Do people remember Clinton Era?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Byrdie714 said:
Wasn't the leader of Serbia arrested?

Wasn't the leader of Panama arrested?
Click to expand...
If you mean Radovan Karadzic, he was the former leader at the time he was arrested; he wasn't in office at the time.
Bosnian Serb war crime suspect Radovan Karadzic arrested - 22 Jul 2008 - NZ Herald: International and World News

Do you mean Manuel Noriega? He was arrested as part of an armed invasion. That wasn't the police going up to his door and serving a warrant.

"Noriega, arrested by U.S. troops after the 1989 invasion of Panama...."
Booming Panama moved on from Noriega dark days | International | Reuters

That supports my statement that one country can't just "arrest" the current leader of another country by sending cops to the door. Taking another country's leader into custody can be done only thru military action, which is what we did in Iraq.
 
Hear Again said:
At least Truman didn't get us into a war we couldn't get out of -- unlike George W. Bush.
Click to expand...
The active fighting ended in 1953, but technically, the Korean War has not ended. That's why America troops have been stationed in South Korea since then.

"The two Koreas, divided since 1945, are still technically in a state of war as the Korean War ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty."

2ND LD: Bush eyes formal end to Korean War if N. Korea denuclearizes | Asian Political News | Find Articles at BNET
 
What is the topic of this thread?

Oh, yeah, Clinton's era.
 
Reba said:
The active fighting ended in 1953, but technically, the Korean War has not ended. That's why America troops have been stationed in South Korea since then.

"The two Koreas, divided since 1945, are still technically in a state of war as the Korean War ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty."

2ND LD: Bush eyes formal end to Korean War if N. Korea denuclearizes | Asian Political News | Find Articles at BNET
Click to expand...

If that's true, why doesn't Bush think it's important enough to end the war? Oh, that's right. He's too busy focusing on Iraq.
 
Hear Again said:
If that's true, why doesn't Bush think it's important enough to end the war? Oh, that's right. He's too busy focusing on Iraq.
Click to expand...
He does want to end it:

"U.S. President George W. Bush said Friday the United States would be willing to conclude a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War if North Korea scraps its nuclear programs."
 
Reba said:
He does want to end it:

"U.S. President George W. Bush said Friday the United States would be willing to conclude a peace treaty to formally end the Korean War if North Korea scraps its nuclear programs."
Click to expand...

The key word being "if."
 
Hear Again said:
If that's true, why doesn't Bush think it's important enough to end the war? Oh, that's right. He's too busy focusing on Iraq.
Click to expand...

Bush is an oil business man..., no wonder why he focus Iraq.
 
Reba said:
"Arrest?" How does one "arrest" the leader of another country? Send in Dog the Bounty Hunter with a warrant? Get real.
Click to expand...

Can you explain us why Bush´s father send troops to Gulf War if Saddam is not reason?
 
Hear Again said:
One cannot talk about the Clinton era without discussing Presidents past and present.
Click to expand...

But not future presidents? Unless your views on them are favorable.

Otherwise all Democrats get really offended.

I was against Bush going to war but I was told to mind my own buisness because I am not american. Now I am against Obama for other reasons. I'm also been told to mind my own busness because I am not american but I notice nobody said that to Leibing and she isn't american either.
 
dreama said:
But not future presidents? Unless your views on them are favorable.

Otherwise all Democrats get really offended.

I was against Bush going to war but I was told to mind my own buisness because I am not american. Now I am against Obama for other reasons. I'm also been told to mind my own busness because I am not american but I notice nobody said that to Leibing and she isn't american either.
Click to expand...

I thought we've been discussing Obama and McCain (future Presidents) in various threads here on AD, no? I know I've been talking an awful lot about Obama as well as expressing all of the reasons why I don't support McCain.

All Democrats get offended if a person's views about Obama are unfavorable? That's interesting because from all of the threads I've read here on AD, every Democrat has backed up their position with facts (although I admit that I'm gullty of doing alot of name calling against John McCain, Sarah Palin and Cindy McCain).

If you take a closer look at the other side, you'll see how Republicans get easily offended. Whenever someone attacks McCain or Palin, they start getting all defensive by calling Obama a Muslim, bringing up William Ayers, claiming that Obama will raise taxes on those making $42,000/year and calling Obama a socialist.

If I remember correctly, your primary reason for being against Obama is because of his stance on partial birth abortion. Based on some of the posts I've read here on AD, other Democrats (including myself) have told you that there are more immediate issues America needs to be concerned with (the economy, jobs, healthcare).

I've also seen posts where some American ADers have told you to mind your own business because you live in Europe. That's inexcuseable, IMO because you have every right (just like Liebling and the rest of us) to express your opinion. I hope you won't let those ADers discourage you from sharing your viewpoint because although I may not always agree with what you have to say, I do find it interesting to read other points of view -- especially from those who live across the pond.
 
Jiro said:
??? I'm talking about between Jillio and I. We have a fundamentally different view on it.
Click to expand...

To be honest, Jiro, you have absolutely no idea what my position on gun rights is. You have assumed, but you have also assumed incorrectly.
 
jillio said:
To be honest, Jiro, you have absolutely no idea what my position on gun rights is. You have assumed, but you have also assumed incorrectly.
Click to expand...

actually no - based on that gun thread while back - we both have fundamentally different view on it. Even though you do not support gun ban, you support a restrictive type. Not me. My view on gun rights is 100% McCain and 0% Obama and 0% Clinton. Your view is opposite of that.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
Can you explain us why Bush´s father send troops to Gulf War if Saddam is not reason?
Click to expand...

Because Iraq invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia asked us for help. This Iraqi invasion was condemned by the world. What do you propose? sit and do nothing? Yea typical of European's stance. They let us do their dirty work and still criticize us. :roll:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top