The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. - Dick Cheney

[MovingTarget]

I disagree with Cheney as for a country (like a person) to be loved, it must first be respected. That being said, respect is something that is earned, but not via the barrel of a gun. Fvck Cheney's Machiavellian bullshit.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal

Topic Title: The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. - Dick Cheney

The most that POS ever did to gain respect for the U.S. was to leave office. Too bad he didn't think of that eight years ago. :roll:

Now, he should just STFU... at least until his trial for treason, murder, torture, war crimes, crimes against humanity, war profiteering and more. Fuck him. :thumbsdown: :|

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Nocturnal

Topic Title: The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. - Dick Cheney

Now, he should just STFU... at least until his trial for treason, murder, torture, war crimes, crimes against humanity, war profiteering and more. Fuck him.

Why hasnt Obama charged him yet? Does that make him an accomplice?

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Nocturnal

Topic Title: The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. - Dick Cheney

Now, he should just STFU... at least until his trial for treason, murder, torture, war crimes, crimes against humanity, war profiteering and more. Fuck him.

Why hasnt Obama charged him yet? Does that make him an accomplice?

It isn't like the statute of limitations is going to pass anytime soon. There is still plenty of time to get their ducks in a row before doing that. Besides, I suspect that this is more complicated than it seems...perhaps the Obama administration is taking a very Ford-like position on this...

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Why hasnt Obama charged him yet? Does that make him an accomplice?

The operative word is YET. It will take time to disgorge the documentation and pursue and depose witnesses to build a strong case. Obama has sounded hesitant to pursue these cases, but he also stated that any documented criminality should be prosecuted. From his position, anything else would draw criticism, fair or not, which would be counterproductive to pursuing and prosecuting the cases they build against the Bushwhacko criminals.

I want Obama's DOJ to do a really good, really credible job on this. Anything less will be a disservice to the nation and our history.

I'll be glad to hear your opinion after they're indicted.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Say what you want about Bush, Iraq, etc. But if you look at the pattern of AQ attacks, going 2001-2009 with no new attacks on American soil = :thumbsup:

I had no sailfish land on my yacht during that exact same period, and say what you want, the two phenomena are similarly related.

That doesnt work here, sorry. WTC 1, USS Cole, African Embassy Bombings, WTC2, Bali, Spain


There was a pattern of attacks. The pattern obviously continued after 9/11, but not on our interests. They had to go for "softer" targets in Eurpoe.


So, unless there was a pattern of sailfish on your yacht that then stopped, your logic fails.

Well you said American soil, and if you count the time from the 1993 WTC attacks to the 2001 WTC attacks, we also had about the same period of time without attacks on US soil. Without being able to point to plots thwarted, evidence from AQ that they were unable to do certain things due to US actions, etc, the correlation doesn't mean a lot.

Oh, and more than 4,000 US citizens have been killed in Iraq. I count them among our interests.

USS Cole and Embassies are United States sovereign soil.

1992-2000:
* 1993 - World Trade Center bombing, February 26: 6 killed, 1,042 injured.

* 1993 - Attack at CIA Headquarters in McLean, Virginia, January 25: 2 killed, 3 injured.

* 1995 - Killing of two US Diplomats in Pakistan, March 8.

* 1996 - Khobar Towers bombing: 19 American servicemen killed.

* 1998 - US embassy bombings: U.S. Kenya Embassy blown up, 214 killed (including 12 Americans); U.S. Tanzania Embassy blown up, 11 killed.

* 2000 - USS Cole attacked, 17 U.S. Navy sailors killed, 39 sailors injured.

2001-2008:
* 2001 - September 11, 2001 attacks, 2,997 killed; World's deadliest terrorist attack.

* 2002 - Reporter Daniel Pearl, kidnapped and beheaded in Karachi.

* 2002 - Nine people killed by bomb blast near US embassy in Lima - seen as attempt to disrupt forthcoming visit by President George W Bush.

* 2002-2006 - Karachi consulate attacks: three separate attacks killed 18 people (including an American diplomat) and injured 87.

* 2002 - Two Marines shot, one killed in Kuwait.

* 2003 - Riyadh Compound Bombings kill 9 Americans, among 35 others.

* 2003 - Three American diplomats are killed by a roadside bomb targeting their convoy in Gaza. Palestine Resistance Committees, an umbrella organization of terrorist groups has taken responsibility for the attack."[1]

* 2003-present - Damascus terrorist attacks: American interests in Syria targeted by Islamist terrorists.

