Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/10/2010 11:11:55 PM EDT
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:13:27 PM EDT
We would have lobbed some cruise missiles at some tent campsites, arrested those we could and have given them a civilian trial, and in general rubbed our pussy.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:21:07 PM EDT
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:22:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.


Horse Shit.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:24:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.


What'd Clinton do every time we were attacked?
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:24:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By bloodsport2885:
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.


What'd Clinton do every time we were attacked?


Have or generate a sex scandel.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:25:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.

-K
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:26:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/10/2010 11:28:35 PM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.

We would have over-reacted or under-reacted.

Most likely over-reacted in a harmful way.

Democrats since the 60s are known for being weak on foreign policy, and Al Gore would have wanted to 'show strength' right away without thinking about it long enough to come up with a coherent strategy.

This means we probably would have become so fixated on Afganhistan, that we would pound the snot out of the place - ignoring that the terrorists had already left & would never be back (and likely ignoring wherever they went next), and definately NOT opened the much-needed Iraqi front.

Since the American People can't comprehend anything beyond 'Bin Laden was in Afganhistan before 9/11', they would never hold the administration responsible for the 're-arranging rocks without killing any jihadis' war that they would fight...

Lots of ordnance, money & lives expended, no impact on Queda, but 'it would look like we were really pissed off on TV'... Oh, and Afganhistan would be further down the tubes than ever, rather than 'slightly better off than before 9/11' as they are today...
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:27:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.





-K


that would of been a hoot.

Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:29:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By bloodsport2885:
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.


What'd Clinton do every time we were attacked?


Uh... Go get a blow job form a chubby Skank??
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:38:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.





-K


Oh yeah... that guy. The word WEAK comes to mind...
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:43:16 PM EDT
Dave is right.

Despite their apparent pussy attitude towards war, Democrats have historically ripped countries a new one, though often without a coherent purpose or plan.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:43:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.





-K


Oh yeah... that guy. The word WEAK comes to mind...


Im not so sure. We've all seen he has quite a temper and has a few scews loose. Would he have done what W did? Maybe. I doubt he would have brought the action to Iraq and would have probabaly concentrated on Afghanistan. He may have been ls ay down like Billy Bledsoe, but I don't think so.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:53:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/10/2010 11:54:40 PM EDT by BattletweeteR]
thought about this for a while...if al gore was president.

with al gore, sept 11 would of still happened.

with al gore we would have bombed the shit out of Afghanistan.

and with al gore we would of still be dealing with iraq and its chemical/ nuclear weapons programs....parts of me still think war with iraq would of still happened happened, but not in 03, but 05.

Link Posted: 9/10/2010 11:56:08 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Infallible:
Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.


Oh yeah... that guy. The word WEAK comes to mind...


Im not so sure. We've all seen he has quite a temper and has a few scews loose. Would he have done what W did? Maybe. I doubt he would have brought the action to Iraq and would have probabaly concentrated on Afghanistan. He may have been ls ay down like Billy Bledsoe, but I don't think so.


I agree with the concentrated on Afghanistan part but what about Iran and north korea? If we didn't go into Iraq would we have gone into best korea instead?
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:02:17 AM EDT
Al Gore would have sent in CIA and SOF to do targeting for the Northern Alliance. Once they retook the country, he would delcare victory and go back to a domestic agenda. Then we would be hit a few years later.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:03:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/11/2010 12:04:45 AM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By ExtraZero8:
Originally Posted By Infallible:
Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.


Oh yeah... that guy. The word WEAK comes to mind...


Im not so sure. We've all seen he has quite a temper and has a few scews loose. Would he have done what W did? Maybe. I doubt he would have brought the action to Iraq and would have probabaly concentrated on Afghanistan. He may have been ls ay down like Billy Bledsoe, but I don't think so.


I agree with the concentrated on Afghanistan part but what about Iran and north korea? If we didn't go into Iraq would we have gone into best korea instead?

Why?

North Korea isn't worth the money or manpower to invade...

They're contained, broken, and powerless - and as Asian atheist-communists, don't prevent the 'Arena in which to challenge Al Queda' that Iraq did....

Same thing for Iran, except substitute 'Persian Shiites' for 'Asian Atheist Communists'... Oh, and then we'd have to fight both Hezbollah (due to attacking Iran) AND Al Queda (everywhere else, due to the original war) - right now, Hezbollah is Israel's problem, not ours...

Neither of those two is 'Sunni Arab' (or better yet, 'Persecuted Sunni Arab Minority') and thus neither is a place to fight Al Queda.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:06:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By ExtraZero8:
Originally Posted By Infallible:
Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.


Oh yeah... that guy. The word WEAK comes to mind...


Im not so sure. We've all seen he has quite a temper and has a few scews loose. Would he have done what W did? Maybe. I doubt he would have brought the action to Iraq and would have probabaly concentrated on Afghanistan. He may have been ls ay down like Billy Bledsoe, but I don't think so.


I agree with the concentrated on Afghanistan part but what about Iran and north korea? If we didn't go into Iraq would we have gone into best korea instead?

Why?

North Korea isn't worth the money or manpower to invade...

They're contained, broken, and powerless - and as Asian atheist-communists, don't prevent the 'Arena in which to challenge Al Queda' that Iraq did....

