums!!
RKfalken
Gold Star Member
posts: 181
(2/17/01 8:15:14 pm)
| Del
Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've heard that India and Iran are also condemning the attack.
If the rest of the world was with us.. they are playing silent. The only country to side with us is England.
and something to paste..
'Nations Criticize Attacks on Iraq
By CHIKAKO MOGI, Associated Press Writer
TOKYO (AP) - Muslim nations on Saturday slammed U.S.-British air strikes against Iraqi targets near Baghdad, saying prior attacks failed to topple the nation's leader and victimized innocents.
Friday's raid, the largest in years, brought quick criticism from Russia and China - and a cold response even from some U.S. allies, particularly France, which once patrolled Iraqi skies alongside the United States and Britain.
Turkey, a close U.S. ally which allows U.S. and British planes to use its bases to patrol a no-fly zone in northern Iraq, voiced dismay over the raid and said it was time for Washington to review its policy towards Baghdad.
``It is sad that a need was felt to resort to such an action against Iraq and that civilians as well as military targets were harmed,'' Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit said.
``Yesterday's events show that 10 years after the Gulf War (news - web sites), peace, calm and stability have still not been established in Iraq,'' Ecevit said. ``That is why it would be of use for the new U.S. administration to review the Iraqi problem with Turkey at the earliest opportunity.
Israel said it was not worried about a possible flare-up in the region in the wake of the attack. ``We don't need to be concerned about the events overnight,'' Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh told Israel radio. ``This doesn't mean that we should disregard Iraq, which is a growing threat.''
But Palestinians held protests in support of Iraq in the Palestinian areas. In the West Bank town of Ramallah, about 200 Palestinians took to the streets late Friday after word of the U.S. strike spread, waving Iraqi flags and posters of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) and chanted ``Death to America'' and ``Long live Iraq.'' In Nablus, about 1,500 protesters burned American and Israeli flags and pictures of President Bush (news - web sites).
Observers elsewhere questioned the effectiveness of using military might to force Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein out of office.
South Korea's national news agency Yonhap cautioned the United States to be mindful of mounting international criticism against its use of power in resolving conflicts overseas.
``Its policy of strangling Iraq has failed to topple Hussein and often resulted in sacrifices of innocent civilians,'' Yonhap said.
Iraq's state-run media reported that two people were killed and 11 people were injured in the attack. Iraq has said that some 300 people have been killed and more than 800 injured by allied strikes since Iraq began challenging the no-fly patrols in December 1998.
The United States said the attack targeted air defense installations in order to damage Iraq's capabilities to threaten allied planes patrolling a no-fly zone in southern Iraq. Washington and London said Iraqi attacks on allied patrols had gotten more frequent and sophisticated in recent months.
No-fly zones were established in northern and southern Iraq after the Gulf War, which ended in February 1991 with the end of Iraq's occupation of Kuwait.
``Saddam Hussein remains a threat to stability in the Middle East,'' British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) said in a statement. ``I am determined to prevent his tyrannical regime from once again attacking Iraq's neighbors, and to ensure that the humanitarian crises we witnessed after the Gulf War should not be repeated.''
France, which took part in setting up the zones but has since stopped participating in the patrols, said it had ``often expressed our incomprehension and our discomfort in regards to the repeated airstrikes carried out by American and British aviation.''
``In addition to the victims they create among the civilian population, these operations maintain a tension that is damaging the implementation of a mutually agreed-upon solution to the Iraq problem, in conformity with the goals of the Security Council,'' the French Foreign Ministry said Saturday.
Russia and China were also quick to condemn the strikes.
``What the American militarists are doing at the start of the new administration's activity is a challenge to international security and the entire world community,'' said Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, chief of the Russian Defense Ministry's international cooperation department, as quoted by news agency Interfax.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao said, ``We condemn the air attacks launched by the United States and Britain against Iraq, and express deep regret over the deaths and injuries of innocent civilians resulting from the action.''
China called on the United States and Britain to stop military action in Iraq immediately to create a favorable atmosphere for upcoming talks between Iraq and the U.N. secretary-general slated for later this month.
In Japan, where ties with the United States have been strained by a string of gaffes by American military officials stationed in Japan, a short statement by the prime minister's office said only that it ``hopes the situation over (Iraq) will not get strained further.'''
PaulRevere98999
Gold Star Member
posts: 133
(2/17/01 8:22:11 pm)
| Del Re: Oh my golly goodness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RKFalken:
Consider the possibility that most of our friends in the Middle East hate and fear Saddam Hussein, but are obliged to criticize the US-British attack so as to counter any extremist outrage amongst those segments of their population. In other words, its a PR ploy to appeal to their plebian masses just as the Democrats appeal to their plebian followers at any opportunity.
PS - Liberal socialists or not - God bless the British. If this country has only one friend and ally in the world it is they.