Bush: 'I take responsibility' for federal failures after Katrina

Status
Not open for further replies.
What you do is try to hang on to all the tentacles at the same time you are cutting them off one by one. Do nothing to address the individual issue and it will remain a problem in perpetuity.

Regarding the shipyard full of nukes - aren't you old enough to have gone through training in school for dealing with a nuclear attack? If not, just climb under your desk on your knees in a ball and pull your head down with your hands. :D
 
Duck and Roll.
 
CPanther95 said:
Regarding the shipyard full of nukes - aren't you old enough to have gone through training in school for dealing with a nuclear attack? If not, just climb under your desk on your knees in a ball and pull your head down with your hands. :D

Duck and Cover, I remember that from 'The Iron Giant'.
 
vurbano said:
Funny how no one told us back then that it wouldnt matter. You'd be ashes laying on the ground.

Good ole "duck and cover", they always omitted the "kiss your ass goodbye" part. :D


NightRyder
 
If he can do it right? Have you paid ANY attention to this war at all?

INS has been incredibly quiet since bush got into office. Illegal mexicans have always been all over the place here in ohio, but they used to get rounded up quite regularly.

Last time I saw a raid was in October of 2000...Think about it...
 
What do you think is more fitting of impeachment, gettin freaky with woman or failing to respond to a catastrophic disaster or the potential for one and the subsequent deaths that follows.

He may be doing the so called "noble thing" but he is not the only govemental official that should take responsibility and be found responsible, but he is far from being the worst offender in this situation.
 
Van, you think clinton was the worst offender??

Since when is sex a dirty thing? Since when is congress full of sexual deviants? Since when does the president not get some strange poon...c'mon man...

Here's the thing. When clinton was in office, you didn't have people OBSESSING over the job he was doing everywhere you go. The mall, Best Buy, Work, everywhere, everyday, i catch a conversation. Didn't get that when clinton was in office. We went about our business. Then monica happened and it got blown up into some horrible thing when it was nothing. Like we didn't know clinton wasn't a saint before monica happened...
 
Purogamer said:
If he can do it right? Have you paid ANY attention to this war at all?

If you are speaking of the war in Iraq. Iraq was defeated long ago. If you pay any attention to what is going on we are now fighting terrorists sent in from other countries while we train and equip the Iraqi's until they are strong enough to defend themselves successfully and maintain a democratic govt. My point was that Bush is protecting a country while it forms a democratic government in the midst of Islamic fanaticism surrounding it. And that that was a good option. I only see about 3 or 4 option available to end this terrorism and the one he has chosen is the most noble and if it work would cost the least lives. I see the options as:

1. Do nothing and watch our cities blow up.

2. Create a democratic government to facilitate change in the middle east. Maybe just maybe if they see muslims living successfully and happily this way they will end the hatred.

3. fight them here on our soil. No thankyou. Close the borders if you want but it wont stop it.

4. Remember what we had to do to Japan? The real problem there was their convictions about the divinity of their emporer, I.e a severely brainwashed society similar to what we have in the middle east. The bomb was the option that would end the war and save the most American lives.
 
vurbano said:
If you are speaking of the war in Iraq. Iraq was defeated long ago.

If that was true, the US Military would have been long gone from Iraq. Haven't you heard about the worst bombing on Bagdah has been the worst since the War started. Sadam may be not there but the Insurgent has been very tough so I wouldn't declare the War is over because it has not been over in Iraq.
 
Sean Mota said:
If that was true, the US Military would have been long gone from Iraq.
Dead Wrong. I know you can read Sean. Read again. SO you think it would be more constructive to defeat Iraq as we did then bug out and leave it for the terrorist groups to rule?:rolleyes:

here it is for you:


If you are speaking of the war in Iraq. Iraq was defeated long ago. If you pay any attention to what is going on we are now fighting terrorists sent in from other countries while we train and equip the Iraqi's until they are strong enough to defend themselves successfully and maintain a democratic govt. My point was that Bush is protecting a country while it forms a democratic government in the midst of Islamic fanaticism surrounding it. And that that was a good option. I only see about 3 or 4 option available to end this terrorism and the one he has chosen is the most noble and if it work would cost the least lives. I see the options as:

1. Do nothing and watch our cities blow up.

2. Create a democratic government to facilitate change in the middle east. Maybe just maybe if they see muslims living successfully and happily this way they will end the hatred.

