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

2007-07-21 16:03:23 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

sylvestre,

Wow... Can you tell any of us what I violated? Or do you simply report everyone you hate?

2007-07-21 16:09:03 · update #1

Crushin, Do you remember that LBJ could not get his party's nomination because he was in the process of wasting 58,000 American lives?

2007-07-21 16:09:46 · update #2

Prioritize... I guess you and Clinton could give a rat's tail about those 4,000 poor Kenyans that were bombed because of Clinton's embassy.

2007-07-21 16:16:18 · update #3

14 answers

You misunderstood. Dems NEVER said Clinton was tough on terror. When Clinton was briefed about the threat of terrorism in the US, Clinton said, "that's tough". (I believe Monica was waiting for him at the time.)

2007-07-21 16:16:01 · answer #1 · answered by Cherie 6 · 4 2

Just a couple of examples with details, which just goes to show how much you know, how much the people who are posting know, and what the mental capacity of Republicans are.

On February 26, 1993 - World Trade Center bombing
Clinton responded by ordering his National Security Council, under the direction of Anthony Lake, and the FBI to find and punish those responsible. The FBI was able to quickly identify the vehicle used in the bomb from a remnant found in the rubble: a Ryder rental van, which had been reported stolen in Jersey City, New Jersey the day before. The truck was rented by Mohammed Salameh, whom the FBI immediately detained. Similar evidence led to the arrests of other plotters behind the attack, including Nidal Ayyad, Mahmoud Abouhalima, Ahmad Ajaj, and Ramzi Yousef—who was identified as the key player in the bombing. All men were tried and convicted for the bombing and other terrorists activities

Operation Infinite Reach
Date: August 20, 1998
Location: Afghanistan & Sudan
Casusbelli: bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, rapid escalation in Al Qaeda operations
Result: Part of the al Qaeda network disrupted, around 100 killed or wounded.
US Casualities: 0

2007-07-21 16:32:02 · answer #2 · answered by Dangerous 2 · 0 0

I've never heard a Democrat saying Clinton was Tough on Terror. He had no reason to be.

Can you honestly say that you think if 9/11 hadn't happened, successfully for the terrorists, that Bush would be fighting a war in Afghanistan?

No way, he'd be trying to take invade Iraq for sure still (see the downing street memo) but he wouldn't give a rats *** about Afghanistan. Most of the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan are from Saudia Arabia; funny how we're not there.

2007-07-22 17:36:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

In response to the bombings, U.S. President Bill Clinton ordered Operation Infinite Reach, a series of cruise missile strikes on terrorist targets in Sudan and Afghanistan on August 20, 1998.


The August 1998 bombings of Afghanistan and Sudan (code-named Operation Infinite Reach, by the US) were US cruise missile strikes on purported terrorist bases in Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan on August 20, 1998. The attack was in retaliation for the bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people (including 12 Americans) and injured 5,000 others.

2007-07-21 16:14:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

If Hillary replace into harder than Obama, she could have already gained the nomination (fairly thinking all the ease she had in the beginning up of the race). don't get me incorrect - she isn't elementary (this is why she remains in the race), yet Obama proved to be harder than Hillary so some distance.

2016-10-22 07:53:20 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Where's OBL and al Zarahri now? Bush has had 6 years to catch these two bastards and so far he has nothing. Clinton only had 8 months. So why hasn't Bush captured them? BTW, there were no al qaeda in Iraq prior to his invading Iraq. And, he said that we were defeating the enemy (al Qaeda) and all of a sudden Chertof is saying that the enemy has grown very rapidly and is the same size it was during 9/11. Which one is it? We are defeating the enemy or we are letting it grow out of control?

2007-07-21 16:16:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

no, your wrong. he was tough on terrorism. he killed almost everyone at Waco in the compound and Ruby Ridge. American terrorists. some were less than 1 year old! he was looking out for our future.

2007-07-21 16:20:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Cheney decided to shoot a man in the face, and bush made sure Libby did not do jail time. Is that what Cons mean by getting tough on crime?

By the way, while Clinton was in office, no American Civilians were killed on American soil by Al Qaeda. For once, use your brain and think about that...

2007-07-21 16:12:55 · answer #8 · answered by linus_van_pelt_4968 5 · 2 5

Clinton was too busy trying to keep obscure visitors to the Oval Office out of the media eye to focus seriously upon his obligations to this country.

2007-07-21 16:17:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I believe you to be wrong there sir. "Tough on Terror"? I don't believe a Dem has said or even thought anything near "Tough on Terror". Now "appeasement to terror", that is more their lingo.

2007-07-21 16:19:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers