Pete on impeachment.

[Zambroski]

1 minute ago, revkevsdi said:

You really are crying. What a little bitch. 

I called you stupid.  How is that crying?

So, what sled you gonna buy for this year then?

[revkevsdi]

3 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

I called you stupid.  How is that crying?

So, what sled you gonna buy for this year then?

What year and make is your truck?

[Zambroski]

1 minute ago, revkevsdi said:

What year and make is your truck?

Wut?  That’s a weird name for a sled.  

Are you seriously wanting to go down this route of who is a bigger player?  

 

[revkevsdi]

14 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Wut?  That’s a weird name for a sled.  

Are you seriously wanting to go down this route of who is a bigger player?  

 

You seem to find the boat very important. It only cost around 30 grand  new. 

That told me plenty about what kind of “player “ you are  

 

[Zambroski]

6 minutes ago, revkevsdi said:

You seem to find the boat very important. It only cost around 30 grand  new. 

That told me plenty about what kind of “player “ you are  

 

Boat?  What in the fuck are you crying about?  This literally makes.no sense to me.  But, either do your reasons for lying on the internet.

[revkevsdi]

Just now, Zambroski said:

Boat?  What in the fuck are you crying about?  This literally makes.no sense to me.  But, either do your reasons for lying on the internet.

     Sudden amnesia 

[Zambroski]

4 minutes ago, revkevsdi said:

     Sudden amnesia 

LOL!!  What?  

Holy fucking triggered!  

 

[XCR1250]

1 hour ago, revkevsdi said:

Mercans are dumb you could be right. They gave Bush a second term even after he lied about wmd’s. 

The Clinton administration’s fixation on weapons and its desire for regime change were clearly on display at a February 1998 town hall, where Secretary of State Madeleine Albright tried to sell the public on bombing Iraq. Albright was repeatedly interrupted by antiwar activists, and pressed about why the US was so keen on attacking Iraq when there were many other, similarly terrible dictators throughout the world.

Albright replied, “No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.” Albright then proceeded to lecture the audience, telling them “I’m really surprised that people feel they need to defend the rights of Saddam Hussein.”

Just a few years later, similar scenes, with different players, would be reprised in the buildup to the Bush administration’s invasion.

War By Other Means

Much as George W. Bush inherited his initial Iraq policy from Bill Clinton, Clinton inherited his from Bush’s father.

Following Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on Iraq in an attempt to force a withdrawal. Even after Hussein pulled out, however, the US, which had a veto on the Security Council, refused to allow the sanctions to be lifted.

Their new rationale was that the restrictions were needed to  disarm Iraq. Yet as early as 1992 the US knew Iraq had given up its weapons of mass destruction, and the sanctions remained. And that’s how Clinton wanted it to stay. In 1997 he declared, “the sanctions will be there until the end of time or as long as he [Hussein] lasts.”

The embargo was war by other means. It not only banned weapons of battle, but technologies that ostensibly had military and civilian uses — like pencils, which the sanctions regime said could be fashioned into bullets.

The effects of the sanctions were catastrophic. Iraq experienced shortages of food, medicine, and clean drinking water. And a 1995 Lancet study sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization concluded that 576,000 children under the age of five perished because of the policy, while a “conservative” estimate put the death toll for the same age group at 350,000.

Dennis Halliday, a thirty-four-year UN veteran, resigned from the organization in protest after spending a little over a year as the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq. He said the sanctions constituted genocide. His successor, Hans von Sponeck, also a career UN employee, lasted just two years before stepping down in protest; Jutta Burghardt, then head of the World Food Program, did the same.

Despite the mounting casualties and increasing scrutiny, the Clinton administration was unapologetic about its decision to punish Iraq “until the end of time.”

In a now-infamous 60 Minutes interview in May 1996, Leslie Stahl questioned Albright about the policy. “We have heard that a half million children have died,” the veteran journalist said. “I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Albright responded, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”

Albright’s emotionless defense was notably different from Clinton’s. During a lengthy, impromptu interview in 2000, Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman asked the president about the death toll and the resignation of dissenting UN officials.

Instead of justifying the “price,” Clinton simply denied the facts in question. He held that Saddam had the money to feed children in Iraq, but elected not to:

They [the two UN officials who had resigned] think that we should reward — Saddam Hussein says, “I’m going to starve my kids unless you let me buy nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and biological weapons. If you let me do everything I want to do, so I can get in a position to kill and intimidate people again, then I’ll stop starving my kids.”

Clinton’s determined parrying underscores the fact that while Bush set the sanctions in motion, Clinton not only embraced them but used them as a tool of regime change. It is he who bears the lion’s share of responsibility for the death and suffering of countless Iraqis.