* 2004 - Civilians Nick Berg, Jack Hensley, and Eugene Armstrong kidnapped and beheaded in Iraq.

* 2004 - Paul Marshall Johnson, Jr, civilian working in Saudi Arabia, kidnapped and beheaded; five other Americans die in attacks in Saudi Arabia in 2004.

* 2007 - American embassy attacked in Athens, Greece.

* 2007 - 9 People killed in a mall in Omaha , Nebraska.

* 2008 - John Granville, US diplomat, assassinated in Khartoum, Sudan

*2008 - US Embassy attacked by Al Qaeda in Yemen, 11 killed


Not a complete list, I'm sure, but still.
And don't forget all of the soldiers.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Say what you want about Bush, Iraq, etc. But if you look at the pattern of AQ attacks, going 2001-2009 with no new attacks on American soil = :thumbsup:

I had no sailfish land on my yacht during that exact same period, and say what you want, the two phenomena are similarly related.

That doesnt work here, sorry. WTC 1, USS Cole, African Embassy Bombings, WTC2, Bali, Spain


There was a pattern of attacks. The pattern obviously continued after 9/11, but not on our interests. They had to go for "softer" targets in Eurpoe.


So, unless there was a pattern of sailfish on your yacht that then stopped, your logic fails.

Well you said American soil, and if you count the time from the 1993 WTC attacks to the 2001 WTC attacks, we also had about the same period of time without attacks on US soil. Without being able to point to plots thwarted, evidence from AQ that they were unable to do certain things due to US actions, etc, the correlation doesn't mean a lot.

Oh, and more than 4,000 US citizens have been killed in Iraq. I count them among our interests.

USS Cole and Embassies are United States sovereign soil.

So then the attacks on the Green Zone where the US embassy is located count as attacks on US soil. That means US soil has been subject to dozens, hundreds, if not thousands of terrorist attacks over the last 8 years.

We all know that in terms of what we were talking about 'US soil' means the US mainland.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politi...xrA2NoZW5leXdhcm5zbw--

Are you serious? GTFO out with that old BS!

Reading that article infuriates me.

Towards the end of the article, he specifically states that the Patriot Act, the water boarding, all the laws they broke, are essentially thee most reason(s) why we haven't had another terrorist attack on US soil.

Do you agree with that?

Yes I agree with him.

How come you're not dying for his war in Iraq then?

Why aren't you a lawyer representing Guantanomo detainees?

 

[winnar111]

He will be proved absolutely correct.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
the guy should be in prison.

Ordinarily I'd demur and say that it'd be pretty difficult to build any sort of legal case, but considering the amount of crap Mr. Cheney has been involved in since the days of President Nixon, I bet a good legislator and investigative team could pull it off.

Not that it'll actually happen.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: winnar111
He will be proved absolutely correct.

That's where I disagree.

I hope he's completely as wrong and stupid as all the liberals swear he is.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: JS80
Some people are better in other capacities. I'm paying for it with cash.

Wow you're a moron lol. So you're saying you aren't good at dieing then? Neither am I.

 

[First]

Except the U.S. has been attacked since 9/11, we merely transferred the deaths over to a war in Iraq. 4000+ U.S. citizens have died. To suggest that is a success is, well, setting the bar unbelievably low. The distinction of the attacks being on U.S. soil ignores the reality that we transferred much of the terrorist focus around the world from killing civilians on U.S. land to killing soldiers in Iraq. I guess in Cheney's mind, that's Mission Accomplished. Thankfully adults are in power now.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

IMO it is classless of him to be critiquing Obama at this point. He's just trying to plant the seed of the idea that any subsequent attack that might occur is 100% Obama's fault (when he knows full well the reality is much more complex than that).

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
IMO it is classless of him to be critiquing Obama at this point. He's just trying to plant the seed of the idea that any subsequent attack that might occur is 100% Obama's fault (when he knows full well the reality is much more complex than that).

We weren't respected, we were feared because we had men in power who'd stoop to any level to get their way. Iraq for instance.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: winnar111
He will be proved absolutely correct.

That's where I disagree.

I hope he's completely as wrong and stupid as all the liberals swear he is.

So you hope for an attack on the United States just so we "stupid liberals" can be wrong?

Absolutely disgusting.

 

[CLite]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
IMO it is classless of him to be critiquing Obama at this point. He's just trying to plant the seed of the idea that any subsequent attack that might occur is 100% Obama's fault (when he knows full well the reality is much more complex than that).

Agreed, it's a parting shot, no other way to describe it.

