Biden Says 'Who Cares' What Cheney Says Source: New York Times
PRAGUE - Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had a blunt response Friday to the latest broadsides from former Vice President Dick Cheney: "Who cares?"
In the latest exchange between old and new administrations, Mr. Biden rebuffed his predecessor's criticism about President Obama's handling of Afghanistan as "absolutely wrong." And Mr. Biden rejected the last review of the war conducted by the White House under former President George W. Bush and Mr. Cheney as "irrelevant."
"Bush Disgraced the USA" <boywiddledr...@Bushy.net> wrote:
>Biden Says 'Who Cares' What Cheney Says Source: New York Times
> PRAGUE - Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had a blunt response >Friday to the latest broadsides from former Vice President Dick Cheney: "Who >cares?"
> In the latest exchange between old and new administrations, Mr. Biden >rebuffed his predecessor's criticism about President Obama's handling of >Afghanistan as "absolutely wrong."
Cheney is right about this. Obama is too selfish and cowardly to show leadership in the mideast. American lives are at stake while Hussein hobnobs with fatcat donors to the DNC and pitches his political agenda.
He's waiting to see how the political winds will blow before he'll make up his mind. He's putting his lust for power above American lives.
>And Mr. Biden rejected the last review of >the war conducted by the White House under former President George W. Bush >and Mr. Cheney as "irrelevant."
Tuff turds, Bidunce. I don't recall hearing Dems complain when Jimmy Carter attacked Bush while in office. Now Repubs are perfectly justified to sit on the sidelines and throw stinkbombs at Dems.
> Terrorist attacks under... > Obama = ZERO.
Yawn. The old on-his-watch shtick again. Don't make me drag out Pearl Harbor and whose watch the attack was on!
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 01:59:18 -0700, Foxtrot wrote: > "Bush Disgraced the USA" <boywiddledr...@Bushy.net> wrote:
>>Biden Says 'Who Cares' What Cheney Says Source: New York Times
>> PRAGUE - Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had a blunt response >>Friday to the latest broadsides from former Vice President Dick Cheney: >>"Who cares?"
>> In the latest exchange between old and new administrations, Mr. >> Biden >>rebuffed his predecessor's criticism about President Obama's handling of >>Afghanistan as "absolutely wrong."
> Cheney is right about this. Obama is too selfish and cowardly to show > leadership in the mideast. American lives are at stake while Hussein > hobnobs with fatcat donors to the DNC and pitches his political agenda.
> He's waiting to see how the political winds will blow before he'll make > up his mind. He's putting his lust for power above American lives.
>>And Mr. Biden rejected the last review of the war conducted by the White >>House under former President George W. Bush and Mr. Cheney as >>"irrelevant."
> Tuff turds, Bidunce. I don't recall hearing Dems complain when Jimmy > Carter attacked Bush while in office. Now Repubs are perfectly justified > to sit on the sidelines and throw stinkbombs at Dems.
>> Terrorist attacks under... >> Obama = ZERO.
> Yawn. The old on-his-watch shtick again. Don't make me drag out Pearl > Harbor and whose watch the attack was on!
Oh, by all means, do. FDR responded by going to war, and three years later, the Japanese Empire was gone.
>>> Yawn. The old on-his-watch shtick again. Don't make me drag out Pearl >>> Harbor and whose watch the attack was on!
>>Oh, by all means, do. FDR responded by going to war, and three years >>later, the Japanese Empire was gone.
>>Now, tell us about how America avenged 9/11.
> Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the > best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear > uniforms.
How's Pakistan doing these days?
> Using tough tactics like Gitmo and rendering are some of the rare things > he did right.
You think disgracing America was a good thing?
> FDR nuked civilian venues which isn't any more humane nor justifiable > than Bush's (now Obama's) continued occupation of Iraq.
No he didn't. For someone who thinks mass slaughter of civilians is an American virtue, you sure don't seem to know much about it.
"5228 Dead, 361 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>Foxtrot wrote:
>> "5228 Dead, 361 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote: >>>Now, tell us about how America avenged 9/11.
>> Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the >> best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear >> uniforms.
>How's Pakistan doing these days?
Widespread military action there is beyond the scope of our mission.
We should deal with violent enemies there and everywhere else the same way Israel does. Send commandos to assassinate the leaders and bulldoze the family homes of known corroborators.
>> Using tough tactics like Gitmo and rendering are some of the rare things >> he did right.
>You think disgracing America was a good thing?
Unlike Obama and you other bed wetting libs who think being liked is more important than national defense, I don't give a flying fuck what the euro pansies think about Gitmo and rendering. They work.
>> FDR nuked civilian venues which isn't any more humane nor justifiable >> than Bush's (now Obama's) continued occupation of Iraq.
>No he didn't. For someone who thinks mass slaughter of civilians is an >American virtue, you sure don't seem to know much about it.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian cities that happened to be connected with the military. You don't mind collateral damage when done by Dems?
> Widespread military action there is beyond the scope of our mission.
They formerly had very limited Taliban & Al Qaeda presence. Now they are a 3rd front in the war.
They didn't used to be. Gee, maybe Obama screwed up and cause that problem, huh?
> We should deal with violent enemies there and everywhere else the > same way Israel does. Send commandos to assassinate the leaders and > bulldoze the family homes of known corroborators.
Ah, so your answer to everything is more war crimes?
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:56:56 -0700, Foxtrot wrote: > "5228 Dead, 361 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>>Foxtrot wrote:
>>> "5228 Dead, 361 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote: >>>>Now, tell us about how America avenged 9/11.
>>> Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the >>> best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear >>> uniforms.
>>How's Pakistan doing these days?
> Widespread military action there is beyond the scope of our mission.
Never heard the phrase "mission creep" I take it.
> We should deal with violent enemies there and everywhere else the same > way Israel does. Send commandos to assassinate the leaders and bulldoze > the family homes of known corroborators.
Yeah, with the result that Israel is as much a captive state as the people she subjugates.
>>> Using tough tactics like Gitmo and rendering are some of the rare >>> things he did right.
>>You think disgracing America was a good thing?
> Unlike Obama and you other bed wetting libs who think being liked is > more important than national defense, I don't give a flying fuck what > the euro pansies think about Gitmo and rendering. They work.
No, they don't. You have exactly ONE conviction to show for all the people you threw in jail for years, and most wound up finally being released because there simply was no reason other than your own cowardice for keeping them in jail.
>>> FDR nuked civilian venues which isn't any more humane nor justifiable >>> than Bush's (now Obama's) continued occupation of Iraq.
>>No he didn't. For someone who thinks mass slaughter of civilians is an >>American virtue, you sure don't seem to know much about it.
> Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian cities that happened to be > connected with the military. You don't mind collateral damage when done > by Dems?
You tried claiming FDR did it. He died four months earlier. Learn some history.
On Oct 25, 6:42 pm, "r wiley" <rawi...@southslope.net> wrote:
> No he didn't, and since you are posting on behalf of the > party of gay rights, your hypocrisy is showing.
> rw
We are glad u are learning to identify the H word... in some contexts.
The Subject line refers obliquely to the actual context of Biden's statements. He was about to run at the mouth, characteristically, and hand Murdoch another tabloid headline, when he very publicly checked himself.
His new mantra is, of course, "What Would Obama Do?", so he answered the reporter's baiting very calmly politely. Thus, the Subject line is nothing but harmless teasing about what the rightoids _wanted_ him to blurt out.
And rest assured that all the Center & Left wants nothing but prosperity for all the members of Cheney's family - except one.
>>"5228 Dead, 361 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>>>Foxtrot wrote: >>>Oh, by all means, do. FDR responded by going to war, and three years >>>later, the Japanese Empire was gone.
>>>Now, tell us about how America avenged 9/11.
>>Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the >>best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear >>uniforms.
>>Using tough tactics like Gitmo and rendering are some of the rare >>things he did right.
>>FDR nuked civilian venues which isn't any more humane nor justifiable >>than Bush's (now Obama's) continued occupation of Iraq.
