Grouse du Jour

S

Stephen Hamilton

Joined
Aug 18, 2000
Messages
312
For those of you who sometimes wonder why I hated Clinton and why I refused to retire during his administration, take a look at this article. As we sell them the "rope" with with which to hang us... this article once again illuminates why I consider Clinton to be a traitor in the most literal sense. Under his administration and with his explicit help much of the USA's most advanced technology was sold to China. Do you feel safer?

http://www.insightmag.com/news/357426.html

Stephen
obkhuk: Low-tech, highly effective
 
I may feel just as you do or stronger. It would appear that the man should have been shot for treason. How much did he sell the Russian that we don't even know about.

Then there is the Mrs.. Probably the most dangerous women in the world. She would sell this country down the river in a heart beat.:eek: :mad:
 
These are people who recently lost their family dog. Seems it jumped on Hilary's lap, and froze to death.

(Don't like the b*st*rds, myself. Sorry if I misspelled that.)
 
Scarey stuff, and I agree that the Clinton administration allowed and promoted such technology transfers for which this country will later suffer.

However, while blame is being apportioned, did Clinton force General Motors to sell Magnequench to a Chinese consortium? Was there really no-one else interested in buying the company? It is ironic that the auto industry is one that would would suffer the most from Chinese domination of this technology, but I don't think that short-sightedness absolves them of any responsibility.

On the other side of the coin, should the government have forced GM to continue to operate the company against what GM obviously felt (at least at the time) was in their best economic interests. Should the government have bought Manequench or compensated GM for selling to a US company with a lower bid? Surely such a practice would be decried as ripe for abuse and manipulation.

If the executives at some of these companies had a shred of patriotism or even just an eye for the long term viability of their companies, I think a lot of this wouldn't have happened. The Chinese aren't a huge reservoir of mindless consumers waitng to enrich American companies beyond all dreams by buying up anthing thrown their way. For that matter, neither is the rest of the world.
 
Why else but Clinton's treasonable quasi- negligence and refusal to enforce terms of the Gulf War are we now at the brink of war with Iraq?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
 
A job was left undone. Now that the government wants the thing corrected. We have to send guys like Sarge and his men to finish what should have been done long ago. Dayum Shame. :mad: :mad: :mad:
 
Originally posted by firkin
If the executives at some of these companies had a shred of patriotism or even just an eye for the long term viability of their companies, I think a lot of this wouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...

Don't anyone hold their breath waiting on the concience of corporate America to intervene. To be sure there are exceptions, but mostly the execs are concerned with their stock option price, percs, and the value of their own portfolio. Witness Enron, World Com, ad nauseum. :barf:

It is a "What's in it for me" world in corporate America. :(

My stomach is churning now. Time for some Pepto Biz. :(
 
Originally posted by Pappy
A job was left undone. Now that the government wants the thing corrected. We have to send guys like Sarge and his men to finish what should have been done long ago. Dayum Shame. :mad: :mad: :mad:
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that it was George W's father who left the job undone. Why are we really going to war in Iraq except that a scared little bully in the White House wants to show his father how good he is. The idea that Iraq is a direct threat to the U.S. requiring preemptive action is silly on the face of it, but North Korea's existing and expanding nuclear bomb program -- oh no, that's something we won't fight about and won't even talk about ... Bah Humbug!

Of course I support the troops; I just wish I could feel even a little better about the politicians. A pox on both parties, mine included.
 
Russ Kay

I agree 100%. We should leave Saddam Hussein alone. So what if he gets nuclear weapons to go along with VX gas, etc, etc. He would never ever use them on the good people of the world! He just hates his own people. He will only kill them, not us.

We should trust him. And believe that pigs really can fly. :barf:
 
Originally posted by Semper Fi
Russ Kay

I agree 100%. We should leave Saddam Hussein alone. So what if he gets nuclear weapons to go along with VX gas, etc, etc. He would never ever use them on the good people of the world! He just hates his own people. He will only kill them, not us.

We should trust him. And believe that pigs really can fly. :barf:
Click to expand...

Semp, I wouldn't support or trust Saddam Hussein for an instant. Of course he's a duplicitous, evil tyrant. But he's not now -- and no one has shown him to be -- a direct or immediate threat to the USA. The fact is, nothing significant about the Iraq situation has changed in the past five years or so ... if Saddam is so dangerous to us now, why wasn't he then? What has changed? That's the question the rest of the world is asking, and that's the question that neither Bush or Powell has answered.

I'm honestly worried that our leaders in DC have their priorities all screwed up. Whatever happened to the war on terrorism? That's disappeared from public debate, dropped below the radar screen in favor of this incursion into Iraq, and I think that's a much bigger problem. Worse, I believe that our going into Iraq and winning (and we will certainly win), then taking over the government and occupying the country for some undefined period of time, will come back to haunt this country for decades to come. The terrorists -- Muslim fundamentalists and others -- will just see that as a provocation and an excuse to commit more atrocities against USA.

If there has to be a war, then let us fight it and win it. I'd just feel a lot better if I thought that our President was being honest and upfront with us about what it's going to cost, in both money and lives, and who's going to pay for it.
 
Russ

Your points are well taken. Please excuse my feeble attempt at sarcasm.

What has changed is that a President with some backbone is in the White House. The point was made earlier by others that Clinton should have taken care of the problem years ago. Yes, it can be argued (and has for years) that Bush's father should have completed the job. He did not. He had reasons that were valid at the time but were not vindicated in hindsight. That is history and now is now.

Sooner or later we must face the problem. I'd rather it be on our terms and timing and not the other way around. Make no mistake here. I am no advocate of war. But a long term view must be taken. I see no other recourse. I only see the inevitable.
 
I am just about ready to give up telling some of these guys any thing. I might accomplish more going out and kicking a fence post. It seems that a lot of people don't want to hear good reasoning nor the truth. They would rather wait until we get the hell kicked out of us again before they do anything. How soon 9-11-01 has been forgotten.

The news today proves that the war on terrorism has not been terminated or taken a back seat to much of any thing.
 
Remember the old saying, "Opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one." :) Everyone has a right to their own view on a subject including old "jar heads" like you and me. Of course, our view differs from many.

My problem has always been that I am a poor communicator when it comes to debate. I have never been good at convincing a person with words. Frustration is the result.

I have always felt actions are far better than words. That is what I like about our President. He is doing something instead of just blowing air.

If this country could present a united front to the world and show we are fully prepared to take the next step, I believe the terrorists, Saddams, Osamas, etc. would take heed. But we don't show unity because everyone has a right to their opinion and they haven't been convinced otherwise. When the next attack occurs on American soil, perhaps the actions of our enemies will provide the convincing argument that our words, Pappy, cannot.

Semp --
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top