10 questions for dick clarke

[DealMonkey]

As "insightful" (and I use that term loosely) as your questions are (or rather Limbaugh's questions are, since you apparantly can't come up with these sorts of things on your own), I'm more interested in the answers. Do you actually have the answers to those questions? If not, you only seem interested in 1/2 the story. As usual.

 

[conjur]

If Rush doesn't toe the party line, then why can he not find fault in Bush?

And, the 1st question re:what advice did Clarke give is an invalid question as Sudan did not offer bin Laden to the U.S.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

PS - If you don't like Rush -that's fine but you are dead wrong about his integrity - he has more than the leftist bleaters here combined.

OMG

Note - the leftist bleaters here have zero integrity It's not hard to beat them. 0+0+0+0....=0

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur
If Rush doesn't toe the party line, then why can he not find fault in Bush?

And, the 1st question re:what advice did Clarke give is an invalid question as Sudan did not offer bin Laden to the U.S.

How was clinton advised by clarke the first time OBL was offered up by the Sudanese?

Play your games if you want but atleast try to answer the questions.

CkG

 

[conjur]

Close-up photo of CADkindaGUY

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
If Rush doesn't toe the party line, then why can he not find fault in Bush?

And, the 1st question re:what advice did Clarke give is an invalid question as Sudan did not offer bin Laden to the U.S.

How was clinton advised by clarke the first time OBL was offered up by the Sudanese?

Play your games if you want but atleast try to answer the questions.

CkG

Again, CkG, that's an invalid question. I could ask a similar question:

What advice did Cheney give Bush when Mexico offered bin Laden to the U.S.?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur
Close-up photo of CADkindaGUY

Awww - can't answer the questions so we play games...how nice.

CkG

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard

PS - If you don't like Rush -that's fine but you are dead wrong about his integrity - he has more than the leftist bleaters here combined.

OMG

Note - the leftist bleaters here have zero integrity It's not hard to beat them. 0+0+0+0....=0

CkG

You can win any argument by sticking your head in the sand and screaming "I'm not listening." If you consider that winning, that is.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
As "insightful" (and I use that term loosely) as your questions are (or rather Limbaugh's questions are, since you apparantly can't come up with these sorts of things on your own), I'm more interested in the answers. Do you actually have the answers to those questions? If not, you only seem interested in 1/2 the story. As usual.

Answer the question please.

 

[arsbanned]

Wow, Clarke posts here are AT P&N? Huh. Interesting.

 

[alchemize]

This just in...Clinton passed 3 times...THREE TIMES...on killing Bin Laden...

And the Clinton administration debated whether to launch airstrikes to kill bin Laden at least three times in 1998 and 1999, but decided against them because of doubts about the intelligence and concerns about killing civilians.

There were three occasions. Each time, the munitions and people were spun up," former Defense Secretary William Cohen told the panel. "They were called off because the word came back, 'We're not sure.' "

I'd like to ask Clarke what his opinion was each of those 3 times.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
If Rush doesn't toe the party line, then why can he not find fault in Bush?

And, the 1st question re:what advice did Clarke give is an invalid question as Sudan did not offer bin Laden to the U.S.

How was clinton advised by clarke the first time OBL was offered up by the Sudanese?

Play your games if you want but atleast try to answer the questions.

CkG

Again, CkG, that's an invalid question. I could ask a similar question:

What advice did Cheney give Bush when Mexico offered bin Laden to the U.S.?

How was clinton advised by clarke the first time OBL was offered up by the Sudanese?

Did the Sudanese offer up OBL? Yes
Shouldn't clinton have been breifed by someone involved on his "anti-terrorism" team about the situation? Yes
So what exactly did clarke tell clinton when it became known that the Sudanese had OBL?

Hmm... divert and play games all you want though - I didn't expect much less to happen in this thread.

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gaard

PS - If you don't like Rush -that's fine but you are dead wrong about his integrity - he has more than the leftist bleaters here combined.

OMG

Note - the leftist bleaters here have zero integrity It's not hard to beat them. 0+0+0+0....=0

CkG

You can win any argument by sticking your head in the sand and screaming "I'm not listening." If you consider that winning, that is.

Then pull your head out...

