Al-Quada vs Clinton and Bush White House

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Sourdoughman, Mar 21, 2004.

  1. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    561
    Here is a link to an article about the Bush and Clinton Administrations vs Al Quada. I think you have to blame the Clinton watch a little more than the Bush watch because he was in office for 8 years and did nothing.
    We had the 1st WTC bombing, I think there were like 3 or 4 embassy bombings overseas, and the USS Cole and we did nothing.
    I think you could also use Somolia fiasco as an example as to not what to do
    because it showed signs of weakness on the part of Americans and Clinton.

    I will admit that I will vote for the lesser of 2 evils this year because their are
    things I don't like about George W.
    1 I don't like the Patriot Act
    2 I don't like our debt
    3 I don't like how he's wanted to go after Sadaam day 1 no matter what.

    I do like the war on terror and I want to stay safe so that's where I stand.

    The Clinton Administration was 1 big failure when it came to terrorism, both parties have let us down.......

    Link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4571338/
     
  2. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i definitely agree with that. in fact i recently saw an osama interview where he mentioned somalia as an example of how muslims should fight the americans, because they are weak and can be beaten.

    we should never go anywhere and fight in any conflict unless we are positive we are gonna be committed to it enough to completely dominate the conflict, and never show any signs of weakness. giving up or pulling out of conflicts only makes it worse. we never should have gone to somalia, and we should definitely stay in iraq as long as we have to. leaving early is a sign of weakness, and will invite more agression. our enemies must fear us.
     
  3. dallastigers

    dallastigers Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,361
    Likes Received:
    1
    This article was reposted in light of Clarke's comments. I found it very interesting.

    link to article
     
  4. dallastigers

    dallastigers Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,361
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here is a link to an article on Clarke written over a year ago, so it was not in retaliation for his recent comments. I am not familiar with this website, so I cannot speak for its accuracy. Though I had forgotten that Clarke was in a sense demoted by Rice and Bush.

    Until 09/11 there was a belief (with both politicians and the military brass) that terrorism was not an act of war and that it was better to not involve the military. 09/11 woke us up to the fact that it is war and that it is better to fight on their soil than on ours. Special Ops forces have been used better than in the past. Rumsfed started this process when he took over the defense, but 09/11 sealed the deal for their use with Islamic terrorists. He probably more than Bush deserves credit for the transformation of how we respond now including the use of Special forces.


    link to article
     
  5. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    561
    When I first posted this thread I didn't realize Clarke was a left over from the Klinton White House.
    With people like Clinton, Clarke and Reno on our side, who needs enemies...
     
  6. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    Was Clinton really that soft on terrorism. The answer is no. It is easy to pass the blame to the guy, and in some ways he did frop the ball, but with something as unpredictable as golda terror he reall didn't do that bad. He did more to combat terrorism than any previous administration had, and before 9/11 some of Regan's top aids praised the job he did to combat terrorism.

    on the search for bin Laden
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A62725-2001Dec18
    http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.clinton.taliban/index.html

    raising money to fight
    http://www.cnn.com/US/9609/09/clinton.aviation/index.html

    this one has a lot of spin, but just focus on the facts
    http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/10/18/column.billpress/index.html

    freezing terrorist assets
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52702-2001Oct12
     
  7. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    561
    On the search for Bin Laden, if he was searching for him then why didn't he take him when the Sudeneze offered him to Clinton twice?
    i still say he was soft on terrorism, the only thing he really did was freeze assets.

    The problem with your articles is Clinton tried to trust other countries such as Pakistan
    and Uzbekistan, i don't trust any middle eastern country other than Isreal and I don't
    see how we as a country could legimately could trust most of these countries.

    We can only trust our allies at this point and I don't buy the argument the USA couldn't get their man during the Clinton Administration, we knew at times he was in
    Afganistan and about the training camps and didn't use special forces to get him.

    Btw, when was the last Democratic president to have a successful covert operation?
    Somolia was a horrendous failure along with Carter's attempt to rescue hostages from
    Iran.
    Everyone has forgotten just how badly our military was and lack of confidence we had
    in our country under Jimmy Carter.
    Some people around here claim Bush is bad but Carter was actually the worst president
    ever and I do realize some of you were in diapers or born around then.

    The problem with the Clinton Administration is they try and work with other countries including middle eastern countries, Palestine including the brokered peace plan that fell apart.
    You can't work with people that stab you in a back in a heartbeat, some of these countries aren't exactly our enemies but their not our friends either.
     
  8. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    No one knows the anwesr to that, but you can be assured that their were many successful covert operations during the Clinton administartion. My jui-jitsu instructor was a seal during the clinton years and was in combat 8 times. That was all he could ever tell us.
     
  9. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    561
    I was thinking no one would know the answer for sure but you sure here about the bad ones, don't you!
     
  10. mesquite tiger

    mesquite tiger Diabolical Genius

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,967
    Likes Received:
    66

    I do believe he was in the white house before Clinton too. check your sources again........he has been there since at least the first bush from what i understand.
     

Share This Page