CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Here is a link to a short film that was VERY interesting concerning Iraq during Clintins term in office. www.republicanfilms.com http://www.republicanfilms.com/ oops. edit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Point? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Watch the film dipshit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted October 13, 2004 It refuses to load, oddly enough. What are they about? Iraq and their terror involvment? What Clinton did wrong? I have to say that's a really neat banner if ya like Clinton, though. All three of the banners look really neat. And, uh, I guess that's all the content I can bring without actually watching the film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Its mostly a quotefest of things Clinton said about wanting to get rid of Saddam, WMDs, etc. The novelty about it is that its very right-wing slanted yet with all the Clintons quotes shows him in this BIZARRE positive light. Not your typical conservative M.O. MMkay. I just thought it was really odd, and yet interesting. If you can get it to work, enjoy you right-wing nutjobs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 13, 2004 I repeat 'dipshit', point? You're just NOW discovering that Bush didn't just invent the current Iraq policy? You act as if you just unturned a stone.................... I don't think I'll be needing your consultation when I vote for GWB. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Just watch the film and shut the fuck up. I don't care who you vote for. The point is the the FILM is a twist on the perspective. I POV on the war isn't changed, because MY take on the war has NOTHING to do with WMDS. Pay attention and maybe you might learn something jailbait. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 13, 2004 OOOO, jailbait, I'm........................... ...............................still unimpressed Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Styles 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Um, I think you're missing the point (which is not uncommon from you). The whole point is a rebuttle to all the people that like to scream BUSH RUSHED TO WAR, IRAQ WAS BUSHES AGENDA FROM THE START, BLAH BLAH BLAH, to show that, hey, Bill Clinton had the EXACT same policy against Iraq, had the same intellgience, etc. Bush just took the initiative after 9/11 to do something about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Which just makes it odd that a staunch opposer of the Iraqi invasion would actually be the one to bring it up Since it doesn't really do HIM any favors.................... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Styles 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Which just makes it odd that a staunch opposer of the Iraqi invasion would actually be the one to bring it up Since it doesn't really do HIM any favors.................... It's because he doesn't get it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Kind of hard to take it objectively when there's a Bush/Cheney link present in the bottom frame at all times. EDIT: WAR PROFITEERING! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 14, 2004 But wait a minute, how are 911 images WAR PROFITEERING! Since neither are related right?~ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 I don't know where you got that idea. 9/11 is a part of the war on terror, which is (despite the President's spin) seperate from the War in Iraq. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Which just makes it odd that a staunch opposer of the Iraqi invasion would actually be the one to bring it up Since it doesn't really do HIM any favors.................... I'm not sure where you got the idea I was trying to do myself some kind of favor. I can only guess that your right-wing mind seeing ALL in black and white cannot understand that some one NOT for Bush doesn't mean they are FOR Kerry. In fact my post has nothing to do with the election. Paranoid? Even though the film does beat the viewer over the head with rhetoric and talking points the novelty of the republican slanted film piece that shows Bill Clinton in ANY sort of positive light is too sweet. Cuz, GODAMN they hated his ass! After all the talk of blow jobs, cumstains, and impeachments here is the right actually having to legitimize Clinton to support a point they are trying to make. Something greatone has chosen to ignore thus far. Which is fine by me. Since greatone has made this thread more about my beliefs than about my post let me clarify. I am against this war for these reasons. 1. The conflict of interest w/ Haliburton. Sorry, rightys. The fact that anyone would at least ASK about the involved parties and the connections between them is just stupid. But I guess it would be more patroitic of me to just assume they (Bush/Cheney/Haliburton) will play fair as an act of faith. Overcharging anyone? 2. No foreseeable exit strategy. You know, the REASON King George the 1st pulled back 13 years ago. Trying to mold a culture that we don't understand in our image will leave us with more enemies and in fighting than we can handle. When we DO LEAVE the job will remain undone and we will have made enemies of those over there who might have supported the US being there in the beginning but turned feeling abandoned. Sorta like in Afganistan after they fought our proxy war with the Soviets. 3. The lack of support for vets in post war conditions. Hell, lack of support while still in service! I've known too many vietnam vets in my time to simply ignore the fact that we have a really bad track record of taking care of our heroes once the fighting is over. Be it Gulf War Syndrome to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, to Agent Orange, you name it. Our defenders of FREEDOM get the shit end of the stick when we no longer need them. Well FUCK THAT! It takes more than a parade for us to truly give thanks. Isn't it great they work cheap? Pfft. Yes, I do think we were mislead. On purpose. Ok, fuck it call it lies. I never bought Clinton as a true liberal after passing NAFTA and GATT. If Bush and Clinton are in agreement about something I'm not surprised. A (corporate) puppeteer has two hands does he not? So I don't see how I am being contradictory. Then again, I don't see in just black and white. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Even though the film does beat the viewer over the head with rhetoric and talking points the novelty of the republican slanted film piece that shows Bill Clinton in ANY sort of positive light is too sweet. Cuz, GODAMN they hated his ass! After all the talk of blow jobs, cumstains, and impeachments here is the right actually having to legitimize Clinton to support a point they are trying to make. Something greatone has chosen to ignore thus far. Which is fine by me. Clinton being the one to preside over the policy towards Iraq doesn't necessarily show him in a positive light, especially after not actively doing anything with it--you do know of the petition (which was signed by John Kerry mind you) for the use of military force in Iraq similar to now, don't you? So they're highlighting that, yes the policy was the same. Clinton just happened to be there at the time, making him a mere byproduct. Yes, I do think we were mislead. On purpose. Ok, fuck it call it lies. I never bought Clinton as a true liberal after passing NAFTA and GATT. If Bush and Clinton are in agreement about something I'm not surprised. A (corporate) puppeteer has two hands does he not? So I don't see how I am being contradictory. Then again, I don't see in just black and white. I guess if you are under the assumption that Clinton was actually a Republican president then you aren't being contradictory. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CheesalaIsGood 0 Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Even though the film does beat the viewer over the head with rhetoric and talking points the novelty of the republican slanted film piece that shows Bill Clinton in ANY sort of positive light is too sweet. Cuz, GODAMN they hated his ass! After all the talk of blow jobs, cumstains, and impeachments here is the right actually having to legitimize Clinton to support a point they are trying to make. Something greatone has chosen to ignore thus far. Which is fine by me. Clinton being the one to preside over the policy towards Iraq doesn't necessarily show him in a positive light, especially after not actively doing anything with it--you do know of the petition (which was signed by John Kerry mind you) for the use of military force in Iraq similar to now, don't you? So they're highlighting that, yes the policy was the same. Clinton just happened to be there at the time, making him a mere byproduct. Yes, I do think we were mislead. On purpose. Ok, fuck it call it lies. I never bought Clinton as a true liberal after passing NAFTA and GATT. If Bush and Clinton are in agreement about something I'm not surprised. A (corporate) puppeteer has two hands does he not? So I don't see how I am being contradictory. Then again, I don't see in just black and white. I guess if you are under the assumption that Clinton was actually a Republican president then you aren't being contradictory. Being President of the United States is a mere byproduct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Considering that the treaties were in negotiations for YEARS before and were finished at the time Clinton took office, no, his impact on the treaties weren't much more than mere by-products. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted October 14, 2004 Being President of the United States is a mere byproduct? That he was president, no. That he was a Democrat, yes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
