when bill clinton passed on terrorism for the sake of his own polls does this make him a joke?

Question

Clinton had 8 years to deal with a problem that was right in front of his nose. He ignored every terrorist attack while promising to hunt them down. He was too concerned with doing anything that might hurt his popularity(which by the time he was done, was 34%) that he let down the country and set it up for the biggest attack ever on American soil.

And now another clinton wants to weaken the United States again in her greedy bloodthirsty pursuit of personal power?

Haven't they dont enough damage?

Answer 1

yes

Answer 2

Saying that the Clinton Administration did nothing regarding terrorism demonstrates how little you really know about the Clinton Administration. Assume whatever you want, but don't claim a grasp on the facts regarding what counter-terrorism activities went on during the 1990s.

Funny that you would blame him for the growth of terrorism over an eight year period in the White House, when George Bush Sr. and Ronald Reagan were in the White House for the prior 12 years. Weren't Marines attacked in Lebanon under Reagan's watch? And how about the terrorists (sorry, "freedom fighters") Contras that were openly supported by the Reagan Administration? And the weapons and support given to Saddam Hussein and the Taliban during those twelve years, weapons which may be getting used against American troops right now? How you can lay so much blame at the feet of Bill Clinton is almost laughable.

Also funny that some right-wingers want to give our current president credit for "preventing another attack on U.S. soil." How do we know that this administration has really prevented anything? For that matter, why isn't credit given to Clinton since there wasn't an attack on U.S. soil while he was president? The double-standards that fly around (especially in circles where pretty much no one has ever worked in an intelligence agency or has first-hand knowledge to cite) are amazing sometimes.