>FDR nuked no one! When the nuke was used FDR was dead! >Don't rewrite history!
On Oct 25, 11:45 am, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
> Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the > best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear > uniforms.
But I thought you just said we can send in assassins to kill anyone who looks or dresses like them, and we can bulldoze their families buildings.
BTW we can do those things a lot EASIER without a shooting war around them...
Phlip wrote: > On Oct 25, 11:45 am, Foxtrot <foxt...@null.com> wrote:
>> Bush sent al Qaeda into the caves minimizing their power. That's the >> best you can hope for when the enemy doesn't have a country or wear >> uniforms.
> But I thought you just said we can send in assassins to kill anyone > who looks or dresses like them, and we can bulldoze their families > buildings.
They have buildings? why?
> BTW we can do those things a lot EASIER without a shooting war around > them...
We can flatten them from 600 miles away without even breaking a sweat.
On Oct 26, 7:01 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
dog.com> wrote: > > But I thought you just said we can send in assassins to kill anyone > > who looks or dresses like them, and we can bulldoze their families > > buildings.
> They have buildings? why?
Because the Bushies & Karzai colluded to give Al Qaeda the Swat Province, which is developed. Or do you actually believe the Fox "News" rhetoric that all these guys live in caves?
> We can flatten them from 600 miles away without even breaking a sweat.
And you don't mind killing civilians, indiscriminately, to force them to change their politics. That's because you are a terrorist.
Phlip wrote: > On Oct 26, 7:01 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n- > dog.com> wrote:
>>> But I thought you just said we can send in assassins to kill anyone >>> who looks or dresses like them, and we can bulldoze their families >>> buildings. >> They have buildings? why?
> Because the Bushies & Karzai colluded to give Al Qaeda the Swat > Province, which is developed. Or do you actually believe the Fox > "News" rhetoric that all these guys live in caves?
>> We can flatten them from 600 miles away without even breaking a sweat.
> And you don't mind killing civilians, indiscriminately, to force them > to change their politics. That's because you are a terrorist.
NOT IF THEY ARE WILLING TO HELP KILL ME.
It was Democrats that dropped a bomb, that made two cities of 100,000 evaporate.
dog.com> wrote: > Phlip wrote: > > On Oct 26, 7:01 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n- > > dog.com> wrote:
> >>> But I thought you just said we can send in assassins to kill anyone > >>> who looks or dresses like them, and we can bulldoze their families > >>> buildings. > >> They have buildings? why?
> > Because the Bushies & Karzai colluded to give Al Qaeda the Swat > > Province, which is developed. Or do you actually believe the Fox > > "News" rhetoric that all these guys live in caves?
> >> We can flatten them from 600 miles away without even breaking a sweat.
> > And you don't mind killing civilians, indiscriminately, to force them > > to change their politics. That's because you are a terrorist.
> NOT IF THEY ARE WILLING TO HELP KILL ME.
> It was Democrats that dropped a bomb, that made two cities of 100,000 > evaporate.
> Check your history...
> Democrats are terrorists?
In that case, yes - Democrats voted to kill civilians to effect policy changes.
The slight matter of Japan's own nuclear weapon research in Hiroshima doesn't really matter - if it was really there, then why the hell didn't we bomb it sooner?
>> Democrats Bombed the Chinese embassy in Kosovo/Bosnia...
> Actually, the NATO air force did that. They must have been using > American equipment.
I heard that sloppy American intel gave NATO bad orders. Something to do with a street that ended on the map, and the intel officer accidentally picked up the street numbers on the next block with a different street name.
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:47:00 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>> smor...@board.com wrote: >>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:25:02 -0700 (PDT), Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>>> Democrats are terrorists? >>>> In that case, yes - Democrats voted to kill civilians to effect policy >>>> changes. >>> At the time, bombing civilian targets was accepted policy
>> Democrats Bombed the Chinese embassy in Kosovo/Bosnia...
> Actually, the NATO air force did that. They must have been using > American equipment.
|
