Dunno. the CRA was conceived through Carter. Regulations guided FDIC banks yet had no provisions for regulating non-FDIC banks. That is ground work and later non-federally insured banks used the ground work for sub-prime lending. In comes Fannie and Fred to back the loans but then resale the loans. ACORN pushed it HARD being a great example of how it does not matter who took advantage of it, the ground work was there. This is my understanding. What am I missing here? Seems, as usual, there is arguement for both sides. Again!
Crap, Chilipepper. Look what you've done? Got Red all fired up again. The past 8 years have virtually ended "The American Way" as we once knew it. Up until W everything was great. Learn to accept this and we can get back to some football.
This is why I dont usually jump into politics... because everyone has an opinion.... and thats is the American way.... like I had said in a earlier post.... Winning has 1,000 faces but losing has one poor bastard.... I dont think it can be blamed on W but that is my opinion.... no matter who was in office this was going to happen... and look at all that happened in his 2 terms... the largest terrorist attack in our nations history... major natural disaesters... stock market hit its all time high.... and had its largest drop.... I was not a fan of Clinton but he did do some good... but he also did some bad... but that comes with any person in office... but it just kills me that he cheated in the most respected office in the country... and to think Clinton also went to war with Iraq and everyone was fine with that... yet let a republican do the same and its wrong.... I guess this will be my last comment on the situation.... sorry if I offended anyone... your opinion is your opinion and mine is mine.... not saying mine is right or yours.... because eneryone is entitled to an opinion... at least we share one common ideal.... LSU FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!!!! :geaux::geaux::geaux::geaux::geaux:
An fundamental error of scale. Clinton hit Iraq with air and missile strikes, tough economic sanctions, and maintained a No-Fly zone that effectively shackled Saddam at little cost in money and none in American lives. That's a far cry from a full-scale invasion and long-term occupation that has cost us a Trillion dollars and 30,000 casualties. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, it's been a long campaign and we're all a little burned out, but . . . Free Speech Alley is definitely the place to post opinions and get feedback, positive and negative. Comment all that you want to, as long as you're not too sensitive to clashing opinions.
lol.... I dont get offended easliy..... my sister is dating a Tulane graduate... my cousins are Tulane fans.... and my future inlaws only vote Democrat because they are registered Democrats.... hate everything about the Democrats but wont change there political party because they say its too hard.... lol little nutz.... but I am marrying into it... at least my future wife isnt like them.... lol... so debating is always going on in my life... guess it goes back to my family... related to Sam Houston who fought for Americans on my grandma's side and related to a leader of the Mexican army in the Battle of the Alamo on my grandpa's side... so my family has been fighting itself for centuries... lol :geaux::geaux: :usaflagwa:geaux::geaux:
:huh::dis::insane: Operations NORTHERN WATCH and SOUTERN WATCH were destroying the readiness of US air assets (personnel and material) at a time when the same administration went on a "procurement holiday" that ensured that the very assets being relied upon to work past their design were being run into the ground with ZERO impact on the Hussein regime. In fact, he flaunted our unwillingness to seriously kick his a$$ time and time again. So all of that JP-8 and serious materiel damage to achieve absolutely nothing except to prove that America was a paper tiger and not willing to lower the boom. Furthermore, the terrorism of 9/11 was bred and encouraged by the anemic actions in the Middle East and Africa (and elsewhere) in the 80s and 90s. And I include Beriut, Somalia, Rwanda, and Iraq in that. And don't think it was lost on the Islamists that Bosnia and Kosovo did not risk serious ground combat or casualties. Money and casualties are a cost of foreign policy that requires the M in the DIME. Cheap, inept foreign policy that achieves NOTHING is far, far worse than the expensive region-shaping foreign policy that was forced by inaction of the decades previous. I know you disagree - because Bush can't possibly have been right. But someday the Clinton administration will be known for two things. A blue dress. And doing nothing after repeatedly being attacked directly and by proxy, leading up to the ballsy attacks of 9/11. We'll know who's right about this in about 20 years.
Give me a break. Did you watch the Shock and Awe campaign? Did our air assets look "destroyed" to you? :insane: For 8 years the No Fly Zone repeatedly hit Iraqi SAM and AAA sites which actually were destroyed. Iraqi aircraft were shot down. What "procurement holiday"? Defense budgets began to be reduced at the end of the Cold War from the huge levels that they were at. This began during the Bush 41 administration and continued during the Clinton and Bush 43 adminstrations. And in each of these, Congress (a Republican Congress from 1994 to 2006) set the budget, as always. :huh: Zero impact on the Hussein regime? Did he have an air force left? No. Did he have an air defense system left? No. Did we lose any aircraft to the Iraqis ? No. The sanctions crippled Iraq and the UNSCOM inspectors (protected by allied airpower) destroyed all of Saddams WMD's. Did we find any WMD's that Bush went to war over? No. Saddam was unable to do any mischief at all under Clinton. He was hogtied and helpless as Operation Iraqi Freedom proved when Bush invaded and sacked his country in 21 days. As repugnant as Saddam was, he provided a balance against his implacable enemy Iran in the Persian Gulf area. He couldn't hurt us or our allies, but he did provide deterence for Iran who has now occupied the regional power vacccum and increased its economic and military power immensely.