CkG

 

[DealMonkey]

All right, well I guess Cad & Co are content to ask questions to the wind . . . I suppose next you'll be answering the questions for Clarke. Oh brother . . . I'm out of here.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: conjur
Close-up photo of CADkindaGUY

Cad's a pretty bird

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: alchemize
This just in...Clinton passed 3 times...THREE TIMES...on killing Bin Laden...

And the Clinton administration debated whether to launch airstrikes to kill bin Laden at least three times in 1998 and 1999, but decided against them because of doubts about the intelligence and concerns about killing civilians.

There were three occasions. Each time, the munitions and people were spun up," former Defense Secretary William Cohen told the panel. "They were called off because the word came back, 'We're not sure.' "

I'd like to ask Clarke what his opinion was each of those 3 times.

oh, lets shoot missles at intelligence of locations that were hours old? and would take many more hours to reach... predator drones had no missles yet. just look at what pres bush did during gulf war 2 with his intellegence. at the opening of the war he shot 50 cruise missles at 50 locations to kill top leadership and saddam. guess what happened? zero kills, and a lot of civilian casualties instead


cad knows better then to bring up sudan. look for the proof that sudan offered such a deal and that it wasn't just a bluff. you won't find much at all. only offer was to saudi arabia, and saudi's didn't want it.

fact is clinton signed an executive order for the assassination of osama bin ladin.


conservatives like cad know that once bush got into office, he could have cared less about terrorism, only taking vacations and fighting for tax cuts for those who do not need them. he didn't make a mad scramble to make up for supposed lost time, no, he felt it was dandy enough to go to his ranch. since his guy has no legs to stand on, point to clinton

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: conjur
Close-up photo of CADkindaGUY

anyone got a picture of a sock puppet?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
As "insightful" (and I use that term loosely) as your questions are (or rather Limbaugh's questions are, since you apparantly can't come up with these sorts of things on your own), I'm more interested in the answers. Do you actually have the answers to those questions? If not, you only seem interested in 1/2 the story. As usual.

Answer the question please.

See - that's the part you don't understand because you didn't click the neo-con link These are questions openly posed to clarke since he was thrown softballs by Stahl.
See -we're looking for answers he hasn't given the answer to. You know....to get the whole story of what his anti-terrorism positions really have been when it counted.

CkG

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: alchemize
This just in...Clinton passed 3 times...THREE TIMES...on killing Bin Laden...

And the Clinton administration debated whether to launch airstrikes to kill bin Laden at least three times in 1998 and 1999, but decided against them because of doubts about the intelligence and concerns about killing civilians.

There were three occasions. Each time, the munitions and people were spun up," former Defense Secretary William Cohen told the panel. "They were called off because the word came back, 'We're not sure.' "

I'd like to ask Clarke what his opinion was each of those 3 times.

oh, lets shoot missles at intelligence of locations that were hours old? and would take many more hours to reach... predator drones had no missles yet. just look at what pres bush did during gulf war 2 with his intellegence. at the opening of the war he shot 50 cruise missles at 50 locations to kill top leadership and saddam. guess what happened? zero kills, and a lot of civilian casualties instead


cad knows better then to bring up sudan. look for the proof that sudan offered such a deal and that it wasn't just a bluff. you won't find much at all. only offer was to saudi arabia, and saudi's didn't want it.

fact is clinton signed an executive order for the assassination of osama bin ladin.

conservatives like cad know that once bush got into office, he could have cared less about terrorism, only taking vacations and fighting for tax cuts for those who do not need them. he didn't make a mad scramble to make up for supposed lost time, no, he felt it was dandy enough to go to his ranch. since his guy has no legs to stand on, point to clinton

That's quite a laughable argument. So Clinton had no actionable intelligence, but Bush did? Care to provide a link to that? Of course not, because you are spewing partisan rhetoric. Wipe your chin, you spilled.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
See - that's the part you don't understand because you didn't click the neo-con link These are questions openly posed to clarke since he was thrown softballs by Stahl.
See -we're looking for answers he hasn't given the answer to. You know....to get the whole story of what his anti-terrorism positions really have been when it counted.

