Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Rufus_1611, Aug 15, 2007.
Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - Video 1:23
Seven years later, the world changed dramatically.
And Iraq had nothing to do with that, carpro.
The only good thing about Cheney is that he can do no more harm to our country after Jan 2009.
I hope that he(and Bush) don't do irreparable harm to our country during their remaining time in office.
That's the current mantra from the left.
Why on earth would they do "harm" to our country? They've fought valiantly against radical islamist terrorism, despite the propaganda from the leftists at home.
I'd bet anything that O bin L would not have attacked us if he'd known GWB's response. He thought GWB would be like slick willy.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Yeah, leaving our borders wide open is really fighting valiantly, hillclimber1.
That's the current mantra from the far right.
If your statement was true, then our federal government wouldn't be screaming "Watch out for al Qaeda! Watch out for al Qaeda!" while President Bush is still in office.
I don't know if it is anyone's current mantra but it is true and you nor anyone else can refute the statement. I noticed that you didn''t even try. A smart move on your part.
Even Bush in his more lucid moments says as much. It's not a mantra...it's a fact. We were attacked by Bin Laden & Al Qaeda; not Saddam Hussein & Iraq. Big difference.
Yep, far as we know.
However 911 changed drastically the way those charged with the responsibility of national security looked at terrorist organizations and how or where they could get weapons of terror.
1) More of the far right-wing mantra.
2) Which Iraq had none of.
Hey, carpro, how come you and your buddies didn't recommend invading and causing regime change in Saudi Arabia after the attacks on 9/11/2001 - you know, the country where most of the hijackers came from?
Heck no. America rampaging all around the world was what got him so many followers in the first place. Iraq is the best thing that could have happened for OBL.
Where's your proof that "O bin L" attacked us? How can you say he attacked us like he's already been convicted when the FBI claims it doesn't have enough hard evidence to even indict him for the crime? You got some special inside information the FBI doesn't? Give it up. Now! Or we may have to use more aggresive interrorgation techniques.