posted on March 3, 2007 02:44:29 PM new
Words from a man with good sense and reason.
Clinton doesn't support attack on Iran
By JOHN HANNA, Associated Press Writer Fri Mar 2, 10:47 PM ET
MANHATTAN, Kan. - Former President
Bill Clinton said Friday sanctions against
Iran were working better than people think and questioned whether a military strike would work to end its nuclear program. He argued that two-thirds of Iran's population wants a moderate government and that sanctions could have some influence on the nation's powerful clerics.
"We may not have to go to war, and we may not have a disaster," he told about 9,000 gathered at Kansas State University. "You need to talk to everybody before you bomb them. In other words, if you're going to fight with somebody — I don't care what you don't have in common — you should talk first."
The former president's comments answered audience questions following his 45-minute lecture. His remarks touched on a wide range of topics, including the need to improve health care and the economy in the United States and alleviate poverty abroad.
Officials from the United States and other major powers have been discussing imposing new sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. The
U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions in December, but the Bush administration hasn't ruled out military action.
"We should be talking to the Iranians," Clinton said. "Attacking them is a whole different kettle of fish."
He came to Kansas while his wife is campaigning, though he didn't mention her bid for his former job during his lecture.
Clinton questioned some of
President Bush's policies, though he didn't criticize Bush directly.
He said the No Child Left Behind education reform initiative imposed too much testing and didn't do enough to help schools with problems. He echoed other Democrats' statements that ending violence in
Iraq requires both a political and military solution.
He also cited a recent nuclear disarmament accord with
North Korea, saying: "I happen to think it's pretty good deal, and I was delighted to see it happen, but it was produced by diplomacy."
posted on March 3, 2007 02:53:53 PM new
Now, Kiara, you know that you-know-who will come in here screaming that talking doesn't work ...can't talk when your heads being cut off..war is so much better...they want to kill us all and you just don't get it TSK TSK TSK..Clinton did this and Clinton did that and he had sex and he's bad and bush is good and god and strong and will save the world through fear and death ...and you "dems' are nasty peace loving tree huggers and blah blah blah...
posted on March 3, 2007 04:02:46 PM new
And if he got paid for that talk there'll be lots of tsk tsk'ing about that too. Shame on Bill for pursuing the American dream.
posted on March 3, 2007 04:30:05 PM new
He is once case where I DO support term limits. Thank God for that.
Sure he's a 'talker'. He talked his way though FIVE ATTACKS on American soldiers and interests, embassies..etc. And then we experienced 9-11.
All his 'talking' sure didn't work one bit.
Guess liberals will NEVER learn from their mistakes.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 3, 2007 05:36:23 PM new
""He is once case where I DO support term limits. Thank God for that.""
I don't want to speak for you but I assume you meant one instead of once...and yea. YOU should be happy because he probably would still be serving as president!!!!!
And the war in Iraq goes on and on and on and on ....guess the neocons never learn from their mistakes.....but then THEY aren't paying the ultimate price....
posted on March 4, 2007 12:57:49 PM newAnd then we experienced 9-11.
Yep UNDER THE SHRUB'S WATCH !!!!!!
All his 'talking' sure didn't work one bit.
And all of Bush's military might, the Iraq War and his political posturing has not made us any safer today than were were on 9/10/01.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on March 4, 2007 01:06:20 PM new
I disagree totally.
The U.S. has arrested SEVERAL terrorist suspects and they were prevented from accomplishing their goals of destruction on American soil.
Doing nothing but sitting back and waiting until we are attack was clinton's MO.
And he did. For two years under HIS watch they planned and schemed....and then ACCOMPLISHED their goal that day.
It was clinton who DIDN'T act on the FIVE attacks that occurred during HIS watch.
I'm glad that changed.....and I hope whomever is elected president in '08 will ALWAYS work as hard as this President has to continue preventing attacks on our soil.
Even obama said bombing Iran would be 'on the table'....and so far...Iran hasn't attacked us.
Maybe he's lying...maybe he's not. He wants more talks first, as does THIS President. So they're pretty much in agreement on what MIGHT be necessary to do.
Whether obama is a coward like clinton was....only time will answer THAT question.
posted on March 4, 2007 06:18:02 PM new
Logan's dunce is wrong as usual. Clinton was too busy getting his rocks off when we were attacked under his watch. He is just like the typical Demomoron and would rather have the terrorists attack us time and time again.
Linda is correct. Bush has kept us from being attacked more than you will ever know.
.
.
.
"Unfortunately there are levels of Stupid that just can't be cured!!" The current Demomoron motto.
posted on March 5, 2007 09:57:09 AM newThe U.S. has arrested SEVERAL terrorist suspects and they were prevented from accomplishing their goals of destruction on American soil.
February 23, 2007
U.S Terrorism Arrests/Convictions Significantly Overstated
Interesting report (long, but at least read the Executive Summary) from the U.S. Department of Justice's Inspector General that says, basically, that all the U.S. terrorism statistics since 9/11 -- arrests, convictions, and so on -- have been grossly inflated.
As summarized in the following table, we determined that the FBI, EOUSA, and the Criminal Division did not accurately report 24 of the 26 statistics we reviewed.
"EOUSA" is the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, part of the U.S. Department of Justice.
The report gives a series of reasons why the statistics were so bad. Here's one:
The number of terrorism-related convictions was overstated because the FBI initially coded the investigative cases as terrorism-related when the cases were opened, but did not recode cases when no link to terrorism was established.
And here's an example of a problem:
For example, Operation Tarmac was a worksite enforcement operation launched in November 2001 at the nation’s airports. During this operation, Department and other federal agents went into regional airports and checked the immigration papers of airport workers. The agents then arrested any individuals who used falsified documents, such as social security numbers, drivers’ licenses, and other identification documents, to gain employment. EOUSA officials told us they believe these defendants are properly coded under the anti-terrorism program activity. We do not agree that law enforcement efforts such as these should be counted as "anti-terrorism" unless the subject or target is reasonably linked to terrorist activity.
There's an enormous amount of detail in the report, if you want to wade through the 80ish pages of report and another 80ish of appendices.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
Are YOU a Bunghole?