Clinton's Watch

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Raider179

10)How are we supposed to keep Bush out of it when you are comparing Clinton to him in your first post? Unless you meant the other presidents that dealt with Al-qaida:lol

show me were I compared him to Bush?  you could barely make one statement about him with out bringing up Bush.  I've re-read my post 3 times now and still fail to see were I make the comparison.

[mosgood]

hmm  ya the whole monica scandle was blown WAY out of proportion and the Repubs did get overzelous with it.  Of course Clinton shouldnt have lied when he decided to address it.. he should have told them to go to hell in the first place.  But again, him doing what he did with her had NOTHING to do with the security of the U.S. or being the Pres. and the Repubs had NO business going after him for it in the first place.  It was there attempt to WEAKEN the office for their own power plays... and as a citizen, that never sat well with me.

[Masherbrum]

IN!

Karaya

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
show me were I compared him to Bush?  you could barely make one statement about him with out bringing up Bush.  I've re-read my post 3 times now and still fail to see were I make the comparison.

Ummm #6? Only 2 presidents have dealt with AQ. Clinton and Bush. So by saying AQ grew exponentially under clinton I would think you would have to compare how their numbers have grown under Clinton vs under Bush. Why don't you just come out and say what you mean. You blame Clinton For terrorism and Al-qaida. That would have taken up like like 5 of your points but I guess you needed to make a long list since you don't really have a lot there in the first place.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
you could barely make one statement about him with out bringing up Bush.  

3 out of my 9 were comparing to Bush granted.

still doesnt account for no response on #'s 3,4,5,8,9.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Raider179
Ummm #6? Only 2 presidents have dealt with AQ. Clinton and Bush. So by saying AQ grew exponentially under clinton I would think you would have to compare how their numbers have grown under Clinton vs under Bush. Why don't you just come out and say what you mean. You blame Clinton For terrorism and Al-qaida. That would have taken up like like 5 of your points but I guess you needed to make a long list since you don't really have a lot there in the first place.

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 - State Department analysts warned the Clinton administration in July 1996 that Osama bin Laden's move to Afghanistan would give him an even more dangerous haven as he sought to expand radical Islam "well beyond the Middle East," but the government chose not to deter the move, newly declassified documents show.

In what would prove a prescient warning, the State Department intelligence analysts said in a top-secret assessment on Mr. bin Laden that summer that "his prolonged stay in Afghanistan - where hundreds of 'Arab mujahedeen' receive terrorist training and key extremist leaders often congregate - could prove more dangerous to U.S. interests in the long run than his three-year liaison with Khartoum," in Sudan.

The declassified documents, obtained by the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act request and provided to The New York Times, shed light on a murky and controversial chapter in Mr. bin Laden's history: his relocation from Sudan to Afghanistan as the Clinton administration was striving to understand the threat he posed and explore ways of confronting him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/17/international/asia/17osama.html?ei=5065&en=8abb945bc6bab23d&ex=1124942400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Raider179
Ummm #6? Only 2 presidents have dealt with AQ. Clinton and Bush. So by saying AQ grew exponentially under clinton I would think you would have to compare how their numbers have grown under Clinton vs under Bush. Why don't you just come out and say what you mean. You blame Clinton For terrorism and Al-qaida. That would have taken up like like 5 of your points but I guess you needed to make a long list since you don't really have a lot there in the first place.

I still didn't compare him to Bush or any other president for the matter.  During the 90's AQ was networking out and planning the "small scale terrorist attacks ".  I still don't see how you are connecting my post at all with Bush.

It's rather insulting if you ask me that you consider twin towers #1, Khobar Towers, Embasy's in Africa, and the USS Cole "small scale terrorist attacks".  I work with a guy that has a purple heart.  He was in the Khobar Towers when the bomb went off.  He has permanent facial scares even 3 surgeries later.  I don't think he considers the bomb that went off "small scale".

  YOu keep bringing up republicans....well Clinton was the Chief Executive NOT the republicans.  The Commander in Chief is the one that's responsible, NOT the republicans.  If he would have acted aggressivly instead of taking a public opinion pole to see wich way the wind is blowing AQ could have been dismantled 10 years ago when it was still branching out.

[Charon]

1. He discouraged aggressive anti trust action to the point where many of our major industries are close enough to being monopolies that they might as well be. As a result, there is less need to actually serve customers or innovate.

2. He promoted NAFTA and globalization without any safeguards to insure a somewhat level playing field. Of course another country can make cheaper products if they can dump their waste directly into the rivers and air and use child labor (or even the local convicts) at a fraction of the cost of Western workers.

3. Significantly eroded our personal rights to prop up the failed and costly "War on Drugs." The reason the right hates him so much, IMO, is that he stole their agenda early on (when they shot down his initial personal reform efforts). How can we beat this guy if he has our own platform? (They found a way, turn him into a pariah though one of the the longest, most agressive smear campaign in political history.) Being tough on crime became important to his political success, and it came at the expense of our personal liberties.

4. He launched a number of foreign policy initiatives, but ultimately failed to close the deal (the Middle East, for example) even though he got close.

5. I see the whole Al Queda thing as a wash or at best a matter of degree. There was no Republican Congressional push for more action in the wake of those attacks. Bush didn't push for more action and was primarily concerned with "Star Wars" until 9/11. We/they were all asleep at the wheel until 9/11. Then it was time for the blame game. It wasn't even a campaign issue as I recall, and that says something right there especially since his other international efforts (where he was "taking action") were campaign issues. And the Republican position wasn't that he was doing too little abroad...

