Cheney Book

lol Usually Dems will accuse their Republican opponents of being idiots, "W", Reagan, Perry. Cheney must be awesome, because he is "evil".

Senator Palpatine from Star Wars?

Hey, even his buddies don't like it. . . (don't blame me)

Rice rips Cheney book

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... eedfetcher

Rice's predecessor, Colin Powell, has also challenged parts of Cheney's book, calling them "cheap shots."


another interview

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... t=1&f=1001

I should stop with the Darth Vader = Dick Cheney references. Darth has actually seen combat.

Vice Lord wrote:

Kate wrote: Has anyone here read, or planning to read, Dick Cheney's new book?

I read a review of the book and --- spoiler alert ---- in the last chapter, he admits that he is Luke's father.

He's a war criminal...Why aren't we treating him like one?

Ask yourselves .

Because only the losing side gets charged as war criminals. Would you charge Truman with the total destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Or FDR for the firebombing of Dresden? Many more casualties than VP Cheney.

SS109 wrote:

Vice Lord wrote:

Kate wrote: Has anyone here read, or planning to read, Dick Cheney's new book?

I read a review of the book and --- spoiler alert ---- in the last chapter, he admits that he is Luke's father.

He's a war criminal...Why aren't we treating him like one?

Ask yourselves .

Because only the losing side gets charged as war criminals. Would you charge Truman with the total destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Or FDR for the firebombing of Dresden? Many more casualties than VP Cheney.

They were both actions of a formally declared war with nations that had attacked us and our allies. BIG difference.

Soulshiner wrote:

SS109 wrote:

Vice Lord wrote:

Kate wrote: Has anyone here read, or planning to read, Dick Cheney's new book?

I read a review of the book and --- spoiler alert ---- in the last chapter, he admits that he is Luke's father.

He's a war criminal...Why aren't we treating him like one?

Ask yourselves .

Because only the losing side gets charged as war criminals. Would you charge Truman with the total destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Or FDR for the firebombing of Dresden? Many more casualties than VP Cheney.

They were both actions of a formally declared war with nations that had attacked us and our allies. BIG difference.

Actually I would argue that intentionally killing millions of innocents in a declared war is a greater crime than accidental civvie deaths in a undeclared war.
So if Mullah Omar, leader of the Taliban and Afghanistan had actually declared war on the US the morning of the 9/11 attacks, he wouldn't be charged with war crimes for killing the inhabitants of the WTC?
The Nazi's and Japanese were charged with war crimes for atrocities in a declared war. And the Soviets weren't charged for crimes just as gruesome.

In my opinion, the biggest damage directly to the country was his secret "energy" meetings. You know, he was the new "energy czar". That is when CA's power costs went sky high, rolling black-outs, etc . We are still suffering from some of the "de-regulation" of Enron and others because of Cheney, Enron executives were tried and convicted, but Cheney continues on. I think if anything could take him down, it is a thorough investigation into his role in this.

Wily Fox aka Angela wrote: In my opinion, the biggest damage directly to the country was his secret "energy" meetings. You know, he was the new "energy czar". That is when CA's power costs went sky high, rolling black-outs, etc . We are still suffering from some of the "de-regulation" of Enron and others because of Cheney, Enron executives were tried and convicted, but Cheney continues on. I think if anything could take him down, it is a thorough investigation into his role in this.

California's energy issues? Some of that might have been due to their unwillingness to build any new power plants in the state, trusting on getting energy from elsewhere. Usually there are two sides to any story.

I lived there, I remember. Yes, some of it was insufficient infrastructure due to growth of the 90's, but the reason for black outs and high costs was that energy was held hostage and sold at huge profits to the state. The prices were different to CA than anywhere else. People were convicted, so it's not just "two sides to the story"

Martin Ent Inc wrote: Too bad you were too pussy or too young to have been drafted.

lol

First off- Relax, you're losing your composure on a message board and Secondly-I'm too smart to ever give my life away for oil in the mid east, or free enterprise in Indo China.. I don't care about either of those things