If Bin Laden had been caught during Clinton presidency would 911 had been prevented ?

Question

Seemes like republican think tanks push hard on the issue that because Clinton didnt catch Bin Laden 911 happend. If you look at terrorism and how it works its small seperate cells that can work independent of eachother. That provide the possibility to strike no matter who is the leader of Al Queda. I question that it would have made any difference if Clinton would have caught Bin Laden. Ofcourse noone can know but if you look at the 911 attack it wasnt a high tech preperation or a cost intensive project. Its extremely hard to protect a nation 100% from terrorism. I would say its impossible. But people have to choose if they want to live a life were they think about the possibility of getting attacked or if they just ignore it and live life. Terrorists goal is to scare people and make them look over the shoulder. When they have that on people in the country then they dont have to do a single attack since they have already won.

Answer 1

No, like you were saying, terrorist cells can work collaboratively or independent of one another. If Bin Laden had been caught, Al Qaeda would have probably already had a back up plan for his part in it, but the show would still go on. In battle these people are very dangerous, b/c they are willing to set aside all fears and shortcomings they have and fight to the death if necessary for what they believe in. American soldiers (for the most part) aren't even that brave and certainly not that committed to what their nation tells them is needed. That being said getting Bin Laden then would be just as futile as finding him now would be if we did. The terrorist organizations wouldn't stop just because one man was pulled out of the equation. If you're willing to blow yourself up for your belief taking out some guy who used to be a high ranking official in your organization and your enemy's organizations won't be enough to make you say "awwww, shucks! Let me throw down my gun, I surrender..." It won't stop anything now, and it wouldn't have stopped it back then. That is actually a part of the Republican propaganda machine that is activated every time the Republican's feel like they may be losing power over the people and the government. They come up with outlandish hypothetical statements with minimal grounding in real world application and events and super-impose it to scare the people and the Democrats into letting them do what they're gonna do anyhow, and unfortunately it works all too well for both every time they start it up.

Answer 2

(Excuse my poor grammar)

Understand Bin Laden is a excuse for the Bush Administration. I read something that made perfect sense but never thought about it. The hijackers are DEAD! so there really wasn't anything nobody could do after 9/11. Bush knew he had to put a "Face" on who did this. He have to give the American pubic a "Hitler" type enemy. He had to fool everyone into thinking once we get this guy you will be safe. The truth is it has already been prov en that Al Queda works in many cells around the world and they do this for a good reason. They know if they all work out of one city on one base it would be extremely easy to knock them out. If you Clinton killed Bin Laden it would have mad 0 difference. The plan was already set in motion and even when different hijackers backed out at the last minute they quickly sent reserves to finish the job.

Answer 3

I doubt it 911 would have happened if Bin Laden had been caught. Which is not to say some other terroristic attack would not have taken place.
Look, Clinton is very similiar to Bush in the way he handled Iraq. He bombed Iraq for violating airspace and he bombed the CRAP out of slobo, unloading our entire arsenal of missiles and totally crushing their commerce.
I believe that Clinton would have acted very similiarly to Bush in handling the post 911 situation. Remember, Bill was FOR the initial invasion of Iraq, as were many propminent democrats who have since lost their belly for fighting when things got sticky.
But to answer your question, Bin Ladens capture by Clinton would've been good, it would have stopped the destruction of the towers, i believe, but most likely some other terroristic event would have been carried out at some time against the US, maybe not on the scale of 911, but who knows, maybe one of a much worse degree- which could have killed millions could have occurred if bin laden was caught and averted 911 and the attention of terrorism.
I do not fault Bill Clinton one bit, nor do I fault George Bush. They both reacted in logical, practical ways.

Answer 4

I don't think they really want to catch him. I think they are afraid of him turning into a Myrta...like Ben Kenobi. The truth is that Bin Laden family is more influential in the middle east than people want to give credence to. And don't fool yourself thinking that Osama is a family outcast...he is very admired by large segments of the population in the Arab world. The Bush Family manages investments for the Bin Laden family through the Carlyle Group. President Bush cant catch him and Clinton wouldn't give the order to take him out. When anytime Republicans and Democrats act a like, there is something more here than meets the eye.

Answer 5

because like quite a few of us pre-911, we were ignorant to the prospect of a enormous attack via Al-Qaeda on our own soil. certain, it would were magnificent if Bin encumbered become captured in the previous. yet do no longer overlook that merely taking pictures Bin encumbered, doesn't advise that 9-11 would were prevented. Bin encumbered did not attack the U. S., his employer did. Even with out him, the operation would have persisted. it would were no longer achieveable to capture or kill each man or woman in contact contained in the orchestration of 9-11. Hindsight is 20/20. we are able to not carry Clinton to blame for this. It become generic naiveness and absence of expertise via a lot of people.

