2007-10-07 01:13:09 · 10 answers · asked by Dangerous 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Will anyone honestly answer this question?
2007-10-07 01:19:22 · update #1
Wow Amazing How Facts Make Republicans Look Silly.
2007-10-07 01:25:35 · update #2
Wow, reflexive Republican denial is amazing.
Many Republicans said Clinton's missile attacks on Bin Laden were an instance of "wag the dog." This may have discouraged Clinton from pursuing bin Laden any further, given the fact that the evidence that Bin Laden was responsible for the embassy bombings was sketchy at the time, and Clinton had lost political clout due to the Starr investigation and impending impeachment.
Nonetheless, Clinton admits that although he tried and failed, he should have pursued Bin Laden harder.
The distinction between Clinton and Bush here is that Bush never even tried to get Bin Laden! And of course, as a Republican denier, Bush won't admit he should have done anything different during the 8 months preceding September 11. Bush, Cheney and Rice have absolved themselves entirely by stating that though they were warned Bin Laden planned to attack the US using airplanes, they were not told exactly when or where the terrorists would strike.
2007-10-07 01:20:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Oh, it was a distraction. I don't cosider throwing a dozen Tomahawks into the desert and blowing up a few tents as a serious effort to getting rid of someone. I don't call bombing a medical factory in the Sudan as a serious attempt to getting rid of someone.
Trust me, as part of the USAF, who took part in more than a few Clinton distractions, including bombing surface-to-air missle sites in southern Iraq in 1996 for, well, I honestly can't remember what was on the front page that time, there were just so many, I can smell BS from 163 miles away. And that was BS. Why do I say this, because when I was back a year later, Iraq was trying to shoot down U-2s by just shooting high-altitude capable SAMs at them on a straight ballistic tragectory and hoping to get lucky. You can jam a missle guidence if it's not using guidence from the ground, or anything else for that matter. And what did we do about it then? We did nothing about it that time.
2007-10-07 09:08:08 · answer #2 · answered by Jam_Til_Impact 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The same party who decided to pursue Ramzi Yousef, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, El Sayyid Nosair, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Ahmad Ajaj, and Abdul Rahman Yasin as "law enforcement issues" for their involvement on February 26, 1993 (the first World Trade Center attack).
2007-10-07 08:44:37 · answer #3 · answered by sam simeon 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Neither. The fiasco with Monica Lewinsky was going on when Bill Clinton was President. His administration was not looking for Bin Laden. He had already passed on capturing Bin Laden several times.
It was not until after 9/11/01 that finding Bin Laden became an issue.
2007-10-07 08:17:43 · answer #4 · answered by regerugged 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Monica was in the limelight before Bin ladin. and what does a bj has to do with a war?
2007-10-07 08:22:31 · answer #5 · answered by sarah kay 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
We found Bin Laden?
2007-10-07 08:19:30 · answer #6 · answered by KRR 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Which former President bombed an aspirin factory to distract the public from Monicagate? Which former President then perjured himself and got disbarred and impeached? Which former President is a felon and a disgrace to his office?
2007-10-07 08:18:33 · answer #7 · answered by Yeah Right 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
bin laden is needed to keep the war monger arms dealers in business.
2007-10-07 08:16:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
The dry cleaners who had the dress?
2007-10-07 08:15:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
Was it the same one that told the Sudanese "no thanks"?
2007-10-07 08:16:44 · answer #10 · answered by Kubla Con 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