If Osama Bin Laden strikes again, who should accept "personal responsibility" for letting him go free?

Answer 1

Given the chronology in that "Bagging bin Laden" effort, I'd have to say Bush...
-- Sept. 17, 2001 - Remarks by the President to Employees at the Pentagon:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-3.html
"I want justice. There's an old poster out west, as I recall, that said, "Wanted: Dead or Alive."
-- Sept 11, 2006 - President's Address to the Nation:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060911-3.html
"No matter how long it takes, America will find you, and we will bring you to justice."
-- Sept. 13, 2006 - Inside the Oval Office: President Bush gives journalists a "heads up" about the mid-term elections, among other things.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/696wnfcp.asp
"This thing about . . . let's put 100,000 of our special forces stomping through Pakistan in order to find bin Laden is just simply not the strategy that will work."

A mere two days after telling the nation "No matter how long it takes, America will find you", Bush not only knew bin Laden was in Pakistan but had decided NOT to go after him!

Answer 2

LOL This is an Awesome Question!
I know allot may think it is Clinton who is responsible for not putting him away when initially getting some info of him, yet there is much said and never done when involving International affairs because of the repercussions from assuming propaganda. So he really had no good reason and still there is question if Osama IS actually who brought down the towers on 911. There is proof of many dealings and friendship between the Bin Laden family and The Bushes mostly dealing with oil of course. Also when 911 happened there was a no fly in America for a long time, Yet the many family members of the Bin Ladens were flown out of America to safety. So I would say If Osama did Do a terrorist act then absolutely it would be on the Bush administration for not finding him when they knew he was in Afghanistan and not Iraq all along and they were aware. xxoo

Answer 3

I think many should check their facts before making wild claims.
During the Clinton years we did indeed have satelite intel showing Bin Laden at a base. A cruise missile attack was planned and aborted because Bin Laden was with several Saudi princes. The international consequences of the killing of several Saudi royalty was decided to be to high.

We also had Bin Laden trapped in Tora Bora during the start of the Afghanistan war. The Bush lead military at that time decided to give the responsibility of blocking off the northern escape route to our Northern alliance. It turned out that our Northern alliance was supportive of the Taliban and they allowed Bin Laden to escape. If Bush wanted Bin Laden that bad (that was shortly after 911) why didn't he pour in US troops and get the job done? Also we've known for awhile now that Bin Laden has been hold up in northern Pakistan and yet we support and pay (about $10 billion last year) a dictator to do nothing.

Bush has needed the threat of Bin Laden intact in order to play out his campaign of fear upon the US.

Answer 4

Bush and Pakistan. Only an ignorant fool would blame Clinton. The lie about Sudan offering us Bin Laden is ridiculous. These people need to crack open a history book before they continue to embarrass themselves in a public forum.

Answer 5

According to an interview in November of this year between David Frost and Benazir Bhutto (attached), Osama bin Laden has already been murdered (per Ms. Bhutto). The Bushes just keep him around to keep us on our toes.

Answer 6

bush 43 is to blame for him being free. bush 41 should be blamed for originally fortifying and arming OBL (during the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan) and calling him a freedom fighter, understandable considering the Saudi/Texas oil familial and financial connections. Then 43 can be blamed again for creating more of a need to the OBL's of the world to become active and to have a purpose that's not to our benefit in the short or the long run.

Answer 7

Good question, I think it should be the Bush administration ,because they left this very important job to be outsourced ,We knew where he was and instead of sending our troops into get him, we left it up to Afghan warlords.

Answer 8

All of our political leaders and government officials should accept the responsibility for the attack or attacks if another one happens.
We should have been doing more to research and develop alternative energy just like Gore wanted to do. Instead we got Bushco, Texaco.
OBL and the whole middle-east knew that eventually we would come for the OIL.

Answer 9

Bill Clinton, he was offered Osama by the Sudan government.

Bill Clinton knew where Osama was and with held a US military strike for fear it might kill women and children.

Answer 10

Mr bush.One thing ironic about Bush is that anything that gets in contact with him becomes "terrorists".Before he got elected, there was no such thing called "muslim terrorists and now anybody who dont agree with him especially liberals becomes "terrorists".
B4 he invade iraq, no terrorists at all, now its like a terrorist beehive, but all the terrorists wants us out.
Btw Bush and bin laden family have very good relationship and Osama was our ally back in the 80s