2007-12-10 01:18:26 · 15 answers · asked by realitycheck 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
he did try to kill Bin Laden but he was accused by the republicans of trying to divert attention away from the BJ scandal,we dont know if he would have killed him,but we can fairly say that the republicans are partly to blame for him not continuing to pursue that policy
2007-12-10 01:29:37 · answer #1 · answered by cantonbound 3 · 0⤊ 6⤋
He said in 1996, his first speech regarding the 1993 WTC attack, to not overreact about the terrorists or Bin Laden. Of course, he did shoot a couple rockets to the middle east for some reason that obviously failed, but no one complained about because his last name starts with a C instead of a B. Sudan government would have held him for either Saudis or America. Clinton said Bin Laden was not a "top priority" at the time, this was 1997. After we been attacked multiple times by him.
Marine Bases being bombed, WTC bombed, two U.S. Embassies bombed, USS Cole bombed, and so much more he did on his own. And people complain about Bush. . .
2007-12-10 01:23:13 · answer #2 · answered by Fallen 6 · 8⤊ 0⤋
Clinton wanted Bin Laden to father a child with Hillary.
2007-12-10 03:26:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
From what I have read Bill didn't have a plan to take him out. And what plans were made to take UBL out were never even started.
We knew where UBL was staying in down to the house number. This info was given to the US by Sudanese authorities. But Bill was afraid of causing an incident.
The best chance I've heard about was when UBL left Sudan and went to Afghanistan. The jet he was flying in didn't have the legs to make the trip without refueling. The US knew when and where he was going to have to refuel.
The jet could have been shot down OR a black ops force could have captured him during the refueling stop. But these plans were rejected by Bill because he was afraid it might have again caused an incident.
And to Steve--Lobbing a few cruise missiles at some place UBL might have been years later does not constitute trying several times to kill him. The GOOD chances came before UBL went to Afghanistan.
2007-12-10 02:20:37 · answer #4 · answered by namsaev 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Their never was a plan to take out bin Laden permanently. He was never on Clinton's radar, and prior to 9/11 their wasn't much reason for the US to go after him (Saudi Arabia was a different story though). If you are referring to the "Path to 9/11", the mockumentary from ABC, know that all scenes involving members of government going after bin Laden are entirely fake. They never happened, it was a dramatization.
2007-12-10 02:44:29 · answer #5 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
His plan was to be in the oral office with an intern, which distracted him from thinking about anything above the waist.
And even more truthfully, Clinton was haunted by failure to get Bin Ladin.
Tuesday, September 25, 2001
Acting like a man who knows he has much to answer for, ex-president Bill Clinton was seeking out anyone and everyone who would listen, to explain that the World Trade Center disaster that killed thousands of Americans wasn't his fault.
After telling NBC's Tom Brokaw and Fox News Bian Kilmeade, and countless audiences for two weeks that he did everything he could to nail prime suspect Bin Laden, Clinton was taken to accosting total strangers on the street to offer his excuses.
One such New Yorker was Saul Finkelstein, who says he was corralled by the suddenly guilt-ridden ex-prez on a Saturday while riding his bike with his sons! The ex-commander in chief unburdened himself to Finkelstein, who reported this episode to the Washington Post's Lloyd Grove.
"In 1998, the U.S. Navy launched a series of cruise missle attacks," Clinton insisted to the stranger. "We missed him by one hour."
He seemed to want the passerby to understand that if president Bush succeeds where he failed, it won't be because Bush tried any harder. Clinton stated, "It will not be that difficult to get Bin laden [today] because unlike 1998... the U.S. will have the cooperation of surrounding countries."
The bottom line was, Finkelstein said, was that Clinton wanted him to know that"what happened on 9/11 could no way be traced to some failure on his administration's part."
.
2007-12-10 01:49:51 · answer #6 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you read the book " See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism"by Robert Baer you will learn that they had the opportunity to blow bin Laden away and were told not to do it - by the CIA during the Clinton admin.
2007-12-10 01:35:39 · answer #7 · answered by patrickmert 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Bill (what a wienie) Clinton had the man offered up to him on a silver platter in July of 2000. We knew exactly where he was and cabinet members urged Clinton to act.
However, Clinton not wanting to do anything that would cause him a loss in popularity rating or, force him to spend money, elected to defer the problem onto his predecessor.
That was his only plan.
2007-12-10 02:41:37 · answer #8 · answered by wider scope 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He was going to show him the great life in the party cites of the world.... or do you mean another form of taking out.
Bill had his shot at bin and failed.
2007-12-10 01:22:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
little, considering he was a minimal threat during the time of Clinton's presidency. Oh, there were a couple missle strikes on his compounds and Clinton pressured sudan to get rid of him
Are you going to pen a revisionist version of how Bush was led into Iraq by the Congress next?
2007-12-10 01:23:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