Comments on: Clinton Digs In; Romney Takes Foes' Digs

CBSNews.com's Vaughn Ververs: Clinton, Romney Try To Rebound From Iowa Losses During Back-To-Back Debates

[antoniof123]

Posted by chitown639 at 04:21 PM : Jan 06, 2008

The Regan/Bush administration were warned about the Talaban they just didn''t listen.

See a pattern that was already forming even back then.

[hiproductions--2008]

Typical CBS reporting:

Democrats "capturing the imagination" of voters
Republicans "scrambled and less focused"

How ridiculous to call this tripe "reporting" when its
really just college newspaper editorializing. Grow up
CBS, try to be more like ABC and hide your bias a little better.

I highly recommend that anyone that sees this, REFUSES to do business with CBS sponsors and takes the time to complain to those sponsors so they find a different entity with whom to place their advertising dollars.

[chitown639]

In Afghanistan, we supported the Mujahidin with millions of dollars in guns and food after the U.S.S.R. invasion. Bin Laden supported and fought along side the Mujahidin until the defeat of the Soviets. When Iraq, invaded Kuwait and we deplored our troops to Saudi Arabia, this angered Bin Laden who believed that Western troops in Saudi Arabia was great insult to Islam. He wanted to use his forces left over from the Mujahidin to rescue Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. He vowed to avenge the dishonor to Islam. Al Qeada is born.

[perception5]

** BUZZ ON THE STREET** FOX NEWS DEBATE. HAS ROGER AILES, HEAD OF FOX NEWS AND FORMER CAMPIAGN DIRECTOR FOR RUDY GIULIANI, TOLD MIKE WALLACE AND HUME TO GO FOR MITT ROMNEY''S THROAT TONIGHT?

[ioweign]

You''''re ridiculous; the hijackers were in the US at "School" before Bush took office, and all the missed opportunities to take out Al Qaeda after their earlier attacks occurred between 1993 and 2000 (who was in office then)? You know full well that you lefties would have crucified Bush if after taking office in those first few months, with no attack on us, he had decided to up and take out Al Qaeda and the Taliban then? Soooo, let''''s recap, Clinton gutted our military and intel services with his "peace dividend", Clinton''''s justice dept. created the "wall" between our intel agencies and FBI cited by the 9/11 commission as one of the key causes we couldn''''t have stopped 9/11, the hijackers all entered the US while Clinton was in office to go to "school", and all of the attacks by the Al Qaeda network pre-9/11 that would have given us the cover needed to retaliate and take Al Qaeda''''s safe havens out occurred on Clinton''''s watch - yep, definitelty all Bush''''s fault; it alllll happened on "his watch"....good logic.

Posted by fredgrad2000 at 04:05 PM : Jan 06, 2008


The wall between the FBI and the CIA has/had existed prior to Clinton.

Bush was looking for excuses to invade Iraq ten (10) days after he took office. There is no connection between 9/11 and Iraq - Bush has even stated that !

If the military was gutted then how could it mount a response to 9/11 in Afghanistan and area and the invasion of Iraq.

[fredgrad2000]

BTW BaghdadsHere (still trolling I see),
Quit kidding yourself! 9/11 is all on Bush''''s watch.

Posted by jh6379

You''re ridiculous; the hijackers were in the US at "School" before Bush took office, and all the missed opportunities to take out Al Qaeda after their earlier attacks occurred between 1993 and 2000 (who was in office then)? You know full well that you lefties would have crucified Bush if after taking office in those first few months, with no attack on us, he had decided to up and take out Al Qaeda and the Taliban then? Soooo, let''s recap, Clinton gutted our military and intel services with his "peace dividend", Clinton''s justice dept. created the "wall" between our intel agencies and FBI cited by the 9/11 commission as one of the key causes we couldn''t have stopped 9/11, the hijackers all entered the US while Clinton was in office to go to "school", and all of the attacks by the Al Qaeda network pre-9/11 that would have given us the cover needed to retaliate and take Al Qaeda''s safe havens out occurred on Clinton''s watch - yep, definitelty all Bush''s fault; it alllll happened on "his watch"....good logic.

[realpatriot1]

Baghdadshere/poopusbuttus,

The best I can tell as a civilian Al Quaeda didn''t come to Iraq in a significant way until 2005 and even then it was local insurgents calling themselves Al Quaeda. The real leadership of Al Quaeda and its terror camp infrastructure has been in Pakastan since they were run out of Afghanistan.

The surge "working" has not defeated Al Quaeda''s global movement in a very signicant way. Actually, our occupation has fueled much of their recruiting. It does appear that their recruitment of Jihadists has hit a wall but we have no reason to celebrate and be overconfident unless and until we actually take out what''s left of their leadership, state sponsership, and training infrastructure. Pakastan along the Afghan border is where the real last stand of Al Quaeda is and Iraq has been an expensive diversion from that fight which has allowed them to build themselves back up there.

If you think they''ve been defeated just because the Sunnis are sick of fighting in Iraq you are seriously deluded in my opinion.

Callinhg a Marine Sgt a traitor doesn''t bolster your argument or your own level of patriotism one bit.

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by speakinup at 03:20 PM : Jan 06, 2008

Ask General Fallon who only supports Betrayus because he has to...he knows the surge didn''t work...and he knows there is the possibility of civil war at any minit in Iraq. And that arming the Sunni''s is about as risky as walking on eggs.