[Snake]

1 hour ago, revkevsdi said:

Mercans are dumb you could be right. They gave Bush a second term even after he lied about wmd’s. 

That's how hard dems sucked.

[ManOnManOral]

1 hour ago, revkevsdi said:

What year and make is your truck?

Mine is a 2019 freightliner, what do you have....let me guess.  

[revkevsdi]

21 minutes ago, XCR1250 said:

The Clinton administration’s fixation on weapons and its desire for regime change were clearly on display at a February 1998 town hall, where Secretary of State Madeleine Albright tried to sell the public on bombing Iraq. Albright was repeatedly interrupted by antiwar activists, and pressed about why the US was so keen on attacking Iraq when there were many other, similarly terrible dictators throughout the world.

Albright replied, “No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.” Albright then proceeded to lecture the audience, telling them “I’m really surprised that people feel they need to defend the rights of Saddam Hussein.”

Just a few years later, similar scenes, with different players, would be reprised in the buildup to the Bush administration’s invasion.

War By Other Means

Much as George W. Bush inherited his initial Iraq policy from Bill Clinton, Clinton inherited his from Bush’s father.

Following Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on Iraq in an attempt to force a withdrawal. Even after Hussein pulled out, however, the US, which had a veto on the Security Council, refused to allow the sanctions to be lifted.

Their new rationale was that the restrictions were needed to  disarm Iraq. Yet as early as 1992 the US knew Iraq had given up its weapons of mass destruction, and the sanctions remained. And that’s how Clinton wanted it to stay. In 1997 he declared, “the sanctions will be there until the end of time or as long as he [Hussein] lasts.”

The embargo was war by other means. It not only banned weapons of battle, but technologies that ostensibly had military and civilian uses — like pencils, which the sanctions regime said could be fashioned into bullets.

The effects of the sanctions were catastrophic. Iraq experienced shortages of food, medicine, and clean drinking water. And a 1995 Lancet study sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization concluded that 576,000 children under the age of five perished because of the policy, while a “conservative” estimate put the death toll for the same age group at 350,000.

Dennis Halliday, a thirty-four-year UN veteran, resigned from the organization in protest after spending a little over a year as the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq. He said the sanctions constituted genocide. His successor, Hans von Sponeck, also a career UN employee, lasted just two years before stepping down in protest; Jutta Burghardt, then head of the World Food Program, did the same.

Despite the mounting casualties and increasing scrutiny, the Clinton administration was unapologetic about its decision to punish Iraq “until the end of time.”

In a now-infamous 60 Minutes interview in May 1996, Leslie Stahl questioned Albright about the policy. “We have heard that a half million children have died,” the veteran journalist said. “I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Albright responded, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”

Albright’s emotionless defense was notably different from Clinton’s. During a lengthy, impromptu interview in 2000, Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman asked the president about the death toll and the resignation of dissenting UN officials.

Instead of justifying the “price,” Clinton simply denied the facts in question. He held that Saddam had the money to feed children in Iraq, but elected not to:

They [the two UN officials who had resigned] think that we should reward — Saddam Hussein says, “I’m going to starve my kids unless you let me buy nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and biological weapons. If you let me do everything I want to do, so I can get in a position to kill and intimidate people again, then I’ll stop starving my kids.”

Clinton’s determined parrying underscores the fact that while Bush set the sanctions in motion, Clinton not only embraced them but used them as a tool of regime change. It is he who bears the lion’s share of responsibility for the death and suffering of countless Iraqis.

How many US Soldiers and Iraqi citizens died in Iraq during Clinton’s time?  

How much was spent on the bombing of Saddams weapon factories?  

Compare that to the Republican response.

Now consider that Clinton bombing them worked. 

[revkevsdi]

20 minutes ago, Snake said:

That's how hard dems sucked.

Right. That was John Kerry. 

He actually served in Vietnam on swift boats.  No deferment, no bone spurs, no national guard service snorting coke off hookers titties. 

But there was that big question about his service record. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/service-mettle/

More false equivalency from Republicans. 

[Angry ginger]

1 hour ago, revkevsdi said:

Right. That was John Kerry. 

He actually served in Vietnam on swift boats.  No deferment, no bone spurs, no national guard service snorting coke off hookers titties. 

But there was that big question about his service record. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/service-mettle/

More false equivalency from Republicans. 

i am sure he's snorted much coke off hookers titties,

[revkevsdi]

1 hour ago, Angry ginger said:

i am sure he's snorted much coke off hookers titties,

Titties are distracting but I do find it amusing that Republicans would attack Kerry's war record based on innuendo but ignore Bush being posted to the National Guard, Cheney's deferments and Trump's Daddy buying him a get out of Vietnam card. 

