Bush's "State of the Union" tonight: ON RIGHT NOW!!

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: WoofyJr

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: fluxquantum
the state of the union seemed long to me...*yawn*

I saw some guy in the middle row sleeping.

yup caught that one too... I wonder what's he dreaming...

That someone else was President 😀

 

[GTaudiophile]

Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Edit: One rant...the Prez made it seem like we were going to war, but we are already at war imo.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: DukeFan21
Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: SuperTool
The Democratic response was pretty good. It's the economy stupid is as true now as it was in 92.

Yes, and we will be getting tax cuts of some sort 🙂

Every time my government says its giving us a tax break, my taxes actually go up.

Time to move. Mine went down, slightly.

 

[Oakenfold]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold I think he did a very good job. Covered all his bases, medicare reform sounds interesting, I bet that there are quite a few attorney's upset over the reform of hospital liability as well! It's time to support this country, he's the president, all you playa haters need to bite it.

I am a Joe Citizen. I NEVER have to support a President. I prefer to support my country. If I feel they are at cross purposes, then WHOEVER is prez will get lampooned.

It's your responsibility to support him, that is in fact supporting your country. Of course you could always go live in Iraq, I'm sure you'd fit in pretty well with that logic. 😀

Son, I would wager I have contributed more to this country than you. Nevertheless, if you believe you have are obligated to support someone in power, I suggest you would have done well in Germany in the late 1930's.

Old man, I never contested what you have contributed to this country, I simply state to stand behind your elected official in his hour of need!

A statement presented more reasonably. I disagree with the implications, however you are entitled to your opinion.

Old man huh, betcha I learn ya a thing or two. Whippersnapper. 😛

Agreed, I may have my theory's and belief's but try to remain open minded @ all times.
We are all entitled to our own, no one should ever be forced into them, it's only those that we should fear for that lack enough education to develop their own.

I bet you aren't that old.


🙂

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DukeFan21
Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

We can make lose/lose situations all night long. Doing nothing appears to be a far more dangerious option.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Are you going to sign up so you too can take part in the grand adventure of liberating Iraq?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

It illustrates other world leaders we (the US ) have been at odds with/ in armed conflict with and didn't asassinate them, which, if I followed your rhetoric blaming Clinton for "allowing OBL to escape", is what you would that they have done.

I never said ANYTHING about Clinton "allowing OBL to escape"

Actually, the people who warned the Clinton were the same ones who warned the Bush administration, but we can't question that anymore now with the passing of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act.
In any organization, the leader takes the credit and the heat. The presidency is no exception. IMO, Bush had a very narrow window of opportunity with which to retaliate with extreme prejudice (tactical nuke) that would've sent the real message...... Don't mess with Tex... uhh the US 😀

Clinton had chances to capture or kill bin Laden but did not capitalize on them and barely made an effort. He was too busy with getting hummers from interns.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Let me help you with that. Steal the oil, keep the Iraqis under US domination for the forseeable future, oh yeah, steal the oil. And who cares of thousands of Iraqi's die in the process (maybe most of the Muslim world?).

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DukeFan21
Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

We can make lose/lose situations all night long. Doing nothing appears to be a far more dangerious option.

I'm not saying that we do nothing, I'm saying that we give the Inspectors the time they say they need so we can garner the support of other countries with the Military Power we'll need to effectively occupy Iraq after we kick the sh!t out of Hussien.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Are you going to sign up so you too can take part in the grand adventure of liberating Iraq?

I dont you can be trained to fly an f-117 on such short notice.

 

[Miramonti]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DukeFan21 Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

And how about the kurds grabbing some from the same cache and start warring with Turkey again.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Oakenfold
I think he did a very good job.
Covered all his bases, medicare reform sounds interesting, I bet that there are quite a few attorney's upset over the reform of hospital liability as well!
It's time to support this country, he's the president, all you playa haters need to bite it.

Yes, free speech is a terrible thing...

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Let me help you with that. Steal the oil, keep the Iraqis under US domination for the forseeable future, oh yeah, steal the oil. And who cares of thousands of Iraqi's die in the process (maybe most of the Muslim world?).

We all know the Iraqi Republican Guard will lay down arms and surrender en masse as they did before. I really don't think there will be much, if any, loss of life. Well...except for those morons acting as 'human shields'.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DukeFan21
Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

We can make lose/lose situations all night long. Doing nothing appears to be a far more dangerious option.

I'm not saying that we do nothing, I'm saying that we give the Inspectors the time they say they need so we can garner the support of other countries with the Military Power we'll need to effectively occupy Iraq after we kick the sh!t out of Hussien.

I am also saying after 12 years of inspections we are not much better off today. How much more time should inspectors get? I am more than willing to let inspections work if we get complete and total cooperation.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Oakenfold

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Oakenfold I think he did a very good job. Covered all his bases, medicare reform sounds interesting, I bet that there are quite a few attorney's upset over the reform of hospital liability as well! It's time to support this country, he's the president, all you playa haters need to bite it.

I am a Joe Citizen. I NEVER have to support a President. I prefer to support my country. If I feel they are at cross purposes, then WHOEVER is prez will get lampooned.

It's your responsibility to support him, that is in fact supporting your country. Of course you could always go live in Iraq, I'm sure you'd fit in pretty well with that logic. 😀

Son, I would wager I have contributed more to this country than you. Nevertheless, if you believe you have are obligated to support someone in power, I suggest you would have done well in Germany in the late 1930's.

Old man, I never contested what you have contributed to this country, I simply state to stand behind your elected official in his hour of need!

A statement presented more reasonably. I disagree with the implications, however you are entitled to your opinion.

