ulTRAX
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 09:59 AM
Original message |
CONDI: defends failures at home; US should have launched preemptive attack |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-08-04 10:00 AM by ulTRAX
Am I getting this right? Condi is excusing away all the failures on the home front that reasonable people believe could have disrupted some of the 911 plot... yet we should have launched a preemptive attack on Afghanistan before 911?
|
RainDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:01 AM
Response to Original message |
1. "Bush tired of swatting flies" |
|
Kerrey- what flies did he swat??
She tries to avoid direct answer. he calls her...
thank you.
the Bushistas are bullshit artists. they did squat.
|
RainDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. But Condi got Kerrey on his view of response to Cole |
|
bombing...to go after Saddam.
checkmate, Kerrey, by Condi.
|
fryguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:02 AM
Response to Original message |
3. and what sort of bullsh*t are they talking about.. |
|
every time they say that, its like they forget about all that crap about "waging the dog" that was thrown at clinton when he acted in response to any attack. Each time cruise missiles were launched, the GOPhers launched in with attacks that it was his attempt to obfuscate the Lewinsky affair - and now they're saying that he should have done MORE? how do you say hypocrite?
|
Cannikin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:02 AM
Response to Original message |
Brotherjohn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:15 AM
Response to Original message |
5. BUT... YOU... DIDN'T! And Clarke WAS recommending special ops go in. |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-08-04 10:16 AM by Brotherjohn
The Clinton Plan (I know it hurts to hear that, Condi) was a quantum leap forward in using special ops / covert involvement in Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. It was finalized while Election 2000 was being decided by the courts. You can understand them not going forward with it in December 2000.
You HAD a plan to "pre-emptively" strike at Bin Laden. You just didn't USE IT!
And stop trying to use the word "pre-emptive" to justify the "Bush Doctrine". A localized, pre-emptive, special ops-type attack on Bin Laden in 2000-early 2001 would have been self defense. We had already BEEN attacked and were going to be attacked again by the party we would have been striking against. THAT kind of a pre-emptive attack is legally and morally justifiable.
The Iraq War is NOT self defense. The Iraq War was illegal. The Iraq War made us less safe, not more. So stop trying to use your pathetic lack of action pre-9-11 to justify your illegal war against Iraq!
|
The Backlash Cometh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-08-04 10:23 AM
Response to Original message |
6. The Carpet of bombs, remember? |
|
Let us buy you off, or deal with our military might.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:30 PM
Response to Original message |