BTW, Human intel has been unpopular in Washington since the first Defense contractor shot a multi-million dollar satellite into orbit. It has been a serious issue ever since. Defense contractor dollars carry a lot more weight than low tech human intel where budgeting is concerned.

Charon

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Gunslinger

It's rather insulting if you ask me that you consider twin towers #1, Khobar Towers, Embasy's in Africa, and the USS Cole "small scale terrorist attacks".  I work with a guy that has a purple heart.  He was in the Khobar Towers when the bomb went off.  He has permanent facial scares even 3 surgeries later.  I don't think he considers the bomb that went off "small scale".

   If he would have acted aggressivly instead of taking a public opinion pole to see wich way the wind is blowing AQ could have been dismantled 10 years ago when it was still branching out.

Sorry but they were "small scale" attacks. Large scale would be as catastophic as 9/11.

You make it sound so easy capture/kill Bin Laden. Where is he again, why haven't we caught him now then? Clinton had most of the country against him because of his indiscretions and now I think it would be safe to say 90% of Americans want To kill Bin Laden no matter what it takes. Well guess public opinion doesnt matter cause OBL is still running around loose.

[Ripsnort]

Clinton dropped the ball, and it lead to 9/11. When will you finally admit that?

[mosgood]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Clinton dropped the ball, and it lead to 9/11. When will you finally admit that?

I think he absolutely droppped the ball.  Sure he did.

[Sandman]

You can quibble all you want about what Clinton could have or should have done about terrorism. Assignment of blame can be argued any number of ways.

THIS is the worst thing he did, IMHO.

[GtoRA2]

You can blame clinton for all kinds of ****, but no one thought something like 911 was going to happen here.


Not clinton, not bush not congress.



Now you can point fingers when we get another attack, because now we know it can.


Before it was unfathomable to most people.


Nafta was the worst thing he did.

[Charon]

Forgot about that one, Sandman.


Charon

[DoctorYO]

1. Changed the face of the Military in terms never seen before. Created a "sensative" force. We spent more time on "sensativity training for Homos and minorities" than we did time on the rifle range.

(I agree when I went in we were hot off the Gulf War...  By the time I left it was queens berets...  I bet airborne and rangers and SF enjoyed his beret policy what a freaking crock..)


2. Cut DOD spending big time while deployments increased 300% on his watch.

(agree, I lived this crap..  it sucks being in a platoon {normally about 20-30 men} and having the workload of a platoon but only having 12 men...   6 men per squad..

3. Decreased our ability to recruit HUMINT in the CIA by making it illegal to recruit those with questionable backrounds as informants.

(This is not bad policy whats on the books and what really happens are two different things..  one is to save face, the other is reality..  I might add until 9/11 Bush was following the same policy right up to his famous My Pet Goat reading..)

4. Gave the Chinese full access to the whithouse to include nuclear secrets. Chinese espionage increased 10 fold during Clinton's administration.

(this is complete misinformation.  Clinton didn't give the keys to anybody.  Clinton established a open dialogue which inturn has allowed both countries to flourish or get benifit..  your current war is funded by chinese loans along with the housing bubble etc..  No clinton dialogue with China no cheap loans, no cheap loans no war..  no walmart..  no alot of things..   all nations steal from one another this is true but to allude that Clinton somehow gave them secrets is rather pathetic..such actions would warrant a treason investigation Look at the current row with the Israeli spying and they are our allies..)


5. September 11th was mostly planned and even warned about on his watch (See no. 3)

(true it was..  but the vulnrability has existed since the Olympics that the T's killed some Israel competitors..   when Israel put in reinforced pilot doors it was debated by congress/faa for us to do the same.. at the time special interest from the airlines squashed that approach by claiming it would gut the industry through expense of implementing such..  throw reagan..  Bush 1 ..  carter..  etc.. into the mix..  then you have a accurate statement.)

6. AQ grew exponentially under Clinton's watch.

(I agree they did,  they have exploded during the Bush Admin..  they are now globally branded / franchised with little command or control element to go after..  At least with clinton they were one entity not a hundred headed hydra..  I suggest Imperial Hubris for some reading on this..) (I might add with a 200 billion dollar war effort and climbing we still have a paltry 50 million on his head.. its clear we dont want OBL if we did he would have a 10 billion+ tag on his head..)

7. Terrorism on his watch increased (twin towers #1, Khobar Towers, Embasy's in Africa, and the USS Cole

No more so than any other time..  Beruit, Iran.. contras  do your history..

8. Lied before a federal grand jurry

(his reasons for lying have more credibility {well maybe not over hilliary} than bushes preeumptive war against a  foreign country under false pretenses.  Blood is always thicker than govt..  any man that says otherwise is either a liar or otherwise..) a blow pales in comparisson to 1800 war dead 14000 injured not including Iraqis..  weigh the blind ladies scale of justice and tell me which crime weighs more...  its a no brainer..  I have no love for clinton but his policies didn't incite the entire planet..  nor did we pay 60 bucks a barrel either..)

9. Becaue of his scandels he did not have the political clout to actually persue terrorists with actual force instead of lobbing missles at them

(this is complete fabrication, its sad when you as a soldier don't understand the capabilites of the commander and chief in times of crisis..  He may wage war as he sees fit for a limited time without congressional approval.)(a pearl harbor type event will most likely get you any support you demand as seen clearly by the repealing of constitutional protections awarded by the Bill of Rights via the patriot act with false sunset provisions clearly demonstrated by the saturday sneaking of current and new provisions into a troop funding bill.)(lets not forget the concentration camps during WW2 for japanese americans  nothing has changed..)


thats all for now..  


PAAAAARADE     REST........





DoctorYo