[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by mburbank

I'm sorry, is that more or less enabling then say, selling terrorist weapons systems, or trading them weapons for hostages.....

Here comes the predictable hysterics. You really are a lunatic...but to answer your question - YES! When the President of the United States of America elevated one of histories most notorious terrorists, there was absolutely no precedence for it. It legitamized them in a way which secret arms deals and clandestine relationships never ever could do.

Originally Posted by mburbank

Or maybe diverting your armed forces and intelligence away from capturing the man responsible for 9/11 so you can have them go play the hokey pokey in Iraq?

Are you going to argue that 9/11 was planned, and executed all within an 8 month span, all while Bush was in office? Otherwise stop bullshiting.

Originally Posted by mburbank

I'm no Clinton fan. But even in modern history, your claim is an arguable opinion at best.

Then fine, I'm still waiting for you to argue that. You're just going off on some rant about the evil in the world, all while name dropping various crimes against humanity. Even if you believe events surrounding Tinnamen Sqr. enabled terrorism (forgot what we're discussing or something?) you haven't bothered to explain any supposed connection between those events. Just that civilians died.

Originally Posted by mburbank

And then you get into all the American Presidents who were pro genocide in the name of manifest destiny, or pro slavery.

Yeah let's talk about genocide and slavery! Or wait, we can stay on topic....we're talking about terrorist organizations as they relate to modern history, not some phillosophical concepts of life and evil. Not "who was the most corrupt President of all time" or "Who can we blame for the most people dying". The structure for the Islamic Supremacists organizations BOOMED during the Clinton years. Bush just inherited it.

Originally Posted by mburbank

What's terrorism? Killing non combatants speciffically for the purposes of scaring the living crap out of the survivors.

BWAHAHAHHA No wonder. Thanks for the robotic sheep definition of terrorism... that kind of explains why you're talking about an endless list of events that do not fall into the relm of this conversation let alone your own defined concept of terrorism. It's not about fear you dunderhead, it's about killing. But hey, if you want to argue that terror is a War of the Worlds tactic, and the death/destruction bit is all incidental and secondary...go for it. Maybe you think civilian deaths = terrorism? Hate to break it to you, but the FBI and State Dept. definitions of terrorism don't include State sponsored acts, or even unaffiliated hate crimes. Aren't we talking about rogue organizations and guerilla armies?

Originally Posted by mburbank

Truman dropped two atomic bombs on cities! Roosevelt bombed Dresden until there was a firestorm! The main, tactical purpose was to kill enough civillians to scare the crap out of the survivors!

Oh guess not. You see no difference between Truman's atomic bomb, and Bin Laden's 9/11. It's a wonder your wife can kiss you with your head so far up your own ass.