3. fight them here on our soil. No thankyou. Close the borders if you want but it wont stop it.

4. Remember what we had to do to Japan? The real problem there was their convictions about the divinity of their emporer, I.e a severely brainwashed society similar to what we have in the middle east. The bomb was the option that would end the war and save the most American lives.
 
Sean Mota said:
Haven't you heard about the worst bombing on Bagdah has been the worst since the War started.

Yes I have. A terrorist lured people to a van promising work for them. Thats not a war Sean, that is terrorism. Please dont lend credibility to these ridiculous protest efforts by calling a car bomb or suicide bombers a "Bombing" in the sense of a military action. If you want to say we are now at war with Al Queda then fine. But the war with iraq was over quickly.
 
"ONE-DAY IRAQ BOMB TOLL AT 160


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 15, 2005 -- BAGHDAD — More than a dozen explosions ripped through the Iraqi capital in rapid succession yesterday, killing at least 160 people and wounding 570 in a series of attacks that began with a suicide car bombing that targeted laborers assembled to find work for the day.
Al Qaeda in Iraq claimed responsibility.

The death toll at the hands of insurgents in the capital yesterday far exceeds the carnage inflicted in any one day since the war began.

The violence continued this morning when another suicide bomber killed 15 members of a police patrol in southern Baghdad."

Terrorists, Al Queda car bombs and suicide bombers sent into Iraq to disrupt the formation of a new government before it can defend itself. They know the stakes and they dont want it to happen. I really think you are confusing two very different things here. The war with Iraq was over long ago. The war against terrorists from other countries coming into Iraq does continue.
 
The point of my question was wich situation do you think was more in need of an impeachment. Sure Clinton got some odd strange from monica and because of this he ended up in a big hotseat, yet here we have a president that took his time to get back from vacation, we have a governer that didnt take control until days after the disaster, and a mayor that either didnt want to pay city employee's over time to run buses or had a pentiant for wanting to make the feds foot the bill for greyhound buses.

Granted that neither instances are condonable but the amount of scrutiny placed on clinton for his indiscretions and yet so many are excusing this president for his failures and that of other officials. I have to believe that Brown is being prepped as a scapegoat and will be the only person to see any financial hardship and or jail time for all that has gone wrong with this disaster.
 
vurbano said:
If you are speaking of the war in Iraq. Iraq was defeated long ago. If you pay any attention to what is going on we are now fighting terrorists sent in from other countries while we train and equip the Iraqi's until they are strong enough to defend themselves successfully and maintain a democratic govt.

The Insurgent is not completly made of other terrorists coming from other countries. Read carefully the Insurgent has members of Iraq population. The WAR in Iraq is not OVER.
 
Clinton didn't get in trouble for what he did with Monica. He got in trouble because he lied about it. Bush or any president being on vacation is not like the rest of us. They still perform their duties and are kept up to date on situations that really matter. About the only thing that they do differently is they don't receive foreign and domestic politicians for photo ops. It's not like they rent a house at the Jersey Shore and don't conduct business while on vacation.
 
Van said:
The point of my question was wich situation do you think was more in need of an impeachment. Sure Clinton got some odd strange from monica and because of this he ended up in a big hotseat, yet here we have a president that took his time to get back from vacation, we have a governer that didnt take control until days after the disaster, and a mayor that either didnt want to pay city employee's over time to run buses or had a pentiant for wanting to make the feds foot the bill for greyhound buses.

Granted that neither instances are condonable but the amount of scrutiny placed on clinton for his indiscretions and yet so many are excusing this president for his failures and that of other officials. I have to believe that Brown is being prepped as a scapegoat and will be the only person to see any financial hardship and or jail time for all that has gone wrong with this disaster.

I agree Brown is the scapegoat. But Jail time is absurd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)