+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Kyra Memorial Spin Room (/forum-540.html)
+---- Thread: Bill Clinton..... his admiration goes too.... (/thread-215368.html)
- Rebel - 03-07-2005 10:24 PM
[quote][b]Where is the country that Bill Clinton, a former president of the United States, feels ideologically most at home?
Before you answer, here is the condition that such a country must fulfill: It must hold several consecutive elections that produce 70 percent majorities for “liberals and progressives.
- blah - 03-08-2005 09:22 AM
Well, at least he didn't say Lenin or Stalin.......
He probably didn't want to steal his new buddy Dean's answer.
- Dogger - 03-08-2005 01:57 PM
It's called diplomacy. When trying to engage someone it is sometimes useful in pointing out common values. I gaurantee you it was well recieved in Iran. Do you neanderthals realize Iran held candle light vigils to the victim's of the 9-11. Do you think Iranian's love their children too? No one wins a nuclear war. We need to engage people who we don't always agree with instead of making them our enemy.
- Lethemeul - 03-08-2005 02:04 PM
Dogger Wrote:It's called diplomacy. When trying to engage someone it is sometimes useful in pointing out common values. I gaurantee you it was well recieved in Iran. Do you neanderthals realize Iran held candle light vigils to the victim's of the 9-11. Do you think Iranian's love their children too? No one wins a nuclear war. We need to engage people who we don't always agree with instead of making them our enemy.A) Last I checked, Billyboy wasn't in a position to negotiate jack with anybody. He's no longer an elected representative of the American people. What he was saying is the same thing the whacky left was saying in the '80's when they believed that a communist Nicaragua was Utopia
B) I'm not going to respond to the rest of that mamby-pamby, bleeding-heart mumbo jumbo.
- Dogger - 03-08-2005 02:21 PM
What was he negotiating?? He was just making them aware that not all Americans look at Iranians as an axis of evil.
- Ninerfan1 - 03-08-2005 02:29 PM
Quote: It's called diplomacy.
Quote:What was he negotiating??
That was Let's point.
- blah - 03-08-2005 02:56 PM
Dogger Wrote:It's called diplomacy. When trying to engage someone it is sometimes useful in pointing out common values. I gaurantee you it was well recieved in Iran. Do you neanderthals realize Iran held candle light vigils to the victim's of the 9-11. Do you think Iranian's love their children too? No one wins a nuclear war. We need to engage people who we don't always agree with instead of making them our enemy.Neanderthals? At least I can spell guarantee.
Do you really think Iranians were holding candlelight vigils for the victims of 9-11 or the terrorists. In case you forgot they serve the same god. allah, "the all powerful", every other believer is an infidel and must be killed or converted.
- gruehls - 03-08-2005 07:24 PM
Dogger Wrote:It's called diplomacy. When trying to engage someone it is sometimes useful in pointing out common values. I gaurantee you it was well recieved in Iran. Do you neanderthals realize Iran held candle light vigils to the victim's of the 9-11.
they held them for the "martyrs" driving the planes into the towers and the pentagon too.
Quote: Do you think Iranian's love their children too?
well, maybe half of them; the male half. i grabbed these at random and there are plenty more:
<a href='http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_2090.shtml' target='_blank'>Islam & Arab barbaric acts against women re-surface again </a>
<a href='http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/mhviran.htm' target='_blank'>Global Sexual Exploitation of Women and Girls</a>
<a href='http://www.homa.org/Details.asp?View=Detail&ContentID=2137352676&TOCID=2083225346' target='_blank'>A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. </a>
that may be your idea of "love your child," but it ain't mine.
Quote: No one wins a nuclear war. We need to engage people who we don't always agree with instead of making them our enemy.
some few of your posts trumpet your stupidity to the world at large.
there's only been one occasion of military delivery of nuclear weapons, in WWII, and we did indeed win the war at a great saving of lives for what i call the "good guys," though you might disagree.
and from a philosophical point of view, the "cold war" was a nuclear war, and we won that too, with better throw weights and precision and multiple independent re-entry vehicles, and hardened silos, and penetration ratios. mr. gorbachev didn't tear down the wall; the people of eastern europe who'd been caged like animals for decades did, with a little help from their friends.
from time to time dogger, your ignorance is amusing. when you start giving lectures about serious subjects about which you know nothing, the humor fades fast.
- Rebel - 03-08-2005 08:45 PM
The reason I said it was dangerous is because basically, you have a "former" leader of the free world admiring a dictatorship, I.e. validating that form of government. This steels the resolve of the mullahs. Also, apparently, Clinton doesn't mind a dictatorship so long as it's controlled by liberals or progressives.