Answer 6

Clinton at least tried to find bin Laden. And was stopped by the efforts of the Republican-dominated Congress. Let's not mix facts. It is not Clinton's fault. Nor is it Bush's fault. Nor the fault of any Congress.

9/11 happened because the country, as a whole, had gotten really relaxed and comfortable in the knowledge that no hijackings of planes had happened in this country in a long, long time. We became lazy and complacent, and the terrorists took advantage.

However, if we're discussing FAULT... it is no one's fault other than the terrorists. And I will never, as long as I live, understand the American need to point fingers at our own countrymen and say, "This one person is entirely responsible for the worst terrorist attack every to happen on United States soil." Why not just say, "It was tragic, it was awful, and here's what we're going to do to prevent it from happening again."?

Answer 7

No!! Becuase Bin Laden and his gang of terrorists hiding in a cave in Afghanistan did not perpetrate 911!! Bin Laden was merely the cover story for the biggest lie of the century. While we dont know exactly what happened on 911, we do know that the war machine welcomed it as did neo-con-fascists like PNAC etc! Bush and Clinton have one thing in common - no desire to catch Bin Laden!! He is much more valuable lurking out over the horizon in some unknown location directing a war of terror against the west! What if they caught him? then what? Would the war on terror be over? he is much more valuable "uncaught". 911 was an inside job, start with what we know....wtc7 did not fall on its own (Larry Silverstein admits it was "pulled" what more do you wing nuts need?) jets were not scrambled becuase of a secret operation going on that morning (yes on the morning of Sept 11, 2001) concerning the air force response to highjacked airliners hundreds of miles south...etc etc etc etc! I could go on and on and on with the amazing once in a million coincidences, but I wont here! 911 is another gulf of tonkin or USS Maine, Pearl Harbor, Fort Sumter, provoking the mexicans into the mexican american war etc etc etc. Our history is littered with the evidence of our complicity in virtually every war we have ever been in! So, in Summary - 911 could not have been prevented, not as long as the military industrial complex owns and controls our governemt!

Answer 8

Bin Laden was just the money in my opinion. 911 tooks years of planning to execute. Taking Bin Laden would only have been helpful if we had gotten the information we needed to muck up the rest of the gang.

Answer 9

They had the chance to take out Bin Laden during the Clinton admin and they decided not to do it. His group has been tied to acts of terror for decades and they had him in their sights at a one of his training camps and didn't act on it. I believe it was a horrible misstake and I certainly would have believed that even if the attacks on 9/11 didn't happen.

If they would have taken out Osama and his entire camp, it would have likely led to other contacts he had and possibly a very, very large 'sting' operation.

They had him in their sights even before the pilots of the crashes were getting their training!

Cerainly his womanizing and the ensuing consuming media/investigations it caused; and his running from the truth were a distraction that the person with the responsibility of leading the country shouldn't be involved in.

His guilt should be enormous! Should a president be using his position for womanizing or should he be emersed in his job--it's only 4 years long!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's some info from Wikipedia that I was reading to learn more about what Laughing Man Copycap said--10 answers down.

In the book House of Bush, House of Saud, author Craig Unger states that Saudi Arabian interests have given $1.4 billion to firms connected to the Bush family. Nearly 85% of the 1.4 billion, about 1.18 billion, refers to Saudi Arabian government contracts awarded to defense contractor BDM in the early to mid 1990s. Carlyle, however, sold its interest in BDM before former President George H. W. Bush joined as an advisor.
Former President George H.W. Bush retired from Carlyle in October 2003. George W. Bush served on the Board of Directors of early Carlyle acquisition Caterair. Bush left the board in 1992 to run for Governor of Texas.
The Saudi Arabian relatives of Osama bin Laden were also investors in Carlyle until October 2001 when the family sold its $2.02 million investment back to the firm in light of the public controversy surrounding bin Laden’s family after September 11. The bin Laden family has publicly disowned the al-Qaeda leader, but privately some members of the family have kept in contact with him.[citation needed] Osama bin Laden has no economic interest in Saudi Binladin Group (SBG), whose investments were in part managed by the Carlyle Group until the arrangement was terminated by mutual consent.

Answer 10

I see that you liberals are still in the land of "what if" again. But just to indulge you...

YES. If Billy had been actually chasing down Bin Laden and not chasing Monica around, then 9/11 could have been prevented.