Old man huh, betcha I learn ya a thing or two. Whippersnapper. 😛

Agreed, I may have my theory's and belief's but try to remain open minded @ all times.
We are all entitled to our own, no one should ever be forced into them, it's only those that we should fear for that lack enough education to develop their own.

I bet you aren't that old.


🙂

He is...I've seen his picture 😉

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Let me help you with that. Steal the oil, keep the Iraqis under US domination for the forseeable future, oh yeah, steal the oil. And who cares of thousands of Iraqi's die in the process (maybe most of the Muslim world?).

We all know the Iraqi Republican Guard will lay down arms and surrender en masse as they did before. I really don't think there will be much, if any, loss of life. Well...except for those morons acting as 'human shields'.

Good luck.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile Okay, so the Air Force needs a moonless night to send out its F-117 and military leaders prefer to attack in as dark conditions as possible. When is the first moonless night after February 5? That's the day we begin to remove Saddam from power, capture the oil fields, set the Iraqi people free, and begin refueling our economy. Sounds like a win-win situation to me...with the exception of the (hopefully few) brave Americans who die.

Are you going to sign up so you too can take part in the grand adventure of liberating Iraq?

I dont you can be trained to fly an f-117 on such short notice.

True, but it takes little time to be given a boot in the azz and kicked out of a plane. 😀

 

[Atrail]

I'm not saying that we do nothing, I'm saying that we give the Inspectors the time they say they need so we can garner the support of other countries with the Military Power we'll need to effectively occupy Iraq after we kick the sh!t out of Hussien.

I think we have the power.
More help surely won't hurt, but it is not actually needed IMO.
Unless North Korea becomes a bigger a problem, then we will be stretched thin...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DukeFan21
Alright, let's say the President lays off on Iraq...if Iraq later down the road unleashes its weapons on the U.S. or any other country for that matter, do you Bush-haters blame him?

How about this. American Invades Iraq and overthrows Hussoien. Due to the logistics we can't effectively controll every area of Iraq. The Shiites (Islamic Fundies x 10) living in Southern Iraq get their hands on some of Hussiens WMD Cache and proceed to hand them over to Al Qaeda and they use them on the US. Do you blame those who said to wait a bit so we could put together a Coalition Strong enough to effectively occupy Iraq after the Invasion and Regime Change?

We can make lose/lose situations all night long. Doing nothing appears to be a far more dangerious option.

I'm not saying that we do nothing, I'm saying that we give the Inspectors the time they say they need so we can garner the support of other countries with the Military Power we'll need to effectively occupy Iraq after we kick the sh!t out of Hussien.

I am also saying after 12 years of inspections we are not much better off today. How much more time should inspectors get? I am more than willing to let inspections work if we get complete and total cooperation.

We are in agreement.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Conjur- So you believe that if an invasion of Baghdad occured, it would be the same as chasing the guard out of another country they never had an interest in themselves?

As someone just said "good luck"

 

[tk149]

Didn't anyone else think, "OMG WE'RE GOING TO WAR!"

I know he's been talking about it for months, but to hear it flat out like that in the most important speech of the year...geez...just a huge emotional response for me.

My best wishes to our fighting men and women, and their families.


BTW, Clinton sucked, sucked big time, sucked from day one when he violated his first campaign promise (gays in the military anyone?), all the way to his last day in office when he pardoned political suckups. Bush could turn out to be a terrible president and still be a hundred times better than Clinton.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Let me help you with that. Steal the oil, keep the Iraqis under US domination for the forseeable future, oh yeah, steal the oil. And who cares of thousands of Iraqi's die in the process (maybe most of the Muslim world?).

Hagbard,

Why are you so consumed with USA affairs? Is your government so perfect that you have a need to focus your attention on USA to correct our flaws?

If you feel so strongly against our efforts against Iraq, why don't you go to Iraq and be a human shield?

Why don't you do something about it instead of just spouting off your mouth? Or are you just all talk and no action type of weasel?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: tk149
Didn't anyone else think, "OMG WE'RE GOING TO WAR!"

I know he's been talking about it for months, but to hear it flat out like that in the most important speech of the year...geez...just a huge emotional response for me.

My best wishes to our fighting men and women, and their families.


BTW, Clinton sucked, sucked big time, sucked from day one when he violated his first campaign promise (gays in the military anyone?), all the way to his last day in office when he pardoned political suckups. Bush could turn out to be a terrible president and still be a hundred times better than Clinton.

At least according to Morons like you.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

It illustrates other world leaders we (the US ) have been at odds with/ in armed conflict with and didn't asassinate them, which, if I followed your rhetoric blaming Clinton for "allowing OBL to escape", is what you would that they have done.

I never said ANYTHING about Clinton "allowing OBL to escape"

You're right . What you said was this..

he coulda had OBL,

So as vague as that is, what do you really mean? Could've had a BJ, sex,( what do you mean by sex?), a game of tennis?? I think your meaning was clear. Get away or assasinate him was pretty clear.

Actually, the people who warned the Clinton were the same ones who warned the Bush administration, but we can't question that anymore now with the passing of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act.
In any organization, the leader takes the credit and the heat. The presidency is no exception. IMO, Bush had a very narrow window of opportunity with which to retaliate with extreme prejudice (tactical nuke) that would've sent the real message...... Don't mess with Tex... uhh the US 😀

Clinton had chances to capture or kill bin Laden but did not capitalize on them and barely made an effort. He was too busy with getting hummers from interns.

The hummers from interns has been established. Could you provide any references to links or post documents you might have to support your position? He wouldn't have been the first president who sought a less confrontational approach when faced with tenuous political situations. Let's not forget our "allies" the Saud family, of whom Osama is a member.
Again, please get real. The constant redirection to Clinton's personal gaffs do nothing to persuade me of anything other than that is the only bit of behavior you have to disagree with.