Dogger also validated why Democrats aren't trusted with the defense of this nation. He makes excuses for a former president that admires, over his own, mind you, Iran.
- Dogger - 03-09-2005 07:36 AM
Many in that part of the world distrust us. I see no harm in saying some kind words. It is always better to have a dialogue. Under our present leadership N. Korea and maybe Iran have acquired nuclear weapons. Has our policy of isolation worked???? Clinton wasn't negotiating anything by the way. Even Democrats are allowed to express their thoughts from time to time.
- Lethemeul - 03-09-2005 08:19 AM
Dogger Wrote:Many in that part of the world distrust us. I see no harm in saying some kind words. It is always better to have a dialogue. Under our present leadership N. Korea and maybe Iran have acquired nuclear weapons. Has our policy of isolation worked???? Clinton wasn't negotiating anything by the way. Even Democrats are allowed to express their thoughts from time to time.The North Koreans didn't just wiggle their noses and *poof* become a nuclear power. As has been explained, to you especially, numerous times, it takes a very long time to develop working nukes. When it was learned that North Korea had nukes, GW had been president for a maximum of two years. Seems to me that Billary's policy of giving maniacal dictators whatever they want wasn't terribly successful either.
When I said that Billyboy wasn't in a 'position to negotiate', my point was that he was not trying to make nice-nice in an attempt to lessen tensions. He's a socialist whacko expressing his admiration for other socialist whackos..
- Ninerfan1 - 03-09-2005 09:28 AM
Dogger Wrote:Has our policy of isolation worked????Isolation?
:rolleyes:
- blah - 03-09-2005 11:04 AM
Ninerfan1 Wrote:Yeah, you know, being in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Germany does not count. Dogger thinks those are states, right like Puerto Rico? Maybe we should build a wall? Do you think China would show us how?Dogger Wrote:Has our policy of isolation worked????Isolation?
:rolleyes:
:stupid:
- Skipuno - 03-10-2005 09:07 PM
Just a couple of questions. How can you call people who want to roll civilization back a couple of centurys progressives? How come Bill loves these people who want to establish a world wide theorocratcy, but the left in this country dispises the religious right and fights tooth and nail for the seperation of church and state?
- Dogger - 03-11-2005 07:58 AM
Just a couple of questions.
We are trying our hardest for a seperation of church and state with the fledging democracy in Iraq? But the darned conservatives fight tooth and nail to keep violating our constitution.
Why does it seem that the govt's around the world who seem to be cooperating with President Bush are not democratic and the democracy's around the world mainly oppose him?
hmmmmmmmmm??????????
- blah - 03-11-2005 09:25 AM
Dogger Wrote:Just a couple of questions.Any proof on that statement?
We are trying our hardest for a seperation of church and state with the fledging democracy in Iraq? But the darned conservatives fight tooth and nail to keep violating our constitution.
Why does it seem that the govt's around the world who seem to be cooperating with President Bush are not democratic and the democracy's around the world mainly oppose him?
hmmmmmmmmm??????????
As I see it, just about everyone in the free world (outside the U.S.) has jumped on the G.W. bandwagon since the elections went off without a hitch.....
- Dogger - 03-11-2005 09:57 AM
jumping on the GW express??????????? who????
Google troop levels in Iraq and you will find articles about England cutting it's troops. You'll find Poland cutting their troops. What country is jumping on GW's bandwagon? You live in a fantasy world.
On a side note... I'm also glad to see that personal accounts are a non starter. Front page on msnbc. SS will not get a vote in the Senate this year or likely ever with personal accounts funded with SS money. Sounds like people jumping off the wagon to me.
- Dogger - 03-11-2005 10:06 AM
You guys need to stop the circle jerk and get into the real world. You support a simple minded man. When it comes to world affairs Bill Clinton played chess. Bush plays checkers. It's as simple as that. Then you don't have the ability to see why it's wise to charm one's adversaries. You criticize a great man when you don't see the brilliance behind it. One can see how C level thought supports a C level president. Most of you are just too ignorant to see the greatness of this man.
- blah - 03-11-2005 11:29 AM
Dogger Wrote:You guys need to stop the circle jerk and get into the real world. You support a simple minded man. When it comes to world affairs Bill Clinton played chess. Bush plays checkers. It's as simple as that. Then you don't have the ability to see why it's wise to charm one's adversaries. You criticize a great man when you don't see the brilliance behind it. One can see how C level thought supports a C level president. Most of you are just too ignorant to see the greatness of this man.I will go head to head with you anyday on intelligence, both book and street smarts. You name the subject. My resume speaks for itself.
As for Billary's intelligence, no one can question his book smarts, he was a Rhode's scholar. Unfortunately, he was always thinking with his little head instead of the one on his shoulders. :rolltide: :kobe: