Bill Clinton reveals he could run for Irish Presidency

gobnaitolunacy

jill_valentine wrote: »

We could hire Jeremy Clarkson to guard the airports, I suppose.

How hard can it be?

eth0

starbelgrade wrote: »

I was? :eek:

Sleepmurderin' again is it?

Didn't think anything was up when you found the kitchen knife covered in red stuff, the chainsaw blade coverd in the same and all your shotgun cartridges missing and none of your neighbours home but they all left the door open?

the_syco

Dravokivich wrote: »

Won't his missus be looking at running for the US presidency in the next few years again?

Descended from someone from Ireland? Pffft; ex-Irish President :pac:

2 stroke

Do we realy want his finger on the button?

Dr Turk Turkelton

2 stroke wrote: »

Do we realy want his finger on the button?

Monica did!!!

TwoTokeTommy

Zebra3 wrote: »

Which impressed you more?

The bombing of the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan which he ordered?

His bombing of innocent civilians in Belgrade?

The sanctions he imposed on Iraq that killed between 350,000-500,000 children?

Or was it the depleted uranium he ordered to be dropped in Iraq that caused a massive rise in the number of kids born with deformities?

Do tell.

BOOM!!! :eek:

Yes he surely was a man of peace.

Anyone see that documentary called The Clinton Chronicles? Detailing his supposed involvement in high level cocaine smuggling. Incredibly damning stuff if true.

Unlimited Bacon

BILL O'CLINTON

Zebra3

SamHarris wrote: »

FYI the US actions in Somalia is credited with saving up to 400,000,000 lives.

I've read some shyte on here, but that takes the biscuit.... :rolleyes:

Son Of A Vidic

Lumbo wrote: »

His record as President of America was questionable.

Throw in the sleaze and his incompetent foreign policy and you could argue he'd probably fit right in over here.

SamHarris

Zebra3 wrote: »

I've read some shyte on here, but that takes the biscuit.... :rolleyes:

From the official report.

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unosom2backgr2.html

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1] Millions of Somalis benefited from these activities and, at a minimum, an estimated quarter of a million lives were saved.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Ive heard as high as 500,000.

Damn Americans, when will they stop acting like the world police and just let those Somalian warbands starve the natives, its their damn county! Bill should hide his face in shame.

Im sure your detailed research into the famine and the effect of the massive aid distributed comes to different conclusions, if you could it would be nice to see it. :rolleyes:

Isnt it nice that we live in a world where people feel free to have a contrarion opinion about massively complex matters based on nothing?

Don't be scared to use google sometimes, you don't have to be ignorant about things you have a strong opinion on. In fact, this might shock you, usually it is best to inform yourself of at least the direct consequences of an action before developing that strong opinion. I hope you have the where-withall to at least be embarrassed.

It's also depressing that peoples Anti-Americanism has reached the levels where they would happily see 100'000's of thousands starve to death, just as long as the US doesnt get involved. As if any more demonstartions of their warped morality is needed

Son Of A Vidic

SamHarris wrote: »

From the official report.

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unosom2backgr2.html

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1] Millions of Somalis benefited from these activities and, at a minimum, an estimated quarter of a million lives were saved.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Ive heard as high as 500,000.

Damn Americans, when will they stop acting like the world police and just let those Somalian warbands starve the natives, its their damn county! Bill should hide his face in shame.

Im sure your detailed research into the famine and the effect of the massive aid distributed comes to different conclusions, if you could it would be nice to see it. :rolleyes:

Isnt it nice that we live in a world where people feel free to have a contrarion opinion about massively complex matters based on nothing?

Don't be scared to use google sometimes, you don't have to be ignorant about things you want to have a strong opinion on.

It's also depressing that peoples Anti-Americanism has reached the levels where they would happily see 100'000's of thousands starve to death, just as long as the US doesnt get involved. As if any more demonstartions of their warped morality is needed

How many do you think he saved in Rwanda?

SamHarris

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

How many do you think he saved in Rwanda?

Look back two posts. Thank you for demonstrating my point beautifully.

