English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If Bush had listened to Clinton's warning about Bin Laden, then not only the twin towers would not have been hit, Bush would not have been able to kill all the American soldiers in Iraq. So should we add both body counts to Bush's personal body count?

2006-09-12 02:05:23 · 13 answers · asked by brinlarrr 5 in Politics & Government Politics

13 answers

Bill's my guy. I love him. But, he dropped the ball before handing it to Bush. Bush is too immature to listen to any Democrat about anything. Bill had a chance to liquidate Osama, but decided against it, at the last minute, because there were also children in the compound. A commando strike force was set and ready, waiting for the green light and Bill let the chance pass.

2006-09-12 02:14:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There are two men, both extremely wealthy. One develops relatively cheap software and gives billions of dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism. That being the case, why was it that the Clinton Administration spent more money chasing down Bill Gates over the eight years in office, than Osama bin-Laden?
THINK ABOUT IT!
It is a strange turn of events. Hillary gets $8 Million for her forthcoming memoir. Bill gets about $12 Million for his memoir yet to be written. This from two people who spent 8 years being unable to recall anything about past events while under oath!

Here are some facts which all came from Freedom of Information requests, public laws, and various books that have been published, and have not been refuted by Clinton.

1.) After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000, President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
2.) After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, that killed five U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
3.) After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
4.) After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
5.) After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept those promises, an estimated 3,000 people in New York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today and people would stop blaming Bush.

2006-09-12 02:08:32 · answer #2 · answered by michaelyoung_airforce 6 · 1 0

Bill Clinton is delusional. He makes up stories to try to make himself look better. Clinton had dozens of opportunities to capture or kill Bin Laden. He did not have the guts to do it. Besides raising taxes and getting oral sex, he did nothing while President.
President Bush did not kill anyone. When you lie and put it in writing, you are committing libel, which is a criminal and civil offense.
President Bush does not have a "personal body count." It appears to me that you have two counts of libel against you.

2006-09-12 02:11:51 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 3 0

i got here across Richard Clarke's e book, "against all Enemies", to be between the greater enlightening texts in this concern. it is the non-public memoir of a guy who became interior the thick of it for the time of the Clinton years besides via fact the start of the Bush era. and greater, he unquestionably resigned his post as Terrorism "Czar" (a non-partisan place) in disgust while it grew to alter into glaring that the Bush inner circle have been attempting to connect 9-11 to Saddam Hussein from the very beginning. i pick to propose it to the two left and proper winged readers as a solid commencing element in the direction of expertise the present challenge from an interior attitude.

2016-10-14 22:14:13 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Clinton did not leave a warning for Bush, he trashed the white house instead, and stole the china.

2006-09-12 02:08:23 · answer #5 · answered by Super Shiraz 3 · 2 0

The attacks would have still happened if Bin Laden was dead. The plan was set into motion 3 years earlier. OBL's gang will continue to do terror long after he is dead.

2006-09-12 02:09:46 · answer #6 · answered by El Pistolero Negra 5 · 2 0

Spare us your stupidity.

Clinton had over 4 times when he could have given the word and bin laden would have gotten killed. He balked becasue he was a wuzzie and 9/11 was the price we paid.

2006-09-12 02:08:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Clinton must have believed his so-called 'warning' that he was doing everything he could to capture or kill Bin Laden..... oh wait, he did nothing.....

Face it... these liberal lies are getting old!!

2006-09-12 02:11:15 · answer #8 · answered by DiamondDave 5 · 1 0

You are reading to much into the political issue! Bush has not even listened to his own advisors warnings

2006-09-12 02:07:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anarchy99 7 · 0 1

Yes i believe that bush is behind everything that has happened while he was in office.

2006-09-12 02:27:14 · answer #10 · answered by nina t 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers