BREAKING NEWS: Scuds found on North Korean ship

BT - The Saudis said they didn't want UBL. There was no need to have the Saudis involved in the first place. I'd prefer they just cap him in the Sudan w/ a hellfire from a UAV like Yemen. Problem solved.

oh - but Clinton didn't have a legal case against UBL till a few years later - despite that case being for crimes committed prior to the Sudanese offer.

Wow�good post . Lots of words. All wrong, but there sure are a lot of them!
Lets see�now you are a fortune teller, and know what Bore would have done, and it would have stopped what happened on September 11th. I need to book you for my next party. We need a good sooth-sayer for the entertainment.

Take a look at the pictures �

www.defenselink.mil...

Nothing has been �wrapped up� in Afghanistan. Watch the news. We�re still there.

You really do keep up the fortune telling here�I won�t even comment on it, as it�s ludicrous.

The �retreads� are some of the most respected thinkers and statesmen of our time. You may not think so, but that�s just your opinion. You remember what they say about opinions, don�t you?

Colin Powell�treated like a �red headed stepchild�? Besides you just pissing off every red head and stepchild in the world, your full of Shiite. He is well respected, especially by those of us in the military, and has the confidence of the vast majority of this country, as does GWB. Highest approval rating ever. Hmmm�

Coward? Ran all over the country? Dude, get a clue. The Secret Service is the one agency that can override the President�s wishes when it comes to his personal safety and security, they followed proper protocols and took him to the bunker he was supposed to go to. Those that were with him on AF-1 said he was hopping mad that they would not take him back to Washington right away. Think about it though, would you, as the director of the agency tasked with the safety of the president, allow him to go to a city that had just had it�s center for military control partially destroyed? There were still planes in the air that could have had more hijackers on them with plans to fly one into the White House. It was the right thin to do. Period.

And BT, I�m not a republican because I�m in the military. I registered as one a full two years before joining up, and both my parents are Democrats. I�m a Republican because I believe in a hand up, not a hand out, small government instead of massive bureaucracy. And I surely don�t want a man in the white house that cheats on his wife, and gets blowjobs from interns in the oval office, then commits perjury in front of a grand jury. Integrity is learned, and shouldn�t be spurned�

Bob88 and AR, well said.

I did a quick search of Clinton and terrorism,not a lot came up.Why you might ask,because he did nothing.

Originally posted by nyeff
Bob88 and AR, well said.

I did a quick search of Clinton and terrorism,not a lot came up.Why you might ask,because he did nothing.

Well, Bobb, let's be fair...he did lob those two Tomahawk missiles at the empty desert in Afganistan. I hear a desert shrub was killed, and Al Gore wept...

that's correct AR - and those desert shrubs are pretty dangerous almost as dangerous as that aspirin factory!

LOL,
I was going to bring that up,but it was rather embarrasing,so I would rather forget about it.

Book now, dates are filling up quickly!
Last major prediction, Jan. 2000 - " We'll be running defecits before you know it, lhave our moral credibility in the free world tarnished if not lost, have policy written to the benefit of the Bush corporate supporters and be involved with some type of war to feed the defense contractor"

Damn, I'm Good! ( forget about the Yankees going to the World Series again, my emotions got in the way on that one!)

Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfield, Condi Rice....respected statesmen & thinkers!?! How's about felons John Poindexter, Ellito abrahams and Otto Reich who should be in prosion but were pardoned by Bush Sr. right after he pardoned himself?
Dude, cut back on that stuff, I'm sure a piss cup test it right around the corner!
Two reasons they got the gig: Waaay deep in bed with the GOP's favorite contractors/contributers AND they were in the previous GOP-supply-side-administrations. Talent was a far second to connections, based on some of the true economic & policy stars in the GOP that could have gotten the jobs.

You believe that Ari Fleisher lie that they had Intel that AF1 was a target!?!? They already had shot down the plane over PA, and he linked several other stops after the first. I would have respected the added legs of the trip if they would have come out and said it in the first place that the SS took charge, instead of trying to make everyone believe that a heavily modified AF1, escorted by fighter jets, on flight patterns not known publically, was in danger.
You're AD, what's your position on a CINC who got:
1) A choice assignment to the National Guard during Vietnam
2) Got a further choice assignment for flight trainging ahead of 200 men who scored higher
3) And Still went AWOL on his last year of service? Articles 83, 85, 86, 87. Didn't know? Here you go.......www.awolbush.com

So you have no respect for the CO's you know were getting some on the side? Or CEO's or Managers you might have worked for that had affairs? I slammed him for it as well, but I'm not blind to the growth and prosperity our country enjoyed under his stewardship either. Especially given the shambles he inherited after 12 years of Reaganomics.