You might want to remove your thank on Zebras post, considering how clearly uninformed it was. It kind of gives the impression that, and this might be crazy, that you would dislike US intervention in one case (despite it saving those lives) but then condemn them for not doing it in another. The wonderful loops the anti-American crowd happily jump through in an effort to prove their actions or inactions are always maliscious and incorrect never cease to surprise.

FYI we would have seen a very similiar situation in Kosovo, according to all evidence, if the US didnt intervene there. But that they stopped it leaves them open to the accusation of attacking another country without the genocide begining so you could take that position if you'd like, its a tricky one.

We really need basic politics and critical thinking classes in our schools, hypocrisy is the byword for the vast majority of people with very strong opinions on this thing.

Son Of A Vidic

SamHarris wrote: »

Look back two posts. Thank you for demonstrating my point beautifully.

A blemish? I read what you posted, merely a blemish my arse. It was a holocaust and nothing less than a gross dereliction of duty, by the most powerful man on the planet at the time. Of course, if the Hutu militias were threatening any oilfields, we would have had much different outcome. Unfortunately for the Tutsis, Rwanda offered no strategic benefits to the US.

SamHarris wrote: »

You might want to remove your thank on Zebras post

Are you for real? Because I think I'll decide for myself which posts I'll thank. I suspect you just need to accept the fact, that I consider your analysis to be quite flawed.

SamHarris

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

A blemish? I read what you posted, merely a blemish my arse. It was a holocaust and nothing less than a gross dereliction of duty, by the most powerful man on the planet at the time. Of course, if the Hutu militias were threatening any oilfields, we would have had much different outcome. Unfortunately for the Tutsis, Rwanda offered no strategic benefits to the US.



Are you for real? Because I think I'll decide for myself which posts I'll thank. I suspect you just need to accept the fact, that I consider your analysis to be quite flawed.

Hardly more than a blemish - he intervened in many other disastorous situations and lessened their impact. No doubt it was a backlash from people like Zebra telling America to mind its own business which informed his descision not to get involved in another. Does it not strike you as odd that the first people to blame the US for inaction are often the most critical about its role as 'world policeman'?

Thats the nature of history and particularly the US' role in todays world. When its doing its job right there is nothing to talk about - no one will know how many thousands would have died in Kosovo, many dont care that 100's of thousands were saved in Somalia. Its only when something goes catastrophicaly wrong that anybody even notices what the US does or doesnt do. Any wrong is attached to its action or inaction. The enormous 'right' that occours fades from the history books.


I realise it must be pretty embarrassing for you that I could guess exactly where your opinion would meander to a day before it happened - dont be, its not really your fault.

Its just a matter of it knowing exactly what motivates a good proportion of peoples opinions on any major internaional matter (sometimes even social and economic) in a particular (Sadly large) group of people in this country. Here's a hint - it has nothing to do with morality or what is best for a particular group, thats just rhetoric.

Ah so now it is Bill's fault for not pushing for further interventions, not your original position that his intereventions were flawed, as implied by your thanking of Zebras patently incorrect post? What a surprise.

If the US had moved in and secured the massive depots of machettes no doubt your position would be that they had attacked a small African nation without provocation and removed weapons they legally aqcuired.

I have the distinct feeling you are not as effective at finding out which conflicts should be intervened in without 20/20 hindsight. Your probably right, Bill could no doubt have had a better presidency if his advisors had a time machine.

token101

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

Anyone see that documentary called The Clinton Chronicles? Detailing his supposed involvement in high level cocaine smuggling. Incredibly damning stuff if true.

So he's a cocaine smuggler too? :pac: Yeah I'm sure powerful Republicans were in on that as well. Take another toke there Tommy.

TwoTokeTommy

token101 wrote: »

So he's a cocaine smuggler too? :pac: Yeah I'm sure powerful Republicans were in on that as well. Take another toke there Tommy.

In fairness I said "supposed" and "if true". Just curious you know.

CIA involvement in drug smuggling has however been confirmed, the sheer extent is of course unknown.

And thanks for passing that doobie back this way, i'll gladly take another toke, Bill said he doesn't inhale... remember that? funny guy. :pac: