Would you impeach Bush?

[volt]

If you care to read, than go right ahead:
http://democrats.com/elandslide/petition.cfm?campaign=911

The poll is not based only on the above information, but overall "Bush activity".

[Lezmaka]

Why didn't we impeach Clinton for not getting rid of Osama after the attack on the Cole or for not preventing that. Oh wait, we did impeach him, just for something else, never mind.

While we're at it, why don't we make a poll to see if Roosevelt should have been impeached for not preventing Pearl Harbor.

:rolleyes:

[volt]

Originally posted by Lezmaka
While we're at it, why don't we make a poll to see if Roosevelt should have been impeached for not preventing Pearl Harbor.

:rolleyes:

What does my question read? :rolleyes:
Why not make one ? :>

[Lezmaka]

I believe I responded to your question with the :rolleyes:

[volt]

Ekhem...I'm asking a simple question and I get something else? :p
I didnt post to debate on something other than Bush.

[Kruno]

Change my vote from 'yes' to 'Not yet'. I want to see Bush screw up BIG TIME first. :D

[UDawg]

I don't understand the Left's fetish with getting President Bush but it sure is fun to watch the them go nuts when a Republican president is in the White House. Live it up while we can fellow Republicans the Left is one big nut burger now-a-days. We made enough of a fool of our selves when Impeached President Clinton was in office so lets just be quiet and let them self destruct. No need to debate them just let them cry about silly accusations of impeachment.:D

[fastguy94416]

Is that poll for real?

Seriously how could political agendas cloud one's judgement that bad as to actually believe what that poll says.

[FastM]

i dont think its fair to blame Bush for not preventing sept11 attacks. It happen and Bush happen to be the president at the time.... Althout i cant say im a big fan of Bush or his party so i really wouldn't mind to see him go.

[LORD-eX-Bu]

I voted "Not yet". While I am pretty conservative, I do disagree with Bush on many fronts. Bush did ignore those warnings, but whats worse? Turning down Sudan's offer of Bin Laden to the United States 4 TIMES even after the 93' WTC bombing and the bombings of those embassies in Africa thus creating a false sense of security? or following the trend of the previous President when it comes to terrorism? Both Clinton and Bush did not do their job, but now Bush is has to face the consequences of his mistake, rather than Clinton retaining his pension and living a happy-go-lucky life now that he screwwed us all. And on top of it all, now Clinton claims that he was "obsessed" with Bin Laden, hmm... I guess this explains his "devotion" to his wife.:rolleyes: This could have been prevented before, by both presidents, but they didn't do their job. Clinton was impeached already, who cares, Bush, if he does not shape up and do what he has to do, instead of appeasing the Saudis and playing mind games with us, then he should be impeached on grounds of neglect and possibly conspiracy to commit treason against the United States. Wether to go past the impeachment(only means he is accused anyways) is not for me to decide. Both presidents did good things, wether this one lives up to his responsibility is something that only time will tell.;)

EDIT: Early last year, Bush had plans on his desk to have Spec Ops that had secured an airfield in Afghanistan kidnap Bin Laden and extradite him to the US. He didn't act on it.:mad:

EDIT: Vote for Bush instead of Mcain:rolleyes: Worst mistake everrr!

[sbp]

Yeah right http://sbp777.homestead.com/files/laugh44.gif

At least everyone knows what that wacko Cynthia McKinney (http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/wsbtv/news/mckinney0411.html) is up to now since she lose her re-election.

[intercede007]

Clinton's trial was a laughable joke, and one against Bush would be to.

[stncttr908]

Like it or not he's the damned president. At least you guys seem to have voted so you have a right to your opinion...but if everyone decided to take that initiative I believe that Gore would be president right now.

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Lezmaka
Why didn't we impeach Clinton for not getting rid of Osama after the attack on the Cole or for not preventing that.

Clinton's cruise missile attack would have killed Osama and a large amount of Al Quada if the Pakistani intelligence agency hadn't tipped them off a few hours before hand.

[stncttr908]

I don't trust any of those people, no offense to anyone of arab descent.

[legion88]

Originally posted by [eNv]-LORD-eX-Bu
I voted "Not yet". While I am pretty conservative, I do disagree with Bush on many fronts. Bush did ignore those warnings, but whats worse? Turning down Sudan's offer of Bin Laden to the United States 4 TIMES even after the 93' WTC bombing and the bombings of those embassies in Africa thus creating a false sense of security? or following the trend of the previous President when it comes to terrorism? Both Clinton and Bush did not do their job, but now Bush is has to face the consequences of his mistake, rather than Clinton retaining his pension and living a happy-go-lucky life now that he screwwed us all. And on top of it all, now Clinton claims that he was "obsessed" with Bin Laden, hmm... I guess this explains his "devotion" to his wife.:rolleyes: This could have been prevented before, by both presidents, but they didn't do their job. Clinton was impeached already, who cares, Bush, if he does not shape up and do what he has to do, instead of appeasing the Saudis and playing mind games with us, then he should be impeached on grounds of neglect and possibly conspiracy to commit treason against the United States. Wether to go past the impeachment(only means he is accused anyways) is not for me to decide. Both presidents did good things, wether this one lives up to his responsibility is something that only time will tell.;)

EDIT: Early last year, Bush had plans on his desk to have Spec Ops that had secured an airfield in Afghanistan kidnap Bin Laden and extradite him to the US. He didn't act on it.:mad:

EDIT: Vote for Bush instead of Mcain:rolleyes: Worst mistake everrr!

How can Bin Laden et. al be Clinton's mistake? Answer: It can't.

We are now living the world that Ronald Reagan created for us more than a decade ago. Bin Laden was one of Reagan's little creation to fight against the communists. Of course, it is not politically correct for the media to blame the great communicator so we all blame it on the CIA. So officially, let's blame the incompetent CIA.

