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

How could we have done it all differently up until today?

Assuming hindsight is 20/20. I'm not looking for insults or trying to insult, I'm looking for opinions on how we could have done it all differently.

2007-07-26 09:14:12 · 14 answers · asked by Incognito 5 in Politics & Government Politics

Joe D- I'm looking for after 9/11 not before.

2007-07-26 09:19:35 · update #1

B.C.*- sounds good, do it.

2007-07-26 09:21:37 · update #2

pink_angel- AFTER 9/11.

2007-07-26 09:22:19 · update #3

Le BigMac- INTERESTING, elaborate?

2007-07-26 09:23:05 · update #4

bonsai_kitty66- that said, Clinton got closer to killilng Bin Laden than Bush ever has, AND got Head. not bad if you ask me.

2007-07-26 09:25:49 · update #5

14 answers

First and foremost, secure our borders, our ports and our airports. Create a database that ties law enforcement together with social security, customs and INS, information needed to be shared. How can you apprehend anyone if you don't know they are wanted? We should have dealt with Saudi Arabia from a position of strength, instead business interests and personal relationships got in the way. We should have hunted Bin Laden with all our efforts until he was found or killed. We should have had immediate high-level, face to face talks with countries in the region and instead of sending troops to fight we could have sent them to improve living conditions in these countries. It would have been a measure of good-will and money better spent than on an invasion of Iraq. Thousands of unemployed, hungry, angry people do not make good allies. Beating them further into the depths of despair is not the answer.

2007-07-26 09:36:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

We could have stayed in Afghanistan for a start. I know there are a small number of troops still there...but I'm talking keep 300K troops on the ground until UBL is caught and brought to justice.

But I guess he isn't a priority because he's already done his job.

Word to BonsaiKitty... I'm sick of hearing you idiots try to pawn off the blame on Clinton's administration. That's just stupid. Bush received DETAILED intel regarding USB's wherabouts, train camp locations and activities from the Russian Government several months prior to Sept. 11th, but chose to do nothing about it. So the blame is as much HIS as anyone elses.

2007-07-26 16:21:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Round up every member of the Saudi royal family, and the bin Laden family in the US and confine them as conspirators.

Freeze the assets of any bank or company dealing with Saudi Arabia or al Qaeda.

Bomb every square inch of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan, and then flood them with troops to take out any surviving pockets of extremists.

2007-07-26 16:31:21 · answer #3 · answered by tiny Valkyrie 7 · 3 0

At that time, the plan is turning over the Hudson and heading straight for Tower one. Let's rewind to around 8:15 am when to F-16s could've handled it.

And yes, like the first poster said, Condi and the others should have taken that intelligence seriously.

2007-07-26 16:19:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

1) Have the govt. take a more pro-active approach to the numerous warnings they received prior to the 9/11 event.

2) Standing order to shoot down any obviously hijacked plane or any plane flying outside its designated route without any communication from the cockpit as to why they strayed (all sorts of safety features could be built into this system as well).

2007-07-26 16:20:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Well, i suppose if bush had actually READ the PDB's about arabs in flight school, and Al-qeada and thier plans, he might not have been struggling through "My Pet Goat" with a group of grade school children. And if Condi had spend more time READING the intelligence on her desk, and less time running GOP fund raisers, She might have seen the Intel about planes too.

2007-07-26 16:19:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

WE SHOULD HAVE GONE AFTER BIN LADEN & COMPANY AFTER THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTECK IN 1993. THE SUDANESE GOVERNMENT OFFERED TO GIVE US BIN LADEN BUT CLINTON TURNED THEM DOWN. HE ALSO HAD A CHANCE TO GET HIM BUT WAS WORRIED ABOUT COLLATERAL DAMAGE. FOR THOSE WHO STILL ***** & MOAN ABOUT THE ELECTION IN 2000 THINK OF HOW DIFFERENT THINGS WOULD HAVE BEEN IF ROSS PEROT DIDN'T RUN IN 1992 HANDING THE ELCTION TO CLINTON. SO THEN HISTORY WOULD REALLY BE
DIFFERENT MINUS A CLINTON PRESIDENCY.

2007-07-26 16:35:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Go back and not confuse Hussein with Bin Laden.

2007-07-26 16:19:34 · answer #8 · answered by Le BigMac 6 · 4 2

Go hard after the people who did it..relentlessly, and hunt them down whereever they went, even in a cave in norther Pakistan......down to hell itself if necessary, and bring them to justice. Never take our eyes of the prize and not split up our forces and distracting ourselves with Iraq.

2007-07-26 16:18:54 · answer #9 · answered by ez f 1 · 5 1

Well, it would of been nice if Bill Clinton wouldn't of let Osama go when he had him in his sights. It would of been nice if Bill Clinton would of done something after they bombed our embassy and the WTC the first time. Instead, getting a blovv job was his main priority. So sad.

2007-07-26 16:19:54 · answer #10 · answered by bonsai_kitty66 2 · 5 5

fedest.com, questions and answers