Well, if you could afford a good enough computer to watch the videos, you would have seen with your own eyes Clinton and company stating how Saddam was a major threat with his WMD's, and how he must be taken out. Point being, follow along now, if Bush was given bad intelligence, as in there were WMD's, yet none were actually found, then Clinton must have gotten the same bad info. I mean, how could Clinton claim there were WMD's when none were found? Hypocrisy at it's best.

Sounds like both administrations blew it, as well as the U.N. :lol:

Oh, I wasn't dissing truck drivers, just curious how someone with a resume like yours ended up in a job that is classified as unskilled labor? :?

PTD; waiting for yet another canned Al Franken response. :P

Well, my DAD surprised me one day with a new computer that I didn't get to "spec." I wasn't about to complain. I've always been a bit behind on the latest computer technology, cuz I just never cared. Actually, it is now just a "time" issue, in that I don't want to take it to the guru to have it upgraded. I don't even have RoadRunner, cuz I don't want to go through the effort to switch everything over. I will get to it, in time. Until I joined this board, and people (like you and others) started linking everything to a video, I never NEEDED more memory, although speed would have been nice.

As for... "Clinton and company stating how Saddam was a major threat with his WMD's, and how he must be taken out," I'm not going to say you or anyone else is "lying," but I believe - no, I KNOW - there is more to the story. Clinton KNEW that Saddam had WMD's at that time, yes! Heck.... We SOLD them to him under the Reagan administration! However, I don't know if I would ACTUALLY hear Clinton saying Saddam needed to be "taken out." Under Clinton, we tried to fund "insurgent" forces, who were more Democratic, to overthrow his regime, yes. I've never argued this fact. However, it was NOT because Clinton believed that Saddam had anything to do with Al Queda (we hadn't even hardly heard of THEM yet,) or that he was a threat to the citizens of the U.S., and he CERTAINLY didn't mean we should go to WAR against him.

Now.... YOU follow along. Bush was NOT given "faulty" intelligence. He was TOLD that there was NO evidence that Saddam HAD WMD's at that time, NOR that he was trying to reconstitute his program. This was NOT the answer Bush wanted to hear, following the attacks of 9/11, nor to fit his PRE-PLANNED agenda to attack and depose the dictator that daily walked over the image of his father in front of one of the major Ministry buildings in Baghdad (I forget which one.)

When did you FIRST learn about Clinton's attempted cruise missile strikes against Al Queda?? Not until YEARS after the fact, and only AFTER the war in Iraq had begun. When did you FIRST hear Bush making a 'case' against attacking Iraq? MONTHS before it happened. That would give ANY dictator plenty of time to send any WMD's he MIGHT have OUT of country. Bush can't keep a secret! Clinton obviously DID!

The point never really WAS whether Saddam HAD or STILL HAD WMD's... it was WHAT did he plan to do with them, whether he was a threat to US, and whether going to war against him because he wouldn't follow U.N. sanction policies "to the letter of the law" was worth the billions of dollars and thousands of lives we've spent on it! Especially, as it DEFLECTED our focus away from getting UBL "Dead or Alive" and in light of the WIDER Jihad that has resulted from such aggressiveness on the part of the World Leader.

But, you'll never understand that, as most conservative Americans don't, because you buy into the rhetoric that he was somehow responsible for 9/11, or aligned with Al Queda, or because someone has wagged a flag in front of your face and claimed that our boys are dying over there to protect OUR FREEDOMS! Which they are NOT!

At BEST, one could argue they are dying for NATION BUILDING, and THAT was NEVER condoned or voted for by ANYONE in Congress.... let alone the Democrats!

Neither Bush NOR Clinton were given "faulty" intelligence. Bush stood before Congress and the American people on T.V. and flat out LIED about his reasons for going to war in Iraq!

He KNEW he wouldn't get the okay if he told the truth, so he made the intelligence "fit" his agenda, and sold it to us ALL like a "flood damaged" used car!