CkG

I clicked it Cad - I'm not afraid of Rush's blathering. It was exactly what you posted so it doesn't really fix the problem we're having here.

See, the thing you don't understand is that the point is moot. Asking questions that you won't get the answers to, nor really expect to, because you're not asking the guy directly, doesn't get you anywhere. Now if you actually had the answers then we'd have something to discuss. You should have at least waited until Clarke responds -- assuming Rush invited him on his show or whatever. Can I look forward to Rush having Clarke on his show? Hmmmm Cad?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
See - that's the part you don't understand because you didn't click the neo-con link These are questions openly posed to clarke since he was thrown softballs by Stahl.
See -we're looking for answers he hasn't given the answer to. You know....to get the whole story of what his anti-terrorism positions really have been when it counted.

CkG

I clicked it Cad - I'm not afraid of Rush's blathering. It was exactly what you posted so it doesn't really fix the problem we're having here.

See, the thing you don't understand is that the point is moot. Asking questions that you won't get the answers to, nor really expect to, because you're not asking the guy directly, doesn't get you anywhere. Now if you actually had the answers then we'd have something to discuss. You should have at least waited until Clarke responds -- assuming Rush invited him on his show or whatever. Can I look forward to Rush having Clarke on his show? Hmmmm Cad?

I would hope we will have Clarke testifying, under oath, in front of the 9/11 commission. Generally I lend that more credence to that than a book promo/60 minutes segment.

 

[0roo0roo]

as for defense spending, did bush boost it much after he got into office? hah no, he seemed to like clintons funding levels. the difference? 2002 = 58 tactical air craft requested as compared to 2001= 52. but 2002 = only 5 naval ships as compared to 2001 6 naval ships requested new tanks? no, new tanks for either just look at my sig for example of what clintons military did. seemed to work pretty good in gulf war 2 just ask cheney. during gulf war 1, less then 10% of the bombs and missles were smart weapons. in gulf war 2, thanks to clinton it jumped to 70%. you don't think those were all made during bush 2 right? just ask cheney in my sig again.

lets bring back the lie of bush

If called on by the commander in chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report, "Not ready for duty, sir"

george w bush, aug 3 2000


A commander in chief leads the military built by those who came before him. There is little that he or his defense secretary can do to improve the force they have to deploy. It is all the work of previous administrations. Decisions made today shape the force of tomorrow....And when that war[the first gulf war] ended, the first thing i did was to place a call to california, and say thank you to president Ronald Reagan.

--Dick Cheney, aug 2000

 

[prontospyder]

5 More Questions for Mr. Clarke here:

Weekly Standard

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Of course not, because you are spewing partisan rhetoric. Wipe your chin, you spilled.

You know, I just had an interesting though. If everyone on this forum that was spewing partisan rhetoric was put in the same area, there would be quite a big mess to clean up. One big sloppy mix of partisan drivel from both sides.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
See - that's the part you don't understand because you didn't click the neo-con link These are questions openly posed to clarke since he was thrown softballs by Stahl.
See -we're looking for answers he hasn't given the answer to. You know....to get the whole story of what his anti-terrorism positions really have been when it counted.

CkG

I clicked it Cad - I'm not afraid of Rush's blathering. It was exactly what you posted so it doesn't really fix the problem we're having here.

See, the thing you don't understand is that the point is moot. Asking questions that you won't get the answers to, nor really expect to, because you're not asking the guy directly, doesn't get you anywhere. Now if you actually had the answers then we'd have something to discuss. You should have at least waited until Clarke responds -- assuming Rush invited him on his show or whatever. Can I look forward to Rush having Clarke on his show? Hmmmm Cad?

I'm sure Rush's people contacted clarke's people about that -but then again Rush doesn't have very many guests on his show. I'm sure he'd love to get him on the show though The part you must not have read in the neo-con link was this:
"Did you notice how soft Lesley Stahl?s gloves were in the 60 Minutes interview with Richard Clarke? Charlie Gibson?s pitches were equally soft on Good Morning, America. Well, I have ten questions that could have been asked of Richard Clarke, but weren?t. You can read them below or listen to the audio link. See if my questions change your perception or opinion of Clarke's answers based on what you heard in either of these interviews."
So you see you asked for answers and so was Rush

CkG