Let's just say I have multiple episodes of first hand information that allows me to say that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Again, I have first hand information. And have spent what feels like decades trying to unf*ck the heinous effects of wholesale footdragging by the Clinton DoD. Congress owns the purse strings. SECDEF runs procurement. And it was at an absolute standstill from 92 to 00. All done in '91. He had an Air Force that he chose to disperse and bury rather than fly. He had a very large and diverse AD system that he could not force to turn their radars on because they knew they were going to die. We didn't lose any aircraft because they didn't fight. Not because they couldn't fight. Again - you have no idea what you're talking about. The sanctions cause millions of Iraqis to find their schools crumbling and their infrastructure turned to dust because the regime chose to keep it assets to control it's cronies via $$. You should read more. He did plenty of mischief under Clinton, most of it directed at his own people, but also including supporting terrorism, actively seeking WMD, and wasting millions of dollars and an entire decade of our military readiness in a fool's errand. Iraqis shot at US warplanes daily and we did NADA. Why? Bubba said no. Again, we won in 21 days because his army was surrendering so fast, we had to stop taking prisoners to keep moving. They were never going to win. But they chose not to even fight. That had ZERO to do with Bubba and everything to do with a$$kicking they got the first time around. Irrelevant. ONW and OSW were tactical success (protected Kurds and Shia) and strategic failures (convinced Islamists that we weren't up to another fight). Iran is far less powerful in the region with a moderate Muslim Iraq next door than they would be with a Sunni-dominated dictatorship that allowed them to work the Shia angle with their brothers elsewhere. Sorry Red. Clinton was as bad at foreign policy as was good at picking up fat interns. How's that 1 year and we're out Balkans thing going, by the way? Bring back Kissinger.
Oh, right. God told you the truth and I don't know what I'm talking about. This is a discussion. Either put up or shut up. Prove it. Quit ducking the issue. Once again. Post Cold-War military downsizing started under Bush 41 and continued under Clinton and Bush 43. It's on the record. The vast expenses incurred in Iraq have really impacted procurement of new weaponry. SECDEF? Rumsfeld cancelled the $11 billion Crusader artillery system and the $17 Billion Comanche attack helicopter and cut back procurement of both the FA-22 fighter and the Virginia-class nuclear Submarine among other systems. Wrong. The No Fly Zone lasted for 10 years and Saddam rebuilt his AD system. They turned them on all the time and we shot ARM missiles at them when they did and took the opportunity to cluster bomb the missile launchers at each opportunity. Furthermore Clinton lauched large aircraft and missile strikes against Saddam twice. In 1993, Clinton ordered US naval forces to launch a Tomahawk cruise missile strike on the Iraqi Intelligence Service's principal command and control complex in Baghdad in retailiation for the failed attempt to assassinate former President Bush during his visit to Kuwait in April 1993. In 1998 He conducted "strong, sustained" air strikes against Iraq WMD and military sites for their refusal to cooperate with UNSCOM inspectors. LINK He also ordered missile strikes in Afghanistan in an attempt to kill bin Ladin after the Embassy Bombings in 1998 and also struck al Qaida targets in the Sudan. He considered using missile strikes to kill bin Laden three times after August 1998, but each time it was decided the intelligence wasn't good enough to ensure success. George Bush failed to retaliate for the USS Cole bombing and did not address bin Ladin at all until after 9/11. Oh yeah? Then why is it you that has difficulty providing examples of what you speak? We shot down at least one MiG fighter that went up, multiple helicopters and many times the Iraqi AD system took shots at coalition aircraft. I read an awful lot, bandit. Furthermore, I can cite my sources rather than just suggesting that you don't know what you are talking about. How lame. try me. Pick a procurement issue. Pick a conflict. Wait a minute, you just said that they didn't fight us. Which is it? Go back to your extensive library on the subject and you'll find that we struck them each and every time that they shot at us. BS, they fought hard, ask anyone who was there. They lost because we were bigger and better. But you had said that Bubba decimated our miltary with budget cuts. Obviously we had all the firepower we needed. Are you kidding? Iraq has gone from a Sunni regime that fought a 10-year war with 1,000,000 Iranian casualties to a friendly Shiite country that has already established multiple contacts and agreements with Iran. Let's see, Bosnia hasn't been a shooting war in a decade. Milosovich and the other war criminals have been brought to trial. And Clinton won the war with Yugoslavia over Kosovo without a single US casualty. Compare that with the debacle in Iraq.
My impression of “I have multiple episodes of first hand information”= he was there. I try to use the same context. A lot of good that did. Much like the response to the Cole being attacked, Clinton's response was nothing more then a day at the missile range. A lot of noise while only hitting plywood targets. A shot across the bow, that was the Clinton way. All Clinton ever achieved from air and missle strikes was Iraq allowing supervised inspectors back into the country, always coming up fruitless and empty. The USS Cole has YET to be properly addressed as to date, not one fuggin rag has hung for this matter and only Two remain in custody facing charges that they are certain to beat. We all have Yemeni officials to thank for that debacle. Both Bush AND Clinton are to blame for coming up fruitless, much like folding flag over a winless effort over Somalia. Not taking Baghdad in the first SHOULD have been a lesson in staying out of Africa. Supply the opposition, sure, but roll in and try to differentiate good Somali from bad Somali, thanks but I would rather invade Russia. They did not fight at all. Fact is the Iraqi Army was larger then the coalition combined. Only the Republican Guard and a sorry few who didn't get the word put up a fight. After 6 weeks of having communication and supply lines slaughtered they surrendered in MASS. An order by Saddam himself to mass surrender was given to slow the advancing coalition coming at record pace. THEY cannot be considered hard fighters when the wheels are burning off at the pace set by the coalition plowing its way through the desert. A very cold desert I might add. The logistics plan for the invasion shall, IMO never be matched again. Thats right, faster then Patton's advance through Italy, it was logistics which held up that freight train. :yelwink2: They surrendered by groups of hundreds and there came a point we just started to drive past the white flags, after all, who is to worry about a bunch of starving rags with no boots on? A contingency was formed FROM THE REAR to accumulate the volunteer non-fighters.
