If Clinton had captured Osama, we wouldn't be worried about him today...

[kentuck]

Isn't that what the Repubs say? We had not been attacked on 9/11 when Clinton was President but he was supposed to have captured Osama bin Laden. Since 9/11, we have spent 100's of billions of dollars in the war on terror, we had Osama surrounded at Tora Bora, yet George Bush has not been able to capture him? What's wrong with this picture? Bill Clinton could not capture Osama when we were not at war in Afghanistan but Bush cannot capture him even with all the military resources at his disposal? Why hasn't Bush caught Osama? Can that question be asked? The answer is: Bush can't catch Osama because Clinton let him get away..

[emc]

1. I dont get it

Im afraid I dont get your reasoning-----bush cant capture osama because clinton let him get away---you logic dosent do anything for me----------

[kentuck]

2. It's not my logic...

It's Republican logic.

[MrBenchley]

3. You might recall that when Clinton WAS going after Osama

the GOP were howling that Big Bill was "wagging the dog to distract the country from all his crimes" and doing everything they could to hinder him.

Of course, when it came time to put evidence of those "crimes" on the table, there turned out to be no dog to wag.

[jobycom]

4. If the Republicans would have done their jobs instead of illegally impeach

ing Clinton, we would have captured UBL. But every time Clinton tried to get something done, the Repubs claimed UBL was just a diversion.

Clinton has nothing to be ashamed of. He recognized UBL as a threat, he told everyone who would listen that UBL was a threat, he appointed vaious commissions to find ways to prevent UBL's attacks on America, he fired missiles at UBL. The Repubs ignored him, voted down the recommendations of the committees and every other piece of anti-terrorism legislation Clinton proposed along straight party lines (often in committee), and they accused him of wagging the dog when he fired his missiles.

One tiny bit of concern for America over their own self interests on the part of the Republicans, and 9-11 would be just another day. In the days after 9-11, the Republicans pulled out evey idea Clinton and Gore had proposed, and adopted it, pretending it was their own idea. By claiming the new laws would work to fight terrorism, they were admitting they were wrong to reject them before 9-11. They were admitting it was their fault. And it was.

[kentuck]

6. In fact, Clinton had ships off the coast of Pakistan...

when Bush was sworn in on that fateful day, and Bush decided to pull the ships back and not continue to look for Osama bin Laden. That has been reported.

[catmother]

7. exactly. clinton and others high up warned bush when he took

office. he obviously did not pay attention. just like the FBI memo from phoenix about the flying lessons. bush talked about going into iraq days after the inauguaration. he wanted to finish daddy's job, which daddy was smart enough to walk away from. also when afghanistan was brought up supposedly rumsfeld said "we don't have any targets there, but we do in iraq".

[catmother]

5. clinton could have gotten osama. i had this discussion yesterday

with a repub who said clinton had 2 chances. actually he had 3 -- the reason clinton didn't bomb osama was because of collateral damage -- there were children there. if bush would have kept the focus on afghanistan instead of going into iraq, he probably would have gotten osama. remember after 9/11 bush saying "he can run and he can hide, but we'll smoke him out".

[Sleepless In NY]

8. Didn't Gore mention something about this in his speech?

I'm going to have to look for a transcipt, but I'm sure he said something to the effect regarding Cheney's "if we could have spied before 9/11, it wouldn't have happened". Gore said bush & co had the names before them, and the warnings, but took no action anyway.

Here's what I dont understand....Clinton had appointed Richard Clarke as the Anti Terrorism Czar. Neither bush nor rice would meet with him. Cheney once made a comment that Clarke was "out of the loop". Why on earth would an anti terrorism czar be put "out of the loop"? Rice later corrected cheneys remark, but the fact remains no one gave Clarke's warnings any attention.

With "chatter" at its highest level, with 52 pre 9/11 warnings, some mentioning "spectacular suicide" by plane, a PDB: "Bin Laden determined to attack in the U.S." bush goes on a month long vacation?

As for the WTC 1993, all were caught, except 1, and sit in federal prison in NYC.
Plans to bomb bridges, tunnels and other structures in NYC uncovered and stopped. The perps were all Iranian, and its been reported that Bin Laden, though not involved, admired what they had done. In other words, he got the idea from them.

Within a year, 1993 Perps caught, tried, convicted, jailed. Millenium Plot uncovered, anti terrorism bill passed, Anti Terrorism Czar appointed..I think Clinton did a damn good job.

Now 9/11,3,000 dead at home, 2 wars later, over 2,000 more dead Americans & 16,000 wounded, No WMDS, thousands of Iraqis dead, billions spent....just what is the republican "plan" to combat terrorism? Let Bin and the Anthrax killer remain free?

[catmother]

9. you're absolutely right. they didn't listen. they had their own

agenda.