If Republicans truly thanked veterans for their service they would not have let George Bush attack John McCain the way he did. 

[DriftBusta]

Just now, revkevsdi said:

Titties are distracting but I do find it amusing that Republicans would attack Kerry's war record based on innuendo but ignore Bush being posted to the National Guard, Cheney's deferments and Trump's Daddy buying him a get out of Vietnam card. 

If Republicans truly thanked veterans for their service they would not have let George Bush attack John McCain the way he did. 

Given the sheer number of career pols on both sides of the aisle, what is distracting is trying to single any particular president over it.  That said last Dem president that served was Carter, and I do consider military service an extra qualification for being a president.

[spin_dry]

3 hours ago, ManOnManOral said:

Mine is a 2019 freightliner, what do you have....let me guess.  

Look who’s trying to fit in. 

[steve from amherst]

That's not a minivan.

[revkevsdi]

3 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Given the sheer number of career pols on both sides of the aisle, what is distracting is trying to single any particular president over it.  That said last Dem president that served was Carter, and I do consider military service an extra qualification for being a president.

If you valued military service you could have voted for Gore.   " It's worth noting that the vast majority of Harvard's graduates found ways to avoid military service; in fact only about a dozen of the 1,115 people in his graduating class went on to serve. Family connections secured Gore a place in the National Guard, but he turned it down. He was concerned that if he passed up a spot in the Army, someone else would be forced to take his place."

The Republicans who claim to value military service could have backed  McCain.

Or they could have voted for Kerry. Then the last two out of 3 Dam Presidents would have served.  

But in the end Republicans are full of shit. They would back a Republican that shits on an opponents war record instead of supporting a veteran. 

[steve from amherst]

When Gore graduated in 1969, he immediately became eligible for the military draft. His father, a vocal anti–Vietnam War critic, was facing a reelection in 1970. Gore eventually decided that enlisting in the Army would be the best way that he could contribute to the anti-war effort. This would also improve his father's reelection prospects.^[32] Although nearly all of his Harvard classmates avoided the draft and service in Vietnam,^[33] Gore believed if he found a way around military service, he would be handing an issue to his father's Republican opponent.^[34] According to Gore's Senate biography, "He appeared in uniform in his father's campaign commercials, one of which ended with his father advising: 'Son, always love your country'."^[32] Despite this, Gore Sr. lost the election

[revkevsdi]

3 hours ago, ManOnManOral said:

Mine is a 2019 freightliner, what do you have....let me guess.  

Did you buy it just to get a handy from 550 at the truck stop?

[Zambroski]

3 hours ago, ManOnManOral said:

Mine is a 2019 freightliner, what do you have....let me guess.  

10 minutes ago, spin_dry said:

Look who’s trying to fit in. 

And doing very well at it!!!!  

 

[spin_dry]

1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

And doing very well at it!!!!  

 

Better that lamprey be attached to your boat.  

[revkevsdi]

5 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

When Gore graduated in 1969, he immediately became eligible for the military draft. His father, a vocal anti–Vietnam War critic, was facing a reelection in 1970. Gore eventually decided that enlisting in the Army would be the best way that he could contribute to the anti-war effort. This would also improve his father's reelection prospects.^[32] Although nearly all of his Harvard classmates avoided the draft and service in Vietnam,^[33] Gore believed if he found a way around military service, he would be handing an issue to his father's Republican opponent.^[34] According to Gore's Senate biography, "He appeared in uniform in his father's campaign commercials, one of which ended with his father advising: 'Son, always love your country'."^[32] Despite this, Gore Sr. lost the election

So even though they were against the war, Gore chose to help his family and his country.  Meanwhile Trump bought a Dr.'s note, Bush used family connections to "serve" in the national guard, Cheney got deferments. 

Thank you for your service, now we will use it against you.  Sincerely, Republican voters. 

[steve from amherst]

1 minute ago, revkevsdi said:

So even though they were against the war, Gore chose to help his family and his country.  Meanwhile Trump bought a Dr.'s note, Bush used family connections to "serve" in the national guard, Cheney got deferments. 

Thank you for your service, now we will use it against you.  Sincerely, Republican voters. 

You do realize he " served" as a journalist , right?

[revkevsdi]

3 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

And doing very well at it!!!!  

 

He ran interference to stop you from having to answer about your vehicle. 

It didn't work well for the last guy that white knighted for you.