I don't think any VP has been as reviled as Cheney since Agnew. Considering the dialogue of Agnew and his inflamatory speeches and considering Cheney's very quiet and background approach that is very very sad. I personally hope Cheney one day realizes his slanted morality and becomes haunted by it, unfortunately I highly doubt that will happen.

 

[CLite]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: winnar111
He will be proved absolutely correct.

That's where I disagree.

I hope he's completely as wrong and stupid as all the liberals swear he is.

So you hope for an attack on the United States just so we "stupid liberals" can be wrong?

Absolutely disgusting.

erhm... pssst.. work on reading comprehension. Atreus21 is hoping Cheney is wrong and we don't get attacked. While winnar111 is being his typical troll-self.

 

[sandorski]

In related News, Germany is a peaceful Industrial Powerhouse because Hitler killed Millions.

 

[Socio]

I fully expect an attack, without someone like Bush for Al Qaeda to stir their pot their membership and financial support is going to drop and they will not let that happen.

They are already verbally attacking Obama;

Al Qaeda Leader Ridicules Obama

Al Qaeda's number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has spoken again, this time in a video released today in which he mocks President Obama and urges Muslims to engage in jihad. His speech is a sign, experts say, that al Qaeda is nervous about Obama's popularity in the Arab world.

I believe Obama is doing a good job of letting our guard down; Al Qaeda will take advantage of that and attack under the guise of terror but really just to save their terrorist organization.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
IMO it is classless of him to be critiquing Obama at this point. He's just trying to plant the seed of the idea that any subsequent attack that might occur is 100% Obama's fault (when he knows full well the reality is much more complex than that).

Someone's forgotten Carter shooting his mouth off for 8 years. At least Cheney was never President.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Socio
I fully expect an attack, without someone like Bush for Al Qaeda to stir their pot their membership and financial support is going to drop and they will not let that happen.

They are already verbally attacking Obama;

Al Qaeda Leader Ridicules Obama

Al Qaeda's number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has spoken again, this time in a video released today in which he mocks President Obama and urges Muslims to engage in jihad. His speech is a sign, experts say, that al Qaeda is nervous about Obama's popularity in the Arab world.

I believe Obama is doing a good job of letting our guard down; Al Qaeda will take advantage of that and attack under the guise of terror but really just to save their terrorist organization.

So the best way to prevent terrorism is to make the terrorists stronger, and the best way to ensure terrorism is to make the terrorists weaker?

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Over at The Politico, three intrepid journalists, Joe, Moe, and Curly, looked to uncover some real news, from the one source they trust, Dick Cheney. They were greeted by the former Veep, so they could sit down at Uncle Dick?s feet and hear some of their favorite spooky stories.

Of course, they were the same stories he?s been telling for years. Cheney, to their apparent surprise, ?was in a self-vindicating mood.? He also helpfully explained that his upcoming memoir would set the record straight, once and for all, and was merely awaiting the ?statute of limitations to expire.? Of course, none of these so called journalists looked up from their crayons long enough to to query that such a statement could only come from a sociopath, one who during the same story hour reminded them, as though it were necessary, that protecting them from the monsters under their beds was ?a tough, mean, dirty, nasty, business.? it was little more than a Dick Cheney?s golden oldies rehash, with all the usual bits about how ?turning the other cheek? is a chump?s game when dealing with ?evil,? ?hardened,? terrorists, with a new yarn, cribbed from Condi Rice, about how, no one could have predicted the economic collapse. With the possible exception of Dick himself, who has been moving assets offshore for years, but that detail never came up.

Dick is less popular than the clap in a whorehouse, so that fails to explain why the fact that Dick is, all these two weeks later, still a fear-mongering. Catapulting propaganda is tough on a guy who?s had a few dozen heart attacks and just got another boo-boo when his tie got caught in the shredder and he hurt his leg on the man-size safe?. But I digress.

 

[bamacre]

As long as we wish to be a free society, we will always be vulnerable to the capability of being attacked. And as long as we bully and murder those overseas, we will be vulnerable to the desire of being attacked. The answer is not to solve the problem of capability, it is to solve the problem of desire.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politi...xrA2NoZW5leXdhcm5zbw--

Are you serious? GTFO out with that old BS!

Reading that article infuriates me.

Towards the end of the article, he specifically states that the Patriot Act, the water boarding, all the laws they broke, are essentially thee most reason(s) why we haven't had another terrorist attack on US soil.

Do you agree with that?

I would agree that the Bush/Cheney policies have positively insured another attack on US soil.