Respect for Clinton!
 

For this I respect Bill Clinton:

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...5605-6954r.htm


He was planning to use atomic weapons against North Korea!

It appears from the number of bombs, he may have considered using low yield
atomic weapons to clear away the brush to get at the Communists. Right from
the Goldwater playbook!

Hoo-Yaa!

Gilligan

A vote for Bush is a vote for Bin Laden.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
link.net...
For this I respect Bill Clinton:

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...5605-6954r.htm


He was planning to use atomic weapons against North Korea!

It appears from the number of bombs, he may have considered using low
yield
atomic weapons to clear away the brush to get at the Communists. Right
from
the Goldwater playbook!

Hoo-Yaa!

Gilligan

And black is white, right is wrong, and Ganz is truth.

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
A vote for Bush is a vote for Bin Laden.


Wake up, DD. Bush let Bin Laden go free along with his whole family. ALL flown
out of the country after 9/11. Bush "claims" they were questioned, but how much
questioning could have been done in such a short time.
You believe Bush tried to catch Bin Laden? I have a bridge to sell you. Scotty
already owns half.

RB

"Gilligan" wrote
For this I respect Bill Clinton:
He was planning to use atomic weapons against North Korea!

Sneaky blighter, what? Killed the dudes who bombed Cole too, whithout
killing any Americans or invading and foreign countries. In fact it was the
intel structure Clinton set up that gave us an easy win against the Taliban.

Now Bush is destroying the *moderate* Sunni ability to resist the *radical*
anti-US Shiite Muslims so the government the latter install next year can
get into bed with Al Qaeda without any internal squabbling. New
definitions:

To clinton: To screw up - like get a BJ and get caught.
To bush out: To REALLY blunder - like get drunk, roll your SUV and kill your
kids.

Actually it was Goldwater's opponent Lyndon B. for Butcher Johnson who
started a war causing the death of 60,000 US Soldiers for nothing. But then
it was Clinton who preached for eight years that US Soldiers ARE nothing.
And it was John Boy Kerry who paid the price. Paybacks truely are a
m..........................r! No way I'd believe Clinton would push the
button for something as meaningless as N. Korea. Unless of course they were
wearing purple dresses.

M.



"Gilligan" wrote in message
link.net...
For this I respect Bill Clinton:

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...5605-6954r.htm


He was planning to use atomic weapons against North Korea!

It appears from the number of bombs, he may have considered using low
yield
atomic weapons to clear away the brush to get at the Communists. Right
from
the Goldwater playbook!

Hoo-Yaa!

Gilligan

Well, you're crowd believes that the Earth is only 6000 years old, so I'm
not surprised.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Michael" wrote in message
...
Actually it was Goldwater's opponent Lyndon B. for Butcher Johnson who
started a war causing the death of 60,000 US Soldiers for nothing. But
then it was Clinton who preached for eight years that US Soldiers ARE
nothing. And it was John Boy Kerry who paid the price. Paybacks truely
are a m..........................r! No way I'd believe Clinton would push
the button for something as meaningless as N. Korea. Unless of course
they were wearing purple dresses.

M.



"Gilligan" wrote in message
link.net...
For this I respect Bill Clinton:

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breakin...5605-6954r.htm


He was planning to use atomic weapons against North Korea!

It appears from the number of bombs, he may have considered using low
yield
atomic weapons to clear away the brush to get at the Communists. Right
from
the Goldwater playbook!

Hoo-Yaa!

Gilligan

No doubt. It was Clinton.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:15:08 -0600, "Michael"
said:

Actually it was Goldwater's opponent Lyndon B. for Butcher Johnson who
started a war causing the death of 60,000 US Soldiers for nothing.

There's a man who doesn't know his history.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

No doubt. It was Clinton.

It was you, you old fart.

Max

Here's a man who doesn't know his history.

Depending on how you define it, that would include everybody.

So, Oz, you also think Johnson started the Vietnam war?


OzOne wrote:
Nope, AFAIK Johnson DID start the war.

Kennedy had about 16,000 military advisors in Vietnam when he was
assasinated.

Check.

Johnson ordered a retaliatory attack after torpedo boats attacked the
Ticonderoga, and two other US vessels, the names of which escape me
atm, while they were providing radar tracking for Sth Viet forces and
on station in the Tonkin.
The war progressed rapidly from that point in August '64.

The Gulf of Tonkin incident was the political excuse that LBJ used to
get Congressional support for "widening" the war. The shooting was
already going on, and US main force ground units were already in place &
committed... the question is: on what scale, with what objective, under
what rules of engagement, and (perhaps the paramount question) under
what conditions would they be pulled out.

You could make the case that Kennedy started the war by sending in U.S.
airborn forces to protect the "military instructors" we had working with
the South Vietnamese army. Then of course Kennedy had to send in real
grunts to protect the aircraft.

You could make the case that Eisenhower started the war by sending in
those "military instructors" and you could further that case against
Eisenhower by pointing out that S.E.A.T.O. was formed by his
administration with his explicit approval (the Dulles boys did a lot
behind his back, but not this one).

You could make the case that Truman started the war by committing U.S.
policy to supporting the French re-occupation of Viet Nam; and further
that case by pointing out that he sent a lot of military aid to the
French including U.S. air support, although that air support was always
based outside the country AFAIK.

You could make the case that Louis XIV started the war by giving up
French colonial possessions to the British; then turning around and
encouraging French free-style capitalists & Catholic missionaries to go
out and seek new colonies to exploit & convert, which is what led them
to the shores of what is now Viet Nam.


There were actually some secret bombing raids under Pres Johnson prior
to that, flown by US military pilots in old US aircraft, but these did
not amount to a commitment to war.

That didn't come until Jan '65 then Feb '65 when the US launched its
first bombing strikes but without any official declaration of war.
IIRC Johnson said something like "I've had enough of this crap" before
ordering the attack.

March '65 saw two battalions of marines move in and Rolling Thunder
kicked off.

Yep... and let the historic record show that the Marines were very
optimistic at the time because the landings were almost completely
unopposed, a novelty for them.

DSK

OzOne wrote in message

Nope, AFAIK Johnson DID start the war.

Are you referring to *America entering the war?* The French had been there
for some time before we got involved. It was already a shooting conflict by
the time JFK sent "advisors" to Vietnam.

Max