The Dude wrote:Really, do you have any evidence at all that it was because Clinton was a clown that you got attacked? Here's a hint, practically every President since WWII has been regarded by the rest of the world as a clown.
(1)Clinton as I said reacted poorly to the attacks. He wanted bloodless, riskless victory and became fairly comical in his responses. The bombing of an asprin factory when only the cleaning staff I think would be the standard bearer of what he did. If you do not see that acting like you won't defend yourself won't entice your enemies well there would be nothing I could say that could change your mind. (2) every president, a clown? I think your confusing disagreeing with policy with being comical.
And why would they need to attack you at home? You've given them two quagmires that they can use to attack you with less effort. Iran would give them a third.
Please. Iraq is not a quagmire and even at it's worst was nothing compared to vietnam. Afghanistan...well it is the noble war so maybe Obama will fully support it instead of wafting. Regardless saying us being there makes it easier to attack is like saying D-day made it easier for the Nazi's to attack us.
FFS man, do you even know how your own government works? It would be far more beneficial for your enemies to look at Congress and the Senate for clues on what to do. The President is limited in his powers.
Yes I know how my goverment works. The president repersents his country as the highest elected office in the land. If he looks weak, more concerned with polls and refusing to retailiate unless absoletly assured of a painless victory it reflects on the entire nation. Now is it the only signal? No but I never said it was. It is just the single most visible, it is far easier to get a bearing on the president than say the whole of congress, one.
Why would they use them? What possible reason could Iran have for wanting to turn their country into a glass parking lot?
Thier goverment is more or less run by religious fanatics, thier current president has talked about a world without the Great Satan among other cheerful topics, and your relying on MAD to keep them from firing.
Good lord, are Americans incapable of seeing anything but in black and white?
sonofccn wrote: How praytell does having grievances change the fact that Clinton not only had a spat of terrorists attacks during his term which he dealt with poorly but 9-11 was plan and prepared for during his time of office? That save for 9-11 there has been no domestic attack? That if thier plan was to punish us for peeing in thier backyard it backfired badly?
Really, do you have any evidence at all that it was because Clinton was a clown that you got attacked? Here's a hint, practically every President since WWII has been regarded by the rest of the world as a clown.
And why would they need to attack you at home? You've given them two quagmires that they can use to attack you with less effort. Iran would give them a third.
FFS man, do you even know how your own government works? It would be far more beneficial for your enemies to look at Congress and the Senate for clues on what to do. The President is limited in his powers.
Who said smuggle? They are going to use them once they build them yes, likely with those rockets they keep playing with. That isn't smuggling things through the border.
Why would they use them? What possible reason could Iran have for wanting to turn their country into a glass parking lot?
They are a tryanical regime that murder thier own people, wishes nothing but ill will towards a close ally and our selfs and are morally bankrupt. They are bad, just like Nazi Germany was bad, just like the USSR was bad just like every tin plated dictator is bad. They have to be contained and rendered inert at some point. I would prefer an internal revolution into an actual democracy opposed to doing anything but the odds of that at the moment seem low.
Good lord, are Americans incapable of seeing anything but in black and white?
Yes we have the capability. Now that we are past the expected "cultured" response let's be realistic here. I would guess you enjoy your liberties and rights afforded to you by your nation and presented with a magic sceptor to turn Iran into a replica would likely do it. You may detest the shedding of needless blood but please do not pretend that there is some grand enlightenment in refusing to acknolwedge tyranny. We both want the same for this world, we simply disagree on who to achieve it.
Cocytus wrote:Ahh, yes, that eternal bane of conservatives, budget deficits and nubile young women ;) I thought in the context of Iran you meant Carter.
Well you know my opinion on him :). Just for the record on Clinton in my personal opinion besides being way too soft on international issues, save when he was trying to distract and became comical in his air raids, I don't have too much issue with him. I even have a little grudging respect on the way he could weather things that could kill most normal people's presidencies.
But while were on the topic, yes, there were a number of terrorist attacks during Clinton's term. The WTC in 93, the Murrah Building in 95, the Khobar bombing in 96, the Embassies in 98, and the Cole in 2000, all of which combined don't equal the toll of 9/11. And while the event was indeed planned during Clinton's time in office, several hijackers, notably Atta himself, left and reentered the US after Bush was inaugurated. We've been hit hard under presidents of both colors, and an attack whose planning spans administrations must be laid upon both of them.
I personally think everyone has a hand in the blame. We have been all to happy to ignore the middle east as it boiled decade after decade administration after administration through of course with the Soviets dead and buried( crosses fingers) and hindsight being what it is of course I say that. The holes those scumbags slipped in and out of were a long time forming and no single admin can be solely blamed.
There were the anthrax attacks and the DC sniper shootings. There were, of course, thousands of attacks on our armed forces, but you said domestic, and those are the main domestic attacks I can think of.
Those also were homegrown low level I believe not like the well planned well funded 9-11. There of course have also been a smattering of would be attacks which were niched, thank God, through small potatoes compared to what they could have done.