Oh, I'm a big fan of pointing out the hypocrisy of both sides, so that part was good. I've just seen too many "debates" (usually on TV between talking heads or on the radio) where the entire logical debate goes out the window and it turns into two sides taking shots at the other team instead of speaking to the actual topic at hand. It's kind of a "Yeah, well, they're even worse than we are, so we're good and they're evil" sort of thing. Being as I can't stand either side, I have a short fuse for that sort of thing. If that wasn't your intent, then I apologize for my smartass comment.
And I do admit, I have actually defended the administration in discussions with people on the left who had no interest in truth unless it made Republicans look back (there are just a few of those politically motivated types around here). It's the people who aren't interested in finding out the truth in all circumstances, and not just when it's to their advantage, that bother me.
Starting to admit that we were wrong
Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat
- SonomaCat
- Moderator
- Posts: 23968
- Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
- Location: Sonoma County, CA
- Contact:
- Hell's Bells
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 4692
- Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 11:58 pm
- Location: Belgrade, Mt.
- Contact:
i am confused, what is not levelheaded by posting quotes? especially if they were from a book. If he would have added his own comments then i would be typeing somthing different. he has few added quotes from his own but just lets the quotes do the talking. Personally Bronco is just trying to make a point he is not being "limbaugh-like"bronco wrote:HILLARY ON IRAQ AND TERRORISM
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
Source: transcript of Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, October 10, 2002
_________________
I especially like this one...
"My husband may have his faults, but he has never lied to me."
Living History, Hillary Clinton, page 465
_________________________________________
Would any sane person believe that he really didn’t have WMD in 2003? If you don’t know any sane people, try out some of these:
• “And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.” President Clinton, December 16, 1998
• “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” Al Gore, September 23, 2002
• “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
• “I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country.” Senator John Edwards, February 24, 2002
This was not a coin flip. The consequence of trusting Saddam would have been WMD in the hands of anti-American terrorists. Had President Bush simply trusted Saddam Hussein he would have violated his oath to defend his country.
On March 22, 2003, or three days into Operation Iraqi Freedom, President Bush addressed the nation.
“And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.”
Which part of “the mission” was a lie? Which part was not accomplished?
This space for rent....
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 7463
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:05 am
...besides, in the real world when you steal someone else's ideas, it's called plagerism; in academia, it's called "The Review of the Literature." If anything, Bronco is guilty of the one item most posters in here probably never got to here my favorite professor state over and over: "Never mistake academia for intellegensia!"
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 7463
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:05 am
http://www.military-quotes.com/Clausewitz.htm
Okay. Let's see how many want to argue any point Karl may have plagerized from Sun Tzu...or Sun Moo...
Okay. Let's see how many want to argue any point Karl may have plagerized from Sun Tzu...or Sun Moo...