One hopes “let’s wait for a natural disaster to kill him!” isn’t actually President Bush’s plan.
(sniff) Thank you, exalted one.
Do you grade on the Yale curve, or the Harvard curve?
Clothahump
Those of us who think Bush has done okay in office simply snicker at threads like these.
Oh, so I guess some SDMB members would have to be Laura, Jeb, Bush Sr, Barbara and Michael Brown?
Yes, “Dubya’s” years in the Oval Office have been a spectacular showpiece of presidential productivity.
Less than a year in office and we had the worst terrorist attack on US soil.
But he was so decisive and authoritative when he did ???
or how about when he said ???
Or how about his pledge that Osama Bin Laden can run but cannot hide? Hey, have a little patience - it’s only been four fucking years. Have a little patience. Stay the course.
Agreed. I’m glad to see the lightbulb has now come on for you.
Though given that we also nailed it that there wasn’t any actual WMD threat at all, and that they were a cynical attempt by the Bush administration to scare us into a war, frankly you could have caught on a little quicker. But anyhow, better late than never. Welcome aboard.
My bullshit meter pegged a while ago too.
But where is Osama - Pakistan. Why don’t we go in there and get them. Because Pakistan has a nuclear bomb and really, really wants to see how it works against India. And India doesn’t have a lot of qualms against firing one into Pakistan either.
Throw Pakistan into a war, and it isn’t going to be Afganistan. It will make Iraq look like a game of Chutes and Ladders.
Wasn’t this **Bricker’**s schtick?
I got five bucks says we won’t have to wait until next month for the 2,000th U.S. soldier death.
But I’d hope you’d win it.
Well, if he doesn’t really care where he is. 
I don’t see the connection between Pakistan’s nukes and our not sending soldiers into the large region where we think Bin Laden is hiding.
You don’t?
Basically, its taken a hell of a lot of diplomacy over the past decade or two (or three) to keep Pakistan and India from blowing each other up. We’ve been able to do that by playing middleman and greasing both sides. We go into Pakistan, they won’t be happy. We lose our ability to keep them out of India. Possibly more importantly, we lose the ability to keep India out of Pakistan. Basically, if we go in, we go in against their wishes, we have another war. And if the government of Pakistan doesn’t go to war against us for going in, they won’t be the government of Pakistan very long - the whole country is a powder keg being held together with duct tape and twine. If India goes into Pakistan, the big risk is the Muslim world will come to Pakistan’s defense…A lot of people think that might be the start of WWIII.
Besides the whole, civilians getting nuked isn’t nice thing, nor is kicking off a World War…
When Pakistan goes into India (or India into Pakistan), the billions of dollars U.S. international companies have tied up in India at places like Wipro, in call centers, in engineering centers becomes at risk. Billions, probably trillions of dollars of capital goes up in smoke. Making the stock market tank, the U.S. economy weaker, and U.S. companies unhappy.
So Osama sits, isolated as we and Pakistan can make him, in a village on the Afgan/Pakistan boarder while we wait for an old man to die. Because the cost-benefit for going after one guy isn’t worth the risk. The Bush administration may not be the best at foreign relations, but I think they’ve called this one right.
I find it hard to be sporting on things I’d hope to be wrong about. Why don’t I change “predict” to “I wouldn’t be surprised”.
What worries me is that we don’t really have a choice but to believe those in power (Bush, Bloomberg, anyone LEFT or RIGHT) when they announce a terror warning or thwarting. First off, they don’t have to tell us specifics because they can claim classification, so we simply have to take their word. I don’t like this at all. Second, they can take any crazy plot, one off the napkin of a dude in a nuthouse and claim we’re at risk. This essentially gives them an unlimited amount of plots that they can “warn” us against at anytime. Something bad going on we need to deflect publicity from? Let’s tell them plot#1056, the guy that does…
Now I’m not getting into tinfoil hat territory, but I believe the truth to lie somewhere between what is being whispered in each ear. I don’t think there is an outright conspiracy, but I’m quite concerned that realities are being subtly manipulated in order to exert some type of control. The track record of those in charge doesn’t really help. Imagine all the shit going on that we don’t know about. :eek:
Correct. And please don’t tell me that you are trying to lay the blame for 9/11 on him. If you are, then send me your address and I’ll mail you $20 so you can get the word STUPID tattooed on your forehead.
Er, as far as I know, nobody sane imagines that Bush was in any way directly responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
But they certainly don’t constitute any kind of tribute to his ability to protect the country. Especially since his Administration took some actions in the previous months that neglected or downplayed federal scrutiny of terrorism threats.
I don’t blame Bush for the fact that a hurricane hit New Orleans, either, but I think he’s certainly partly responsible for the lack of preparedness that made its consequences worse. Same goes for 9/11.
Doesn’t sound like enough money. Can you show us the receipt from yours?
He says it’s a birthmark.
Well, we know it’s not the mark of McCain.
Considering Clothahump’s terminal lack of foresight and intelligence I’m guessing it says something like ‘STUP-’ because he ran out of room.
Or he believed some huckster standing there on the Midway at the County Fair who assured him it was only $20 even though the sign next to the door said ‘$30’.
-Joe
I saw a plug for one of the Wednesday night MSNBC programs that will be about the coincidence of terror alerts with news that is unfavorable to the political party in power. (I hope I am interpreting what I saw correctly.) I assume that the program will cover more than one Presidency.
I may be mistaken, but I think perhaps it may be Keith Olbermann’s program that is doing this.
Something was mentioned about 13 incidents.
Clothahump, thanks for your very civil and honest response to my teasing.
More bullshit.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/11/alqaeda.letter/index.html
Shit, looks like we better stay the course or the terrorists will win! :rolleyes:
…