Makes you wonder what other little creations are still out there.

[legion88]

Originally posted by [eNv]-LORD-eX-Bu

(snip....)

Bush did ignore those warnings, but whats worse? Turning down Sudan's offer of Bin Laden to the United States 4 TIMES even after the 93' WTC bombing and the bombings of those embassies in Africa thus creating a false sense of security?

(snip....)


Sudan's alleged "offer" would be completely meaningless. The embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania occured in July 1998. Bin Laden left Sudan in early 1996. He was already living in Afghanistan at the time. How can Sudan offer someone they don't have?

FYI: During late 80's to early 1990's, Saudi and Pakistini gov't were trying to kill Bin Laden while he was in Afghanistan. In 1991, he moved to Sudan. He left the country 1996 as I said and moved back to Afghanistan. In 1997, Saudis tried again. Failed. The good 'ol USA tried their luck in capturing him. It was a failure, too.

Summer 1998, Bin Laden expanded his declaration of war to killing of Americans and Jews. The bombings started in July 1998.

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Originally posted by legion88
Sudan's alleged "offer" would be completely meaningless. The embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania occured in July 1998. Bin Laden left Sudan in early 1996. He was already living in Afghanistan at the time. How can Sudan offer someone they don't have?

FYI: During late 80's to early 1990's, Saudi and Pakistini gov't were trying to kill Bin Laden while he was in Afghanistan. In 1991, he moved to Sudan. He left the country 1996 as I said and moved back to Afghanistan. In 1997, Saudis tried again. Failed. The good 'ol USA tried their luck in capturing him. It was a failure, too.

Summer 1998, Bin Laden expanded his declaration of war to killing of Americans and Jews. The bombings started in July 1998.

Yes I worded that part wrong. You got me there, so, whats your point?:confused:

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Originally posted by legion88
How can Bin Laden et. al be Clinton's mistake? Answer: It can't.

We are now living the world that Ronald Reagan created for us more than a decade ago. Bin Laden was one of Reagan's little creation to fight against the communists. Of course, it is not politically correct for the media to blame the great communicator so we all blame it on the CIA. So officially, let's blame the incompetent CIA.

Makes you wonder what other little creations are still out there.

Yes it can be Clinton's mistake also, on top of Regan's, Bush Sr.' and Bush Jr's. Regan funded him, Bush Sr. got him pissed, Bush Jr. ignored him, and Clinton sat on his lap. Clinton had more chances than anyone to kill or capture Bin Laden, he did nothing. Bush Jr. is so preoccupied with poll numbers and oil that he won't start a real war on terrorism. If you wanna blame somebody for the CIA's impotence(not incompetence), blame the democrats for mutilating the CIA and reducing its effectiveness. Bush Jr. didn't use them effectively either until it was too late, but it is not the CIA's fault that their balls got cut off by the Democrats.

[madthumbs]

Personally I don't trust people of political dissent. Bush should be in federal prison. Who was behind the whole anthrax scare? Wasn't his whole family on that specific antibiotic a week before it started hitting the fan? Sorry, but I tried telling people Bush was lying about 9/11 and was probably behind it somehow... I was met with hostile reactions. Now evidence is coming out in the open, and I'm happier for that. The whole "voting" thing is a farce. Bush bought his way into office. We don't really have a choice.. it's trying to pick the lesser of the 3 evils. Even Ross Perot belonged to the same evil organizations that all the other presidents in most of our lifetimes belonged to.

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Originally posted by madthumbs
Personally I don't trust people of political dissent. Bush should be in federal prison. Who was behind the whole anthrax scare? Wasn't his whole family on that specific antibiotic a week before it started hitting the fan? Sorry, but I tried telling people Bush was lying about 9/11 and was probably behind it somehow... I was met with hostile reactions. Now evidence is coming out in the open, and I'm happier for that. The whole "voting" thing is a farce. Bush bought his way into office. We don't really have a choice.. it's trying to pick the lesser of the 3 evils. Even Ross Perot belonged to the same evil organizations that all the other presidents in most of our lifetimes belonged to.

Its nice to read about conspiracy theories once in a while, but when you become obsessed with them and start beleiving crap like that, then you've got probs.:o

EDIT: Lay off Deus Ex.

[UDawg]

This whole thread is a joke. Hardly a bit of truth.

[volt]

Originally posted by UDawg71
This whole thread is a joke. Hardly a bit of truth.

Guess what? You don't have to view it :cool:
There are other threads that I personally don't like. Do you see me complain ?

[sbp]

Originally posted by legion88
How can Bin Laden et. al be Clinton's mistake? Answer: It can't.

We are now living the world that Ronald Reagan created for us more than a decade ago. Bin Laden was one of Reagan's little creation to fight against the communists. Of course, it is not politically correct for the media to blame the great communicator so we all blame it on the CIA. So officially, let's blame the incompetent CIA.

Makes you wonder what other little creations are still out there. Nice try Roscoe but it ain't Reagan's fault. And there is no proof the CIA directly helped bin Laden.

During the Cold War the US rightfully helped the Afghan people in the form of the Mujaheddin resist the Soviet invader. That effort (and others) were successful and the USSR died.

Please note are the Taliban which ruled Afghanistan were not the same as the Mujaheddin. Some were the same, but other Mujaheddin were fighting the Taliban with the Northern Alliance. Former Mujaheddin like the leader of the Northern Alliance, General Ahmad Shah Masood, the proclaimed "Lion of Panjshir", who bin Laden had killed.
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/11/wmass11.xml

By the way Corn says hi!

[Kruno]

Yes. ;) :p :D


Originally posted by volt
Guess what? You don't have to view it :cool:
There are other threads that I personally don't like. Do you see me complain ?