Is there any truth to it?
2007-02-13 19:21:42 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
also, how can terrorism "flourish", when it is something that can spontaneously be done by anyone at anytime?
2007-02-13 19:31:45 · update #1
I think after withdrawal of Russian forces from Afghanistan, USA withdraw its support. No attention was paid to stabilize Afghanistan, help Afghanistan refugee to return their home land and disarming of various armed groups. Obviously its was in the knowledge of USA Administration hostile attitude of different groups to USA. He must be doing his best to tackle the issue within limitations. More aggressive approach was required.
2007-02-21 14:37:44 · answer #1 · answered by snashraf 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who exactly made that comment?
I think the basis for that comment, which is only slightly inaccurate, is the fact that the US had intelligence showing that several groups were actively planning attacks against the US and during his tenure as president there were a number of high profile international and domestic terror attacks against American interests.
World Trade center 1, the bombing of the USS Cole, the embassy and barracks bombings, Oklahoma city and the Olympics to name a few.
Clinton saw a sharp up spike in terrorist incidents, which had not been seen since the beginning term of Regan and the early 80’s.
I remember growing up and it seemed every few months there were new hijackings, bombings and hostage incidents. These numbers dropped dramatically after a few years of Regan's and Bush Sr.'s very aggressive policies involving international terrorism.
When Clinton took office, a more lax stance was taken, it was more important to follow the rule of law and maintain our appearance of a kind state on the world stage, unfortunately it also made us look weak in the eyes of the world. And the rapid withdrawal of troops in Somalia after a small number of regrettable but not all together unexpected casualties and other incidents cemented that perception.
Since Bush 2 has been in office, save for 9/11 there has been few major terrorist incidents directed specificity at the US, while there has been a spike in regional terrorism in other parts of the world.
You are right Clinton did not specifically allow Terrorism to flourish, but his lax policies and concern for the world's perspective of the US emboldened some of the enemy.
Yes Terrorism can be spontaneous as can be seen in the recent school and mall shootings. But planned, dedicated and complex schemes can take months or years and there had been a sharp increase during Clinton’s tenure.
I don’t think Clinton specifically allowed terrorism to flourish, but he did not act decisively enough to nip most of the actions that could have been prevented in the bud as his predecessors had done in the previous twelve years, or in the successive 5 years since 9/11.
Obviously Clinton could have done more.
2007-02-14 03:58:06 · answer #2 · answered by Stone K 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because during his reign Al Quaida flourished particularly since the World Trade Center was attacked in 1993 and the USS Cole and the US Embassy in Kenya were bombed. All Clinton did to retaliate was to fire a few cruise missiles. One struck a baby formula plant in Somalia the other struck an empty Al Quaida camp in Afghanistan. Otherwise there was no concerted effort to bring down Al Quaida until after 9/11. This allowed the terrorists time to build their network and plant agents within the USA.
2007-02-14 07:45:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
History.
2007-02-14 03:54:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
He was not concerned with military at all, (he didged the draft) and Democrats rarely care about the military, he let the guard down and alot of assinine things took place here that eventually le to the World Trade Center disaster.
2007-02-14 03:52:42 · answer #5 · answered by Orion Quest 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Clinton was a great President but so many ignore that fact because of the whole scandal.
2007-02-14 03:29:31 · answer #6 · answered by lizko2 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
maybe it has something to do with th 18 American cities he let corporate Americans target Chinese missles at Dummies.
2007-02-20 01:28:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Buck passing! It's done all the time in Politics and who said it Bush or one of his Crooked Christian Cronies?
2007-02-14 03:29:42 · answer #8 · answered by Shelty K 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He didn't "let it flourish", but he sure as heck did nothing to stop it.
2007-02-14 03:50:59 · answer #9 · answered by Sartoris 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because he focussed on Iraq and ignored Osama, which was a mistake.
2007-02-14 04:15:59 · answer #10 · answered by Mike J 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