Words Without Backbone - FSIC Messageboard

FSIC Messageboard

Words Without Backbone

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Words Without Backbone
Jerry Pilot	posted 10-22- 11:27 PM After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. Maybe if Clinton had kept his "promises", an estimated 7,000 people in New York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today. IP: Logged
Sv JAG	posted 10-23- 08:04 AM Instead of turning this against Clinton, let's just hope that people can understand this as a message at least condining the action of the preseant administration. Anyway, I'm sure Clinton would have freaked out if the latest WTC attack happened during his time... and I am not so sure that Bush would be so strong in his response if those others things had happened. I think its fair to say he probably would have been more thourough than Clinton... but that is just because he give the military A higher priority. Also, let's skip the "hunt them down and pinishing" and start with the "make sure this does NOT happen ever again." Wait 'till we finish Af-gone-istan and move into the other arib countries... then the coalition will be gone, then it will be WW3. I hope everyone knows what side they are on in this war... IP: Logged
BurkeyMK2 Pilot	posted 10-23- 08:56 AM not that one. IP: Logged
3dp Pilot	posted 10-23- 09:30 AM Hindsight is 20/20. Be fair to Clinton. Can you imagine him going to Congress and trying to get authorization for serious military action like we need for this sort of thing, both overt and covert. Be real, the American public needs a serious and close to home body count to be shocked into action. I jumped up and down throughout the early 90s trying to get us to act in the Balkans and when we finally did, much too late in my opinion, 70% of the American public disapproved because they bought the bogus, grossly over simplified line fed to them (by the Clinton adminstration and others when it suited them) that "they've always been fighting over there" and because there were no Americans dying. It seems to be a sad fact of human nature that we need "the Titanic to sink" for any meaningful reforms to be made. It comes down, like everything, to money. We all consider the costs too much, for say airline security, until something goes wrong and then money that should have been spent suddenly looks like a bargain. We gamble, and on September 11, we lost. ------------------ Be seeing you, 3dp Visit RAF Harkness! IP: Logged
Smokey Pilot	posted 10-23- 11:30 AM Maybe if congress hadn't been so busy trying to impeach Clinton more would have been done about terrorism. As I recall I didn't hear many republicans up in arms over the above events. They were more worried about Clinton getting a blow job. [This message has been edited by Smokey (edited 10-23-2001).] IP: Logged
JT Pilot	posted 10-23- 12:30 PM A very balanced article about this can be found here... http://slate.msn.com/code/BallotBox/BallotBox.asp?Show=10/11/2001&idMessage=8422 ... it's a very interesting read. Check it out! [This message has been edited by JT (edited 10-23-2001).] IP: Logged
weasel Pilot	posted 10-25- 05:06 PM I'd say that this one is more "Fair and Balanced". http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/17/213623.shtml weasel IP: Logged
JT Pilot	posted 10-25- 05:47 PM I'd say that Newsmax is not capable of fair and balanced. http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/stories/2001/contab.html [This message has been edited by JT (edited 10-25-2001).] IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 10-25- 05:52 PM Well JT, your article was found on MSN. How can you trust anything from MicroSoft? IP: Logged
weasel Pilot	posted 10-28- 08:00 AM Man JT, that article from 'con'webwatch leaned so far to the left, I almost fell out of my chair! Any way why don't you educate yourself on the people that you are trying to defend? Try reading Barbara Olson's Books. http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/columnists/ponte/2001/ponte10-26-01.htm weasel [This message has been edited by weasel (edited 10-28-2001).] IP: Logged
Smokey Pilot	posted 10-28- 08:47 AM Yeah, anything written by Barbara Olsen would be really balanced. LOL IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center

(This site Copyright (c) 1999 Inertia LLC)

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45c