• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House mistakenly identifies CIA chief in Afghanistan

j-mac said:
Ah, so short of the exact scenerio you think happened with Plame, then all's good with you eh? No responsibility need be taken by anyone because it isn't the exact BS scenerio you condemned with the previous administration....What a crock.
Click to expand...
Again, I already said:

Probably the WH press agency members responsible for creating the list.....and anyone who was supposed to review it.

and...

I'll put some money up that says you are wrong.


But, I'm arguing with the guy who thought this came out in a speech because he could not be bothered to read posts already in the thread
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
There has never been this odd fixation on treating every campagin speech that the president makes as some sort of unbreakable promise.
Click to expand...

Oh its far more than a Campaign speech.

Its his initial response to the IRS's targeting Conservatives.

His initial repsonse to Benghazi. Remember ?

His broken promises and out right lies which include his ObamaCare promises.
 
tres borrachos said:
They were exposed to what exactly? Did a single one of their names ever come out? No, they didn't, which is why neither I nor you can name one of them. In other words, it's irrelevant, and you know it.
Click to expand...
Very poor logic there, why would the CIA list their covert operatives? Answer: They wouldn't.

You have no idea if anyone will be held responsible for putting this man's life in danger. Shockingly, neither do any of us. But someone should be held responsible, shouldn't they...?
Click to expand...
Again, more poor logic, just because you have not heard who was held responsible that does not mean no one was.
 
shrubnose said:
Whether Powell approved or didn't approve of Bush's policies doesn't change the fact that Bush hired him. He was one of Bush's people and Bush is ultimately responsible for everything that the man did or didn't do during the time that he was working for Bush.

That's the way that it works.
Click to expand...

Bush hired Powell because he was a damn good yes man.

Back during the Vietnam War, the U.S. Army started to groom then Major Powell to be a yes man. You noticed as a field commander (Major)the highest position he ever had in a combat unit was as the XO of a infantry battalion. From then on Powell would be groomed to be a yes man because of the National Security Act of 1947, all branches of the military needed yes men to deal with the civilians and Congress who would be micromanaging the military. (One of the reasons why I believe we need to revisit the NSA of 47.)

Read the "Reagan Diaries" and see why Reagan picked Powell to be his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Note: The position of the CJCS is different today than it was during the Reagan administration because of the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986.

The Goldwater-Nichols Act took the Chairman and the entire Joint Chiefs of Command out of the military chain of command. They no longer have anyone to command.
 
pbrauer said:
Very poor logic there, why would the CIA list their covert operatives? Answer: They wouldn't.


Again, more poor logic, just because you have not heard who was held responsible that does not mean no one was.
Click to expand...

So they didn't get exposed, did they? No, they didn't. My point exactly. It was irrelevant.

I'm waiting for Obama to come out, tell everyone his administration acted "stupidly", and find out who is taking the heat for this. Same thing you would demand of Bush.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Again, I already said:

Probably the WH press agency members responsible for creating the list.....and anyone who was supposed to review it.

and...

I'll put some money up that says you are wrong.


But, I'm arguing with the guy who thought this came out in a speech because he could not be bothered to read posts already in the thread
Click to expand...

So then don't respond to that guy's posts....:shrug: You have it all figured out, and categorized as NO BIG DEAL anyway.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
What is wrong with you people? Can you not read anything already posted?
Click to expand...

Sorry but calls for accountability from the likes you people have to be taken with a grain of salt.

You understand I'm sure.

Given the credibility issues the Left has you can't really expect us to take anything you say seriously.
 
tres borrachos said:
So they didn't get exposed, did they? No, they didn't. My point exactly. It was irrelevant..
Click to expand...
LMMFAO
How do you know they didn't? If they didn't the potential was still there?
 
tres borrachos said:
So they didn't get exposed, did they? No, they didn't. My point exactly. It was irrelevant.

I'm waiting for Obama to come out, tell everyone his administration acted "stupidly", and find out who is taking the heat for this. Same thing you would demand of Bush.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




I'll bet that you can't hold your breath the whole time that you're waiting.
 
shrubnose said:
I predict that life will go on in Washington, D.C. with no major disruptions.
Click to expand...

We have had nothing but major disruptions in Washington D.C. for the past 5 years and 5 months.

It's as if there's nobody in charge.

You have a President who is completely dependent on newspapers and broadcast news to inform him on what's happening with in his own administration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom