Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Southwest Ties

  • Thread starter Thread starter waka
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 18

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
VSI9k+ said:
Atleast he doesn't get his hair cut while sitting in AF1, while sitting on the ramp of a busy airport, while closing down all traffic at a major airport. And...perhaps if Clinton didnt get his hummer...he would not have needed to divert the American public's attention to Somalia, Bosnia and Yugoslovia. So, I guess a few good people did die when Clinton lied.

that haircut closing down a "busy" LAX is a myth, by the way

divert public attention to Somalia, Bosnia, and Yugoslavia? First of all, Somalia was Bush Srs nonsense, Clinton inherited it. Secondly, Bosnia and Yugoslavia was to stop the ethnic cleansing and civil wars going on. You have a problem with wars that are actually morally just?
 
big_al said:
how did he have the power when his military actions into bosnia were questioned by the GOP? Oh and that whole 70+ million dollars of tax payer money used to investigate his sexual escapades and impeachment trial probably didnt help him concentrate on "finding bin laden" right?

Well according to the Clinton fans he can get a hummer and do his POTUS stuff at the same time. So why would the investigation have interferred with anything and/or his concentration? This guy was superman. Again, I'm grateful for Slick - he put women in their place (on their knees). The NOW gals have been neutered. The Man Show live at the White House.

BTW, SWA ties are cool.
 
WAKA no matter what any of us do there can be no intelligent discussion if you sir are in it. Have you tried discussion boards on moveon.org? I am sure they are much more likely to enjoy your misinformed dribble.

Just as a side note I don't regret one day of my 28 yr career even if it meant defending the likes of you.
 
Benhuntn said:
WAKA no matter what any of us do there can be no intelligent discussion if you sir are in it. Have you tried discussion boards on moveon.org? I am sure they are much more likely to enjoy your misinformed dribble.

Just as a side note I don't regret one day of my 28 yr career even if it meant defending the likes of you.

somehow I doubt you're qualified to make that assessment. not to mention that you delude yourself with your illusion of consensus......some kind of insecurity thing? come on, this is a message board, do you really need that kind of validation here?:D

there was not one war in the last 28 years in which US troops were involved the defense of this nation
 
DA50pilot said:
dang; she beat me to it

sigh, yet another dittohead
 
You are correct in that we have not been in direct defense of our nation for the last 28 years. BUT...

The liberals would love for us to go to Bosnia, Somalia, and Darfur, to fight battles that have NO Effect on what becomes of this nation in the future. However if we go to depose some wack job dictator who may be developing and distributing WMD's and who has outwardly stated his desire for the distruction of Israel, then we are off base?? Those are things that do affect our nation.

As for your earlier question about not fighting any terrorists in Iraq... many of the insurgents that are causing the problems are Syrian, Afghan, and Iranians who find it the easiest way to fight the US. If they had not gone there they would be trying to get here. That my friend is not a good thing.
 
waka said:
quick question; what terrorists have we fought on Iraqi soil?

best of luck back at ya:beer:

Uh, is Al-Zarquaui (sp?) a terrorist? Gee I dunno. Cutting off Berg's head with a dull kitchen knife, screaming Allahu-akbar, posting a video, and later declaring it was like butchering a sheep...

Oh yeah, he must be a freedom fighter.
 
Gorilla said:
Uh, is Al-Zarquaui (sp?) a terrorist? Gee I dunno. Cutting off Berg's head with a dull kitchen knife, screaming Allahu-akbar, posting a video, and later declaring it was like butchering a sheep...

Oh yeah, he must be a freedom fighter.

There's no question that he's a terrorist. Blowing him up with an aerial attack does not fighting terrorists on Iraqi soil make....especially in the context of why we're there. Hint. Even though our illustrious president would like you to believe it, the answer has nothing to do with terrorism. Your opportunistic attempt based on the latest news failed. It's funny that no one could provide any straight answer prior to now.
 
I know if I thought my president lied and sent soldiers to their death for his personal gain I would be arming myself and going to Washington for a coup de ta.

Why havent you?

Ken
 
waka said:
There's no question that he's a terrorist. Blowing him up with an aerial attack does not fighting terrorists on Iraqi soil make....especially in the context of why we're there. Hint. Even though our illustrious president would like you to believe it, the answer has nothing to do with terrorism. Your opportunistic attempt based on the latest news failed. It's funny that no one could provide any straight answer prior to now.

So you ask if we have fought any terrorists over there...and then proof is offered...but for some reason that does not count?
 
waka said:
There's no question that he's a terrorist. Blowing him up with an aerial attack does not fighting terrorists on Iraqi soil make....especially in the context of why we're there. Hint. Even though our illustrious president would like you to believe it, the answer has nothing to do with terrorism. Your opportunistic attempt based on the latest news failed. It's funny that no one could provide any straight answer prior to now.

Waka, you're a smart guy. Are you really maintaining that since it was an aerial attack, it "doesn't count" as combat on "iraqi soil?"

Before you answer, please consider the enormous number of ground-based assets in Iraq that were absolutely essential for the success of this mission. Please be intellectually honest.

Al-Z was a terrorist. He died on Iraqi soil with the combined effort of ground and airborne soldiers and pilots. There is only one conclusion.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom