If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without health
insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can rise
and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples of
those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't fight
the war on terrorism with paper.




OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on the
US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks. Can
you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being attacked?

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

On Jan 16, 11:29*am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message

. ..





wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without health
insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can rise
and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples of
those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't fight
the war on terrorism with paper.

OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on the
US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks. Can
you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being attacked?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

1. Because he believes Bush can do no wrong because he's a Republican
2. Rush said so
3. Hannity said so.

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

wrote in message
...
On Jan 16, 11:29 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message

. ..





wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health
insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise
and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples of
those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight
the war on terrorism with paper.

OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on
the
US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks.
Can
you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being attacked?-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

1. Because he believes Bush can do no wrong because he's a Republican
2. Rush said so
3. Hannity said so.
=======================


Actually, there *were* some measures that may have prevented the attacks,
but I need to know which ones Bert is referring to.

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.

The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without health
insurance, incredible national debt.

And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.


Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something
else.

What a stupid statement.


OK - maybe you're right. Why do you think it's a stupid statement? I've
spoken at length to 5 observers. They each attribute the lack of attacks to
a different aspect of our efforts against terrorists.

Why do you think it's a stupid statement?

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples
of those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight the war on terrorism with paper.




OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on
the US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks.
Can you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being
attacked?


According to You and Harry, 9/11 happened because of Bush as hit happened on
his watch. Conversely, since no attacks on US soil have succeeded durings
Bush's watch since 9/11. Bush is the reason we have been safe. Fill in
your rant he

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:14:53 -0500, BAR wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health
insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something
else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war on
terror".
That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that you feel
have
prevented an attack on U.S. soil.


The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples
of those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight the war on terrorism with paper.


The notion of a "war on terror" is laughable. I have news for you. You
can't possibly win it by use of force.



Probably the only way to win is via force. Extreme Force. If a family
sends one of their own as an attacker, kill the complete family. May not be
PC, but the message will get through very quickly.

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples
of those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight the war on terrorism with paper.




OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on
the US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks.
Can you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being
attacked?


According to You and Harry, 9/11 happened because of Bush as hit happened
on his watch. Conversely, since no attacks on US soil have succeeded
durings Bush's watch since 9/11. Bush is the reason we have been safe.
Fill in your rant he


You're not making any sense because you're not trying. Attacks were not
prevented by the attack on two buildings in Manhattan. Feel free to keep
trying.

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples
of those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight the war on terrorism with paper.




OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on
the US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks.
Can you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being
attacked?


According to You and Harry, 9/11 happened because of Bush as hit happened
on his watch. Conversely, since no attacks on US soil have succeeded
durings Bush's watch since 9/11. Bush is the reason we have been safe.
Fill in your rant he



And by the way, I never said 9/11 happened because of Bush. If you disagree,
please find one example which proves your point. Copy & paste the text in
your next response. Good luck.

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:54:00 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:09:05 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
have lost touch with America, read this.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7888.html

Unbelievable.
The Bush legacy includes 9-11, the Katrina aftermath, torture,
secret energy policies, Halliburton, signing statements, Gonzales,
no WMDs, Blackwater, 4,000 US troops dead, tens of thousands
seriously
wounded or ill, recession, housing meltdown, 40 million without
health insurance, incredible national debt.
And not one successful attack on the US by Followers of Islam.

Every observer of recent history attributes the lack of attacks to
something else. What do YOU attribute it to? Please don't say "the war
on terror". That's too general. Please offer 2-3 specific actions that
you feel have prevented an attack on U.S. soil.

The war on terror is a global war. Not having an attack on US soil for
a period of time is pretty much meaningless. You haven't eliminated or
even subtantially reduced risk to US soil until you have eliminated
terrorism worldwide. If you claim that's not the mission, or that that
is not possible, then you are stating that the war on terror is
unwinnable. If you want to be picky, and only think you need to worry
specifically about Americans, their are thousands of American citizens
all over the world who are also at risk from terrorists.

The war on terrorism is not winnable. Terrorism by its own nature can
rise and fall as the clouds go by. What you have to do is make examples
of those who become terrorists. Summary executions will help. You can't
fight the war on terrorism with paper.




OK. But, you said the Bush legacy includes not one successful attack on
the US by followers of Islam.

This positive thing didn't happen just because Bush is the president. You
need to connect it with physical measures taken to prevent the attacks.
Can you name 2-3 measures which you believe prevented us from being
attacked?


According to You and Harry, 9/11 happened because of Bush as hit happened on
his watch. Conversely, since no attacks on US soil have succeeded durings
Bush's watch since 9/11. Bush is the reason we have been safe. Fill in
your rant he


They can easily counter that argument, to wit: 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

Hah! You lost that one.
--
John H

If you don't believe that Democrats...
 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:55:56 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


Probably the only way to win is via force. Extreme Force. If a family
sends one of their own as an attacker, kill the complete family. May not be
PC, but the message will get through very quickly.

Worked for the Russians in Lebanon.