Be specific....Since we are in Irac, how would he handle that.now?
How do you think he would handle China?
How do you think he would handle Iran?
What could he have done about Katrina in New Orleans?
2006-07-06 17:13:36 · 27 answers · asked by mom of a boy and girl 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
All you have to do is look at what he did about China during his eight years in office. What did he do about global warming? Or about border security? Or about immigration? Or energy independence? Or social security? Or about terrorism? Or Iran? Iraq? North Korea?
What did Clinton do about the New Orleans levees?
How badly did he cut our military and foreign inntelliegnce services?
The absolute fact is, he did NOTHING to fix any of our problems. There's no reason to expect a Clinton return to have any different outcome.
2006-07-06 17:20:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I wish....
#1 we wouldn't be in Iraq. China would be the same, I mean the dude was from Arkansas and Wal-Mart is the largest importer of Chinese goods in the world. So it's safe to say the relationship with China would be the same or worse depending on your perspective.
Iran. Probably would be less of an issue if we weren't right next door in Iraq. Plus Iraq always sorta made Iran nervous. Saddam took it to those folks if you recall. They might need that kind of beating again.
Katrina would not have been as disastrous. Hopefully the mess that passes as the Department of Homeland Security would never have been foisted on the American People and FEMA could have done its job unfettered by endless beauracracy. FEMA had a solid track record during the Clinton Years and as a survivor of the Flood of 1993 in St. Charles, MO, I can tell you they got things cleaned up in a hurry from St. Louis to Cedar Rapids.
And the best part, Clinton worked ... a lot. He was even working when he was being worked. Bush has been on vacation right before a lot of bad things. The Presidency isn't a part-time gig. Make the commitment and do the work.
2006-07-07 00:21:15 · answer #2 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We likely wouldn't have gone into Iraq without a coalition or UN mandate. He would have been more diplomatic to avoid conflict. There would be a minimum of Sabre rattling and rhetoric towards other nations. Talks with Iran and No. Korea towards normal relations in exchange for some concessions. As far as China goes, we can comment on their human rights, but we needn't "meddle" in their internal affairs. During Katrina, the only efficiency was shown by the Coast Guard. Maybe, they should be over FEMA and Homeland Security.
2006-07-07 00:36:59 · answer #3 · answered by rvnalot 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You want me to be specific about a hypothetical fantasy.
Perhaps you should analyze the series of events through the 90's by Al Qaeda that led up to 9/11 and Bill Clinton's response to those events. You'd be lucky to find if he did a dam thing to fight Al Qaeda.
Katrina is completely off the map here. That was a disaster waiting to happen. The probem was under-performing levees that went ignored by many administrations for decades. To blame only Bush is pure ignorance.
2006-07-07 00:16:06 · answer #4 · answered by C Bass 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay. First of all, It's IRAQ, not IRAC. Secondly, I don't think he would handle it at all. Maybe he would sell some of our military secrets to either of them just to keep them quiet for a few years. As for hurricane Katrina, I don't know, maybe he would have stopped the hurricane from coming since liberals think he is the second coming.
2006-07-07 00:25:58 · answer #5 · answered by Apple 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
get real it would be the same ,the people who give the orders have never changed
Bush takes his orders from them
Bill did as well .but he screwed up and they punished him.
The horrible tyranny that is being created by the Bush junta is a threat to the entire world. For the first time in its history,
Western Civilization as a whole is in danger of being destroyed by a corrupt, criminal ruling cabal which is centered around the Rockefeller interests, which include elements from the Morgan, Brown, Rothschild, DuPont, Harriman, Kuhn-Loeb, and other groupings as well.
This junta took control of the political, financial, and cultural life of America in the first two decades of the twentieth century.
The Bush family, beginning with Prescott Bush, have served as satraps of the Rockefeller, Brown, and Harriman interests.
If some people are too unintelligent or morally deficient to see the tyrannous acts of the Bush administration, if some people are too cowardly to stand against those acts, it's still your individual responsibility as an American citizen to rouse them out of their daze.
Unfortunately it appears it will take at least one more 'al-CIA-duh'- style staged attack to provoke the populous into expelling the whole congress full of traitors and the hoards of other corporate lobbying cockroaches running around DC.
President Bush is simply a puppet of this powerful cabal,
their schemes will be carried out by whatever next president comes to power unless We the People deflect them from this insane, murderous plot for global dominance.
this is the Masonic order and the illuminati
2006-07-07 00:23:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A million times better than Bush. Sorry I can't go into specifics not being from your country. But I think he would be far more respectful of the UN and work with them. He would not have invaded countries for the sake of oil or his father and he would make the place a lot better off for the workers, the sick, the students, families etc. Oh man, those were the days.
2006-07-07 00:19:02 · answer #7 · answered by Aussie Chick 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Despite all of this personal problems! Bill Clinton was a good president! He had good relations and was very well liked by most countries. He would have had faster thinking, and would of done what he thought was right for the American people! Wouldnt mind seeing him in the office again! He would probably straighten things out a bit, dont you think?
2006-07-07 00:23:29 · answer #8 · answered by lsubetty 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are assuming he would have even attacked Iraq. We had no reason to, so I doubt if he would!
If he did: The same way he did with Operation Desert Fox: Target military targets and cruise them, without a loss!
We wouldn't be in Iraq waiting for the next IED to kill someone!
He would have been on the ground the next day, and the FEMA head would be different, as would our response!
We wouldn't be adding on 100 million to the Katrina bill to give to 1 company!
2006-07-07 00:22:10 · answer #9 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
aussie chick say some more, you turn me on the way you say the truth, bush is not cleaning up anything he is the one creating it. this started to happen because daddy bush ticked everyone off overseas, and now his son is betting the fall out, and is also proving how the bush legacy will be that of Two failed bushes who are in need of a good trim. the worst clinton did was get some bush...lol
2006-07-07 00:38:13 · answer #10 · answered by cbb 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