But you guys, go ahead and continue to listen to the Neocons'' efforts to keep you scared witless of the terrorists.

[fredgrad2000]

Neoconism -

Illegal funding of the Afghan rebels? I think you''re referring to the Contras in Nicaragua; the Afghan rebels were funded in appropriated money by the Democratic controlled Congress; so don''t be throwing Reagan out as the sole cause of Al Qaeda; don''t forget that action was supported by everyone in order to help defeat out enemy of that time, the USSR, which their defeat in Afghanistan did indeed hasten. As for illegal immigration; PLEASE!! Blaming the GOP for illegal immigration is insane!! The Dems are the open borders party bud; that is clear as day. Your "boy" Clinton had the best chances to stop Al Qaeda before they became a force; but didn''t take them; he deserves more blame for 9/11 and Al Qaeda than any other American president; but I don''t even think he deserves blame; the world was different pre-9/11; as much as you love to look at everything as if you were the all-seeing, all-knowing Oracle; the real truth is that there was no stomach in the world or the US for another fight in Afghanistan or Sudan to get bin Laden before 9/11; but if we HAD reacted strongly to this threat when it first emerged, before the Afghan and Sudanese training camps had mass-produced thousands of terrorists; 9/11 wouldn''t have happened and Al Qaeda would be nothing but a footnote to history.

[chitown639]

Dems are jihadist because they defend the jihad launched by those brainwashed Muslims...

Posted by BaghdadsHere

(((BaghdadsHere)))

Nobody is defending Jihadist, my poor uneducated friend. When people question or criticize the course of action our leaders have taken, it doesnt make them terrorist. This is the spin your party has been promoting for years. Quickly questioning and besmirching the patriotism of good Americans who dont agree with the presidents hair-brain policies. When in fact, to question and have open debate on the issues concerning this country is showing the greatest respect and patriotism for the fundamental principles this great nation was founded upon.

[j-whitman]

BaghdadsHere,,,,,, You are still yelling "The war is over, Al Queda is beaten" ???? --- You are Looney Toons ----------- Go build them some more roads

[baghdadshere]

Gotta go for a while folks. See you later.

[radiob-2009]

Hmmm "No Reply at All" keeps playing over and over.

[j-whitman]

BaghdadsHere,,,, What part of that "Surge" is over don''t you understand ??? Or even what any of the current strategies consist of ---- Only 1 part of the "Surge" was even close to calling it any sucess, the very limited security in some area''s.

[speakinup]

poopus - anyway, when I pointed this out to him, about the fighter - he came back with something about how what I was insinuating was against international law.

It was at that point, after remembering how he has insisted that there are 110 Senators in the US, and Bush has OBL''s family flown out right after 911, and how a 757 didn''t strike the Pentagon, and that it was a government scheme that brought down the towers - well I decided ilikecats is right.

The guy is truly mentally deficient.

[baghdadshere]

BaghdadsHere,,,, Don''''''''t wet your pants, but --- Under Bush''''''''s incompetent & corrupt leadership Terrorism Has Grown & this country is as wide open as ever.

Posted by j-whitman at 02:55 PM : Jan 06, 2008

j-whitman-FormerTampaxCo CEO,,,,,I dont know how you survived the storm in Sacramento, but this doesnt gives you the right to keep posting lies. In which planet are you living dude? Here on earth things are quite different from what you"re saying. The surge worked pretty good. We won the war in Iraq and al-qaeda is defeated in Iraq and elsewhere. Even Bin Laden was on the internet begging the Sunnis not to fight al-qaeda remember?

No response.No arguments.

[speakinup]

"make that...Exactly. It''''s hard for the terrorists to portray us as "The Great Satan" unless we give creedence to their argument by acting like one.
Posted by formrusmcsgt

General Petereaus''s strategy sems to take this into account, wouldn''t you agree ?

[speakinup]

BaghdadsHere - long time no see. I was off for a week - away from PC.

Couple of nights ago a poster called ilikecats and I came to the conclusion that j-whitman is (seriously) not playing with a full deck, and that we should not beat up the walking wounded.

It makes sense when you think about the method he uses when he changes the topic. The same day he tried to convince me that the Israelis sold a fighter to China and then China reverse engineered it and re-sold it to Iran. Now, thig MIGHT be true, but to prove his point he said that it is super hig tech, siting how it used a missile system that was guilded by the pilot''s eye sight.

Talk about being caught in a lie. The f-14 tomcat, which was retired last year by the Super Hornet had the capability to target 6 air to air missiles at a range of 200 kilometers. Right off hand, I guess that would have to make the Chinese fighter nothing more than a target.

J-whitman just likes to sound like he knows what he is talking about, and will lie to do so. It''s a shame. The guy spends so much time here making a fool of himself.

Anyway - take it into account - unless he''s being just too ornery. Which is most of the time.

[j-whitman]

poopusbuttus,,,, Bush & your far right support of this administration has fueled terrorism & it has grown,,,, not diminished

[baghdadshere]

RowdyTexan2 - out to lunch, huh ? Ok - well - now you''''re being honest.

Posted by speakinup at 03:06 PM : Jan 06, 2008

speak.....Welcome back. Join our team. There are too many leftist OsamaLovers posting today.