Same thing for Iran, except substitute 'Persian Shiites' for 'Asian Atheist Communists'... Oh, and then we'd have to fight both Hezbollah (due to attacking Iran) AND Al Queda (everywhere else, due to the original war) - right now, Hezbollah is Israel's problem, not ours...

Neither of those two is 'Sunni Arab' (or better yet, 'Persecuted Sunni Arab Minority') and thus neither is a place to fight Al Queda.

The reality is, if we went to war with NK, SK would supply most/all the troops and we would supplement with our air and naval power.

SK's doctrine is to build a US independent force, which they are nearly there.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:20:49 AM EDT
If the democrat had been Obama, he would have probably gotten busy passing out candy to children.


Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:22:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.

We would have over-reacted or under-reacted.

Most likely over-reacted in a harmful way.

Democrats since the 60s are known for being weak on foreign policy, and Al Gore would have wanted to 'show strength' right away without thinking about it long enough to come up with a coherent strategy.

This means we probably would have become so fixated on Afganhistan, that we would pound the snot out of the place - ignoring that the terrorists had already left & would never be back (and likely ignoring wherever they went next), and definately NOT opened the much-needed Iraqi front.

Since the American People can't comprehend anything beyond 'Bin Laden was in Afganhistan before 9/11', they would never hold the administration responsible for the 're-arranging rocks without killing any jihadis' war that they would fight...

Lots of ordnance, money & lives expended, no impact on Queda, but 'it would look like we were really pissed off on TV'... Oh, and Afganhistan would be further down the tubes than ever, rather than 'slightly better off than before 9/11' as they are today...


Much-needed Iraqi front? Explain.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 12:23:23 AM EDT
Don't know, because I am unable to look into an alternate universe to find out.

All I have is speculation, which is largely tainted by my own biased personal opinions.

So, in the spirit of the REAL purpose of this thread I will say this.

FUCK DEMOCRATS.


Link Posted: 9/11/2010 3:43:13 AM EDT
Algore would have used it as a pretext to ram Draconian environmental legislation down our throats.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 4:04:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.




You wouldn't be typing this right now, it is prayer time ya know.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 4:31:55 AM EDT

If a Democrat was President on 9/11... he may of taken the security brief "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" presented to him on August 6th, 2001 more seriously and ordered the FBI to aggressively pursue their at-the-time 70 domestic Bin Laden-related investigations.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 4:39:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DarkNite:

If a Democrat was President on 9/11... he may of taken the security brief "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" presented to him on August 6th, 2001 more seriously and ordered the FBI to aggressively pursue their at-the-time 70 domestic Bin Laden-related investigations.


Or he 'may of' tripled gas taxes and driven the economy directly into the shitter.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 4:59:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DarkNite:

If a Democrat was President on 9/11... he may of taken the security brief "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" presented to him on August 6th, 2001 more seriously and ordered the FBI to aggressively pursue their at-the-time 70 domestic Bin Laden-related investigations.
you fail to understand no Muslim would have helped stop the attacks on 9-11 so you could have asked a billion questions but unless you were luckly enough to find someone that would speak to you, it was unstoppable.


Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:01:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SaintMichaelArms:
We would have lobbed some cruise missiles at some tent campsites, arrested those we could and have given them a civilian trial, and in general rubbed our pussy.


And that would have been if we had a GOOD Democrat.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:09:37 AM EDT
Al Gore wouldn't have done anything, I'm sure there are some endangered species of plants/animals somewhere in the middle east he'd be afraid of hurting.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:25:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/11/2010 5:28:07 AM EDT by halloween78]
Originally Posted By Andrewsky:

Much-needed Iraqi front? Explain.


Well, Afghanistan sucks to fight in for a conventional superpower (see the Soviets' Afghan War), and that's without the religious fanaticism of our current enemy embedded in that terrain (social and physical).

Iraq, with its cities and open deserts make for a much better battlefield for conventional forces, and acted as a lightning rod to draw fighters from across the world to where we could fight on better terms.

Also, Iraq is comparatively Westernized, so western concepts aren't as alien to the locals.

I think that's what Dave means, anyway, he'll be back and say it better later.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:36:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By WileyG27:
If the democrat had been Obama, he would have probably gotten busy passing out candy to children.




This.

I think is Zell Miller was president, he would have fought back. Right now, I can't think of any other democrat that would make an honest attempt to stand up to the Dirka Dirkas.

Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:42:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By bloodsport2885:
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
would he have done the same things as President Wilson and President Roosevelt?
ie interment camps, cracking down on protesters, cracking down on other people deemed to no to be "helping"

granted, im glad we didnt find out but i myself believe a dem president would have simply repeated the civil rights fuck ups of ww1 and 2.


What'd Clinton do every time we were attacked?


he treated terrorist attacks, much like Barry wants, as "criminal acts", which we all know isn't the way we need to deal with these cowardly acts.
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:43:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jinxsters:
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.

-K


that would of been a hoot.

We'd all be speaking hadji by now.

Link Posted: 9/11/2010 5:48:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.





-K


instantaneous surrender to whoever.

Link Posted: 9/11/2010 6:02:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Special-K:

Originally Posted By LoupGarou:
Depends on which democrat it was/would have been.



It would have been Al Gore.





-K


Al would have had plenty of harsh words for the taliban.
thats about all that would have happened.
Top Top