Clinton
1998 Missle attack to get OBL for Kenya - Operating on limited intelligence -- at that time, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Tazikistan refused to share information on the terrorists whereabouts inside Afghanistan -- U. S. strikes missed bin Laden by only a couple of hours.
He sponsored legislation to freeze the financial assets of international organizations suspected of funneling money to bin Laden�s Al Qaeda network -- identical to orders given by President Bush after the fact -- but it was killed, on behalf of big banks, by Republican Senator Phil Gramm of Texas.

Clinton gave the CIA a green light to use whatever covert means were necessary to gather information on Osama bin Laden and his followers, and to disrupt and preempt any planned terrorist activities against the United States.
As part of that effort, the CIA, under Clinton, trained and equipped some 60 commandos from Pakistan to enter Afghanistan and capture bin Laden. The operation collapsed when Pakistan experienced a military coup and a new government took over.

In 1998, Clinton also signed a secret agreement with Uzbekistan to begin joint covert operations against Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan�s Taliban regime. U.S. Special Forces have been training there ever since, which is why the Pentagon was immediately able to use Uzbekistan as a staging area for forays into Afghanistan.

Clinton targeted bin Laden even before he moved to Afghanistan. In 1996, his administration brokered an agreement with the government of Sudan to arrest the terrorist leader and turn him over to Saudi Arabia. For 10 weeks, Clinton tried to persuade the Saudis to accept the offer. They refused. With no cooperation from the Saudis, the deal fell apart.

Did nothing my azz, it's just that you boys are partisans first, patriots second.

(Uh, now add Kissinger to your list BT - there, I thought you needed some help)

Perfectly prudent for the president to do what he did aboard AF1. There was a solid show on this shown on The Learning Channel that gave a glimpse to what was going on aboard AF1 - But, I know BT you'll take that as propaganda and unreliable, cause Pravda is the only fair and balanced news outlet. They shot a plane down over PA? Anyway - I have yet to see any solid evidence of that - and after what happened at the WTC I wouldn't have blamed them for doing so if it was in fact true. Is your aluminum helmet on right, BT?

Clinton dropped the ball. Saudi's didn't have to be involved. You mean to tell me we couldn't have covertly 'taken care' of UBL? Surely that was an option available to him. Or did Clinton only kill political opponents (see Clinton Death list).

The unfortunate thing about the missles in Yemen is that the US has no choice but to give them back. The thing that strikes me as odd is, why would this ship go full ahead when they knew that they would be boarded if it was a legitimate arms deal. Also, if it was a legitimate arms transfer then why were the missles hidden under tons of cement bags. There is clearly someone else's hand in all of this. I think it too be a very dangerous chain of events when 2 days after catching a "legitimate" missle transfer from N.Korea to Yemen, North Korea lights the fires in its nuclear reactors. I am afraid that we are almost certianly going to see WMD used against US troops, and the US mainland if we go into Iraq...and I think that the WMD will come from N.Korea.....not Iraq. If anyplace, North Korea needs a regime change, not Iraq.

Originally posted by Bob88
(Uh, now add Kissinger to your list BT - there, I thought you needed some help)

Perfectly prudent for the president to do what he did aboard AF1. There was a solid show on this shown on The Learning Channel that gave a glimpse to what was going on aboard AF1 - But, I know BT you'll take that as propaganda and unreliable, cause Pravda is the only fair and balanced news outlet. They shot a plane down over PA? Anyway - I have yet to see any solid evidence of that - and after what happened at the WTC I wouldn't have blamed them for doing so if it was in fact true. Is your aluminum helmet on right, BT?

Clinton dropped the ball. Saudi's didn't have to be involved. You mean to tell me we couldn't have covertly 'taken care' of UBL? Surely that was an option available to him. Or did Clinton only kill political opponents (see Clinton Death list).

Did you miss the part that I said it was OK, just the story to make him look like he has a set of balls was unnecessary propaganda? I'm more a fan of the BBC, Guardian, Moscow times, Ha'retz...Pooty Poot gets to smacking the editors over at Pravda around too much, you know? The man who talked about Clinton being a NWO or Illuminati plant is saying I'm a conspiracy nut? Geez bud, that you were/are so anti-Clinton might make you more than a little blind to the malfesance in front of your face does not even remotely occur to you,huh?

Now the selective memory pops in about the constant, daily witch hunt by folks calling themselves Republicans against the president, the crotch sniffers, the obstructionists who road blocked everything for no good reason but partisan politics ( you forgot about how they howled about the missles, right? Only for Monica was the chant). You want somebody to blame, you got GOP choices in vast numbers.

And thanks for Kissinger, I did forget that bastard!

Thomas - There Bout Time goes again with the crotches.

I am well aware of what's in my face, BT. Yes, the president needs to do more about the economy. O'neill was a start. But, if the economy keeps getting better it'll be the dems that are in trouble - and btw, what are those dems themselves doing about the economy anway? Their playing monday morning QB - yet they themselves could have ran the ball. And Daschle IS an obstructionist!

I saw that, Bob. I'm beginning to wonder if the FBI might should check his hard drive to see what kind of "art" he downloads! "Oops! I said "hard drive!" No telling what his mind will make of that!

TheBandit795, you are a sweet dreamer and an utopian.

Unfortunatley, sweet dreamers like you,when they see their dreams who are comming true, realise that their dreams were just nightmares !

See what's happened with Dalladier & Chamberlain ! May be it will help you to understand. Or may be for you they were heros ?

You can do peace when the others want to do peace.When they don't want, you can argue for ever if you want, they will not care and they'll attack you !

U-P,
I'd rather be a sweet dreamer than anything.

Einstein was one, Tesla was one, Edison was one, Kekule was one etc...

"Unfortunatley, sweet dreamers like you,when they see their dreams who are comming true, realise that their dreams were just nightmares !"

Is that true??

"See what's happened with Dalladier & Chamberlain ! May be it will help you to understand. Or may be for you they were heros ?"

I don't even know who you are talking about.

"You can do peace when the others want to do peace.When they don't want, you can argue for ever if you want, they will not care and they'll attack you !"

That's because of the hatred that's been building into their minds for years and years and years. They don't even think about it anymore (just like you do). It has become automatic.
This is no justification though. Hatred is not something that comes natural.

Originally posted by Airborne 101
If anyplace, North Korea needs a regime change, not Iraq.

yes thats true but that wud 4 sure start ww3 cuz china wud get invovled
btw you stole my avatar

Sorry f16falcon, didn't mean to rip you off, I am new around here. I am glad to see the 101 getting the respect it has earned and deserved though.

As for Noth Korea, I was speaking in idealist terms. Realistically any attack on Iraq could just as easily start WW3. My logic is that the second an American Troop sets foot in Iraq its use it or lose it time for saddam. Everything that he has is going to be sent over to Isreal. Then they come in the war, followed by the rest of the middle east, followed by Pakistan, Russia, the list goes on.

I know that this is going to be a controversial thing to say, but none the less.....if we truly care about peace and stabilization in the middle east then the US must reevaluate its relationship with Israel. A very large boiling point for anti american sentiment in the middle east is centered on this (I know, there are other reasons as well, but let me finish). If we could establish equalateral relationships with the palistinians and the Israelies then we would have a better standing. Lets face it, even our so called friends in the middle east (Saudi Arabia) would, and apparently have, conspired against us because of our biased support for a country that makes political assasination and ethnic cleansing a policy.

Isreal has been asked to stay out, again, as they did in the original Gulf War. What benefit would they gain from getting involved? The only thing that would happen would be that they would provoke other countries to take sides, in what would become an Israeli conflict. Something they don't need right now. The Americans placate the Israelis by giving them technology to defend themselves, but only to be used in a defensive manner (Patriot Missle Systems). I doubt there will be any retaliation from the Israeli side of the border due to what would amount in Iraqi SCUD attacks. The US has already reigned them in.

I also doubt there will be another WW. There is still enough deterence with nuclear weapons to keep any of the major countries from taking sides. The world vs Iraq or Korea is not a world war.

The thing about Israel is that during the Gulf War we Sharon was not a factor. Maybe if Iraq gets one missle into Jeruselum we can convince Sharon to stay put, but if it starts to rain Mustard gas forget about it. We are talking about a prime minister who bulldozes innocent peoples houses, what do you think that he will do to a country that launches chemical or neuclear weapons against it.

I don't think that realistically any middle eastern government would be able to withstrain from counter attacking Israel should they enter in to the conflict. Egypt is just looking for a chance to get even for 1973, even though it is not official policy, anti-Israeli sentiment is near its all time high.

The scary thing is, should this work out in the manner I am afraid of, we will see weapons of mass destruction used....but not from Iraq....but from Israel.

That may be a worst case scenario. However, they would probably have to beat the Americans to it, as they have already stated that they will use WMD to counter and use of non-conventional arms by the Iraqis, similar to the letter Bush Sr. sent previous to the Gulf War. This time the US Administration distinctly said nuclear weapons though, which should be enough deterent to stop Iraq again from using such weapons. In the previous letter the use of nuclear arms was never stated, but the Iraqis believed it was implied.

No one wants to get nuked, people will do anything to avoid it. Which in this case means staying away from using non-convnentional arms against the US or it's allies.

I agree...somewhat. But we are not dealing with the Soviet Union here. There is no mutual assurance of destruction from Saddam Hussien. I have a hard time believing that the american people would stand for a US nuclear strike against anyone, except for Osama Bin Laden of course. Bush's staments, while disturbing, are just that. Bush's statments are simply a big dumb dog barking loud.

Although, Bush has suprised me with some pretty stupid mistakes ("We will defend Tawian from aggression").