In this article former Clinton advisor Robert Shapiro predicts that only a terrorist attack will save Barack Obama's presidency. I remember a fellow by the name of Bush that had the same boost when 9/11 happened. Nah, must be a coincidence http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=9682
Former Clinton Advisor says only a terrorist attack will save Obama
- Thread starter Shakerod
- Start date
I just can't sugarcoat it, shaky, are you daft? 9/11 happened only 8 months after Bush took office. How did that help him when his next election was over 3 years away, and he was still in the honeymoon phase of his presidency.
I know your thoughts on 9/11 as misguided as they may be, and that you hate the US totally, but at least think about what you write before you start typing. Are you trying to reach the heights of silky.
Hey Zaig nice to hear from you again! I guess going from 45 to over 80 percent in a few months is in your book not a boost.
Anti-America? Far from it, I was born in the U.S. and have many relatives there. I love America, at least the America that was the home of the free and the land of the brave, but is no more. Next time you respond to my post please have something intelligent to say.
In tym of war people always a mayk support for their leeder even if he mooron
There's the secret for getting rid of your red rep dot. You am boss, you start war, people make support for you, you have green dot.
methodman he seemilar to gorg boosh. methodman he moron lyk boosh he eediot lyk boosh he make a the peoples angree lyk boosh an then he mayk war ing lyk boosh but the peoples they mayk keep read post of methodman. an he not get banny ban becoz he steel having fanny fan.There's the secret for getting rid of your red rep dot. You am boss, you start war, people make support for you, you have green dot.
methodman he only want red not green an he want to see what happen eef he get a mynuts 100. methodman he now he have now mynuts 87.
An uncle g it not "you am boss" it "you are boss"
in a my country CCCP boosh it mean ummm how a you say ummm when a hair when not a shave down below an barbara it mean to eat so when a you say barabara boosh you no it a mean to eat hair when a not shave down below haha this very funny in a my country
we mayk jok in a my country on a barabara boosh. an gorg it a mean to mayk shayv when mon key he mayk watchy watch
we mayk jok in a my country on a barabara boosh. an gorg it a mean to mayk shayv when mon key he mayk watchy watch
yes you very strong man do yoo no what a they say to very strong man it a mean that he have very beeg khrum high five!
A terrorist attack would result in a republican being elected president.
no way they'd keep democrats in power if they WANTED to be at war.
no way they'd keep democrats in power if they WANTED to be at war.
yoo very nayeev man
democrat an re pube lickin they get fundee fund from same peoples for elecshin. they mayk run by same boss an it not methodman it corporashun who mayk fundee fund an support lyk jock strap
Democrat they mayk war tooo
JFK he make extra commitment of soldier mans to vietnam to escalate problem US not even attacked
Woody row wilsons he mayk declare war on German to mayk begin ww 1
Frank loins RoseI felt he make declare war on a the Japan
Harry testes Trumans he mayk declare war on korean peoples even tho korea peoples they very good at tai kwon do
Bill clinton he lyk blow job very mutsh but he mayk tym to make war on iraqi it call operation dessert fox he mayk bombee bomb from plane an he mayk kill many peoples
an many mor
war is goood for Usa even if democrat becoz war it mayk the moneys for cumpayny who lyk war an so government they lyk war to mayk moneys to an they make teem
those who control the money supply make all the decisions.
last i checked the government wasn't it.
Iran is an enormous threat to all western democracies as well as to a number of mideastern countries. Its intent to establish a nuclear weapons arsenal which could be used against its neighbours is frightening. Ahmadinejad makes no bones about it; he has, on several occasions, threatened the very existence of the State of Israel. In addition, Iran backs several terrorist movements including Hezbollah and Hamas and perhaps even al-Queda. Syria provides Iran with a venue for arms transfers. There appears to be a growing relationship between Turkey, given Turkey's ever diminishing secular influence, and Iran. In the meanwhile, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia plus several of the Emirates are fearful of Iran's intentions and with good reason. These countries would likely back the USA in any incursion on Iran and would secretly back Israel were Israel to attack although they would publicly condemn Israel. With the addition of nuclear arms, all European countries could be hit by Iran.
I hardly have to detail the lack of civil rights in Iran. It is a country run by a combination of the Ayatollahs, the Republican Guard and the secular government of Ahmadinejad. Opposition to the ruling powers results in imprisonment and possible execution. Rulers of Iran have been brutal in their punishment of opposition figures. Women lack civil rights. Right now there are several women imprisoned for (allegedly) having affairs while married. The penalty is stoning to death where the woman is buried up to her waist in an open pit under the brutal sun and then being hit by large jagged stones thrown by the mob surrounding her. The international community is currently attempting to prevent such a public means of execution. So far, no definite response has been made on the part of the government of Iran.
Were the USA to strategically intervene, there would be many Iranians currently part of the opposition who would rise up to help overthrow the powerful Iranian establishment. Revolution in Iran has occurred before (Shah overthrown). Were O'Bama to attack Iran and remove from Iran its sinister nuclear capability threat, he would probably regain the confidence of many Americans who currently view him as an appeaser to the threat of Islamofascism. There are three nuclear outfitted American ships in the Gulf as well as one German and one Israeli ship so it is obvious that America is getting "attack ready". There is also rumour of an "understanding" between Israel and Saudi Arabia re crossover flights and a landing spot for Israeli aircraft. The USA already has a base in Saudi Arabia. I do not forsee the status quo lasting much longer.
I hardly have to detail the lack of civil rights in Iran. It is a country run by a combination of the Ayatollahs, the Republican Guard and the secular government of Ahmadinejad. Opposition to the ruling powers results in imprisonment and possible execution. Rulers of Iran have been brutal in their punishment of opposition figures. Women lack civil rights. Right now there are several women imprisoned for (allegedly) having affairs while married. The penalty is stoning to death where the woman is buried up to her waist in an open pit under the brutal sun and then being hit by large jagged stones thrown by the mob surrounding her. The international community is currently attempting to prevent such a public means of execution. So far, no definite response has been made on the part of the government of Iran.
Were the USA to strategically intervene, there would be many Iranians currently part of the opposition who would rise up to help overthrow the powerful Iranian establishment. Revolution in Iran has occurred before (Shah overthrown). Were O'Bama to attack Iran and remove from Iran its sinister nuclear capability threat, he would probably regain the confidence of many Americans who currently view him as an appeaser to the threat of Islamofascism. There are three nuclear outfitted American ships in the Gulf as well as one German and one Israeli ship so it is obvious that America is getting "attack ready". There is also rumour of an "understanding" between Israel and Saudi Arabia re crossover flights and a landing spot for Israeli aircraft. The USA already has a base in Saudi Arabia. I do not forsee the status quo lasting much longer.
Last edited:
So let me get this straight your justification for bombing Iranian women and children is because Iranian women are being treated bad. Of course, that makes perfect sense.
H
HubbaHubba
I never indicated that I was in favour of the nuclear option vis a vis Iran although I did present how that option is now within the realm of possibility. I think both Shakerod and Hubba Hubba have made conclusions based on an incorrect analysis of my description of the external and internal perils of the current regime in Iran. Both of their replies are what might otherwise be defined under the rubric of "yellow journalism". They have taken my presentation out of context to suit their own opinions and initiatives. And, incidentally, what concerns, if any, do either of them possess for the deplorable state of the citizenry of Iran, especially its female population? I just thought they might like to let the rest of us know.
Last edited:
