I haven't read the whole thread. The mention of Gephart attacking Bush is the ultimate in hipocrisy. It makes me sick, so I haven't been able to read it all. Gephart was one of the principle architects who pushed to tie the Democrats hands on the war. Byapproving the premature vote to give Bush a blank check to do a unilateral war and cut off a debate about the necessity of the war Gephart is almost as responsible for deceiving the American public as Bush. Most Democrats did not support the war until it started and they felt obliged to rally around the troops. Dick, go suck it up with your fellow warmongerer, Lieberman. No Democratic nomination for you guys.
Not only is he a doctor, he can see into the future. I remember people saying the same thing in July '91. Do I need to remind you what happened then Dr. Dakota?
I voted for Clinton in '91. RM95, Do you ever have a take, or just come in to criticize others with zingers? DD
1. That wasn't the only problem with the Niger report. A member of the state department(Wilson I believe was his name) went to Niger to investigate, and he said it was highly unlikely. 2.France and Russia doubted Bush's evidence. History has shown them to be correct. If the US is going to use it's power to heighten cases so they can invade sovereign countries which aren't a threat to the US, then perhaps someone should balance that power out. 3.War may have been the only answer you could see to stop Saddam, but I feel there were other ways, such as containment, inspectors etc. If war was necessary it wasn't necessary on the time fram that Bush went. A real coalition could have been built, even FRANCE WAS WILLING, provided inspections be given 30 more days. There were other ways to handle this if war was or wasn't the answer.
Still in college, and not worried about money and finances. Once I got out and into the professional world I become very fiscally conservative. I still have liberal views on several issues though like Pro Choice etc... I am pretty moderate for the most part, but not when it comes to big government and my money. Smaller government and let me control the money that I earn. DD
I supported him in '91 and voted for him in the presidential election in '92. SmartA$$. By the way, how is the single life treating you? DD
**** the you put in there. Quit taking personal **** I share with this board and using it against me. *******.
RM95, I put a winky guy in there....was being a little playful, not trying to be an a$$. If you don't want me to kid you about it all you have to do is ask. Max, RM95 and I have had many a little debate...I thought we had passed that and could joke about stuff posted here....I really meant no offense....just a little poke in the ribs. DD
You're right, I probably overreacted...but you seem to do the same thing anytime I disagree with you about something...whether it's about being single, going to therapy, etc. It's always out of the blue too. I apologize for what I said, and for being a hypocrite because I've done the same thing too, even though I think the guy I did it to deserved it.
At the time, it was known to be an unsubstantiated rumor from a British operative. I supported the war on the basis of the claims the administration made about WMDs and WMD programs. They voted to allow the US to go to war. At the time, I thought that we would actually try to force a diplomatic solution instead of just kicking out the weapons inspectors and pursuing a war without any significan worldwide support. I thought Bush would wait to start the war until we had the support of most of the world, much like GWI. Instead, Bush and his cronies acted like cowboys and just invaded without a rebuilding plan, without a security plan, and against the wishes of most of the world. He had congressional approval, but that alone would have gotten him nothing from the American people, who also needed to be convinced that war was necessary. He convinced us with claims that were at least misleading and I, for one, am fairly upset that we went to war based on faulty intelligence.
The only problem with the Niger report that we didn't know the British source for the intel. Are you supposed to not trust hot intel from our greatest ally? Bamaslammer Nice try, but not that simple to compartmentalize. The CIA and Cheney's special envoy, Wilson, said the Niger report was iffy.too, after investigating. Not good enough to try to pawn it off as natural trust for an allie's intel. If the President can't trust intelligence from the CIA and Cheney aren't we getting a bit wierd? The President's last defense on this one may be for Cheney to fall on his sword over this one. Rice has already somewhat done so by saying that she didn't read the whole report that her man Hadley, who tried to take the blame today, received.
Wow, RM95 jumps on DaDakota for allegedly thinking the election was in 1991 and DaDakota returns fire with a jab at RM95's love life! I love it! This is the type of drama that *should* exist on a message board! A little excitement every now and then! We need to start hosting pissing contests or personal attack forums in the chat rooms. I would find it highly entertaining to watch RM95 and DaDakota exchange verbal jabs real-time in a chat room setting. Let's get it on!
RM and I have gone at it in a drunken stupor before, it was not pretty. I was hammering him about his job, and he was hammering me about my game being in the bargain bin. It was good stuff, and really embarrassing. DD
