Which President's ME policy invited the 9/11 attacks?

[ProSense]

3 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Reagan
	1 (33%)
	Bush Sr.
	1 (33%)
	Clinton
	0 (0%)
	Bush Jr.
	0 (0%)
	Not sure
	0 (0%)
	It was terrorism
	1 (33%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[bravenak]

1. Can't give out weapons to everybody.

Or make deals with the devil.

[cthulu2016]

2. All of the above, really

[geek tragedy]

3. None, there is no such thing as inviting a crime against humanity nt

[Chan790]

7. +1

No President's actions invited 9/11; there can be no invitation or motivation towards terrorist attack on civilian targets.

[GeorgeGist]

14. Hiroshima and Nagasaki notwithstanding?

[Chan790]

17. I have a problem with the use of nuclear weapons on Japan.

Beyond the general opposition to use of nuclear weapons, there is little argument for me that their use on a populated mostly-civilian urban area is clearly unwarranted and terrorist.

Lots of things done by lots of now-upstanding nations during WW-II and the era between the World Wars were things that I'd condemn today as terrorism, humanitarian violations and war crimes...the Brits and French in their conduct towards former colonies were particularly brutal in ways that the current human-rights abusers in the Middle East can only match. That's not touching on Germany or Japan's conduct during the war. None of it would or should be condoned if it were happening today. That's progress; I expect us to be our grandparent's betters on humanitarian issues...I should hope our children are ours.

[WatermelonRat]

4. Reagan was the most responsible

Having helped create an environment where bin Laden could earn himself prestige and leadership among other extremists, but I wouldn't say any of them "invited" the attacks. That's not to say that none of them made decisions that increased overall hostilities, but the fact is that al-Qaeda types are extremists with an extremely low bar for provocation.

[zipplewrath]

11. Gulf War 1

Reagan created Osama, but it was Bush's invasion of Iraq and Kuwait from "Mecca" that really turned them on us. We basically stepped into a dispute between various branches of Islam and to a great extent "took sides" without really knowing it.

[NuclearDem]

5. You'd have to go back much further than that.

You'd end up having to factor in:

-Unequivocal support for Israel (everyone since Truman)
-Operation Ajax (Eisenhower)
-Relationship with Saudi Arabia (everyone since FDR)
-Tendency to prop up politically convenient dictators (Mubarak, Saddam, the Shah, and the Saudi royal family) (just about everyone since FDR)
-Western boots on Saudi soil (Bush Sr and Clinton)
-Arming the mujahideen (Reagan and Bush Sr)

But I know taking all that into account, including things perpetrated by Democrats in the region, would require greater thought than just trying to pin it on one president or the other.

[hobbit709]

6. That's about the way I see it too.

[HardTimes99]

18. + Infinity! - nt

[whatchamacallit]

8. I think the question is which authorized it. n/t

[andym]

9. The attacks weren't "invited"

US policy over decades caused resentment among some extremists in the Arab world. 9/11 was their misguided response.

[DURHAM D]

10. Eisenhower. Iran.

[Rex]

12. Reagan and Iran.

Should have left Iran alone, but NOOOOO...Repukes just LOVE fucking up things and then pretending they didn't.

[Cali_Democrat]

13. All

US interference in the Middle East for decades led to 9/11. I wouldn't blame any one President.

Unfortunately we continue to interfere and that will also lead to additional blowback.

[Nye Bevan]

15. I think we'd be "The Great Satan" regardless of the President.

The existence of Wall Street, Hollywood, women wearing bikinis, and sheltering Salman Rushdie from the Fatwa, is all the justification they need.

The 72 virgins would be an additional fringe benefit, of course.

[spanone]

16. wow, bu$h* gets a pass on du....