The difference between YOUR type, and MINE, is that WE weren't buying it THEN, and we don't buy it NOW!

And NONE of this even broaches the subject of how ILL-managed this war has been from the beginning! Bush has changed his tactics as often as he's changed his reasons for going to war. And he has "excused" every mistake he's made, (or agenda he's followed) by crying "wolf!" (Terror for you nonliterary types.)

And YOU have bought it all, hook, line and sinker!

Sound like Al Franken to you? I wouldn't doubt if it did. Fact is, most Dems are conversant in the same truth against the war that I just mentioned, just like most NeoCons have memorized the same lies Bush and Rove have programmed them with. It's inescapable.

Golfhobo...........hehe..........just drive the truck, boy.

You've already told us that you are an apartment dweller and now we know that you couldn't even afford to buy your own computer.

And now you claim to have been in intelligence (which is greatly different from actually having intelligence) but somehow just never really cared about technology.

Uh, no, actually most of us read it in the papers on August 20, 1998.
But it's not too late; you can bring yourself up to date here:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9808/20/us.strikes.01/
You'll like this part:
I know I did. :lol:

It is called selective memory Alligator. :lol: No need for facts, they just cloud a good agenda. :roll:

Just rock your rockin' chair, Pops!

I live in an apartment because I never intended to get STUCK here in the South. Unlike SOME of you, who've never been outside your little neck of the woods, I move around alot. I have no family, so I don't NEED a house.

I already HAD a computer (3, in fact, when my Dad bought me this one without asking me what would be "current." I don't care one bit about downloading music, watching videos, or many other applications some of you care about. I used my computers for business.

But, as a matter of fact, my finances are a bit strapped. I lost some money in that business, and am paying it back. So, because I'm not a wealthy landowner like YOU, I shouldn't have a vote, an opinion, or a past that includes some pretty interesting stuff?

Sounds strange, I agree.... and yet.... I just never really became a techno-nerd! Go figure! I've only ONCE even ever cared enough to have a top notch sound system.

I don't own a digital camera, because I believe in the purity and tangeability of film.

I'm not as impressed by "things" as some of you are.

I'm well aware of the fact that there was some news about it when it happened. I asked Dweller when HE/SHE heard about it! MOST of the current day Bush supporters have "glommed" onto this mantra only recently. Yeah, it wasn't exactly a secret, but Clinton didn't announce he was GOING to do it. He just did it, and THEN told us about it.

Thanks for proving that Clinton WAS fighting the war against Al Queda LONG before Bush claimed it as a slogan. Doesn't say a word about attacking SADDAM or IRAQ now, does it? Had Bush concentrated his efforts on getting Bin Laden in the first place, we might not be in Iraq today! Not unless.... of course, he WANTED us to be!

Well.... at least you know SOMETHING! :lol:

Oh brother :roll: This sounds like a typical trucker with a big imagination. So when does the Federal Marshall part come in? :lol: I used to laugh my ass off at drivers like you Hobo, sitting at the counter impressing all the gullible with their BS. :roll:

I'm sorry, I'm new here. Is this the comedy section? Some guy claims he was in the intelligence business back in the eighties, so he knows what President Bush saw today? He helped develop many of the current security technologies, but has no interest in learning that even a low end computer today(or even a $100 cell phone) can blow away what he was supposedly working with back then, and is easily capable of seeing videos on the net? This is funny stuff; maybe one of his many careers was as a comedian.

deleted

And YOU, "one post wonder," can kiss my butt, too! I KNOW the capabilities of todays computers and microchips. I was around when we had Commodore 64's and magnetic tape backups you recorded on a small cassette recorder. I don't really LIKE computers, and I sure don't like shelling out another Grand everytime they add capacity to manage files heavy in graphics and media.

Golfhobo......Hey I still like you. :D I love how people just s**t on someone who has a differing opinion, instead of having an honest debate of the facts. And Youtube is for people who have ADD or a short attention span. Whatever happened to reading and investigating various sources?