More "Oil" found in Iraq

[Panther]

I legitimately wonder what those people who fault Clinton for his cruise missile strikes think about Gen. Shelton's advice and how a President in general should act when given advice by his top military leaders.

And in truth, my response before is the same answer. IMNSHO, the POTUS should take the best advice (s)he can get and make the best decision (s)he can at the time. But, I don't have all that information at hand and different people will use the advice differently. That's why we elected one person for the job. (PLEASE... I don't want to debate the last election... )

And the Boston Globe reported in an editorial today that the orignal warrant for Abbas's arrest was withdrawn in 1987 after he was convicted in Italy. And the Globe is calling for US charges to be brought against Abbas.

Clinton wasn't President then. Hell, even Pres. Bush I wasn't president then.

True enough. But, when Abbas was convicted, the U.S. warrant was withdrawn because he was convicted and heading to a lengthy prison term. In truth, I think he was released on appeal or some such, though I don't really know... regardless, the warrant (i think) was reinstated when he left Italy.

Thank you for your reply (and the tone of it). I know that we can all agree that Abbas was a bad guy and it's a good thing that he's now been captured.

And good questions from Don as well. I don't have the answers on the aspirin factory. But it is true that Saddam used Chemical weapons against the Kurds. It is also true that there was a lost opportunity for a Delta Force recon mission in the Sudan with Bin Laden as the target... I got confirmation of that from a Lt. Col. USAF who was in the know about it.

Folks,

This is looking fairly good. Keep it calm and discuss things and I think that many people can learn a lot from the information that is put forth. There is much to learn and more to uncover...

Thank you...

Take care and be good to each other...

[Gene DeMambro]

And I thank you, Panther, for your answer!

Abbas was convicted in Absentia in Italy, So, actually, he's never served a day in jail from what I've been able to tell.

Unless someone can come up with more credible evidence that Clinton gave up the store when he allegedly decline the Sudanese offer on Bin Laden, I do not believe it happened. Panther's information from his Lt.Col. friend is a step int he right dorection.

Is there any other evidence, besides Ann Coulter's assertions?

Gene

[Don Rearic]

Gene,

Coulter is not the only person that has said it. There are supposed to be several different times when Clinton turned his back on "deals" to get him. I'll have to look it all up. Hell, I don't even believe everything floating around when it comes to Clinton, Gene.

There is also talk that he turned down a chance to buy back alot of Stingers that we gave to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to down MIGs and HINDs back when the Soviets were in there. Don't know if that is true either.

But some things we do know are abysmal. He refused Gunships and Armor in Mogadishu, it lies with him Gene, but he used armor at Waco, it does not sit well, yes? No?

There are alot of various side issues, but I will try to track down some more info if you are interested in it but I fear that no matter what source I post from, you're going to believe The Clinton Administration, I'm just being honest...so I'm not really in an itching hurry to hunt anything down.

[Gene DeMambro]

Don,

Verifiable, unbiased and reliable information regarding CLinton giving away the store regarding terrorism is welcome and appreciated.

You keep referring to Waco in some recent posts, would you like to start a new topic, as Panther doesn't really like it when topics get sidetracked? I;d be happy to address your questions then.

Gene

[Don Rearic]

Gene,

Well, I don't know that discussing how we got in this mess after having eight years of the Clinton Administration...I don't know that discussing Waco in passing is a sidebar at all. I think it is indicative of the way the country was at the time, as I cited earlier, re: Mogadishu. It has to do with the way military things were done incorrectly, yet, it was deemed "appropriate" to do that sort of thing in Texas, etc.

Earlier, we discussed, what was it (without me looking back now)? General Shelton was his name? Advising Clinton? Well, a POTUS, right or wrong, fair or unfair, can be made or broken by the people that he does take advice from. Les Aspin (mentioned him earlier) really screwed the pooch about Mogadishu. Do you see what I'm talking about? I don't see where all of the hooplah is when it comes to the Foreign Policy of the prior Administration, I don't see all of the victories or brilliance to it, honestly.

But to keep more in line with things I have posted in here, what do you think about the claims that Bill Clinton could have "gotten it right if it were not for the splotch on the Consitution" preventing him from seeking a third term. (However it was worded.)

Do you agree with that Gene?

Further, do you think he deserved a third shot to "get it right?"

How many failures and how many years or terms should a President have to, "get it right?"

You know, been hearing alot about a book, Bill Clinton's USAF Officer assigned to him, carrying the Nuke Codes...his book does not paint a very good picture. Do we believe someone who was entrusted with that position, or is he a liar too and just out to get Bill?

[Gene DeMambro]

I'm a bit torn between being for or against the COnstitution's term limits regarding the President. On one hand, it limits the people's ability to elect as their President whomever they wish. On the other hand, it mandates a representative republic is ensured, with a leader who won't usurp authority, ala a king. But, overall, I think I'm in favor of that particular splotch on the Constitution. If you'd like an elaboration as to why, I'd be glad to give you one.

As far as whether Slick Willie himself deserved another shot at being elected, I say yes. No flames, please. You asked for an opinion and I gave it. If you'd like an elaboration, I'd be glad to give you one.

How many failures and how many years or terms should a President have to, "get it right?"

As many terms the people vote him/her in for. And I don't know that Clinton got it wrong. No flames on this one, either, please.

Well, I don't know that discussing how we got in this mess after having eight years of the Clinton Administration...I don't know that discussing Waco in passing is a sidebar at all.

Because this thread is about Pres. Bush's use of force internationally to root out terrorism and eliminating overseas threats to the US. Would you like me to discuss Waco here, or should I wait for another thread?

Gene

[Panther]

Good dialog gentlemen...

OK... There are so many related topics here it could get really messy really quickly. Bush... Clinton... Waco... Mogudishu... Terrorists... Term limits... See what I mean. Easy to muddy the waters.

(Suggestion only) Break them up and discuss them. Since there obviously is overlap. Perhaps compare the foreign policies. Look at the policy of G.H.W.Bush (the father)... recall that Clinton in his first campaign used the slogan "it's the economy stupid" to indicate that G.H.W.Bush was spending too much time and energy on foreign policy... and compare that with Clinton's foreign policy and then look at G.W.Bush's foreign policy. That is enough to create a long and involved thread. And if someone wants to start a thread about the violation of Posse Comitatus act in Waco while the Clinton Adminstration denied the use of armored vehicles in Mogadishu... that's a full thread as well... But in undue use of force against civilians, there's enough to go around on both sides.

Regardless, I do think keeping things separate (as much as possible) allows for discussion of each issue without jumping from place to place.

Thanks guys...

Take care and be good to each other...

[Panther]

The book Don referred to is called "Dereliction of Duty" and it was written by Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson, USAF (ret). Fascinating book... upsetting also. And corroborated by other sources.

[Thaws]

So in the event the coalition doesn't find any WMD(this scenario seems to be playing out at the present)what might be our informed presidents' next
excuse ? Tim