Does blaming Clinton make terrorism go away?

Question

I've seen a lot of people whine that "if Clinton had taken care of Osama when he had the chance, 9/11 wouldn't have happened."

First of all, that is most probably not true. Secondly, I won't even get into the whole CONGRESS-WOULDN'T-LET-HIM thing. My question is much simpler.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Bill Clinton is completely to blame for the fact that Osama bin Laden hates the U.S.

Does that mean there's no more terrorism? Does finding an American target for our blame (instead of what seems obvious to me - BLAMING THE GUYS WHO DID IT) solve something? If so, what?

I'd really like to understand what it is people think blaming Clinton accomplishes.

Philip: I'm sorry, where does the word "hate" appear in my screen name? I don't see it. Could you point it out?

Answer 1

All blaming Bush or Clinton does is create an enemy that is laughing at us.

Answer 2

Neither blaming Clinton nor Bush fix the problem that congress from early 70's has killed the human side of the intelligence community. Granted I also see no reason to praise Clinton for anything.

& Al-Qaeda is bigger than 1 man. When I was going to school with many of the Present leaders in the Middle East on the Arab side they indulged fully in western vices. Vertue wasn't their strong suit.

Answer 3

Terrorism will always exist, that was never in question. Clinton had bin Laden in his sites and did not pull the trigger. Clinton also did nothing AFTER several terrorist attacks. Could 9/11 have been avoided? Nobody can answer that. If Clinton did something after the WTC attacks in 1993, the Embassy bombings in 1998 and the USS Cole in 2000, could the plan have been thwarted or discovered? It's very possible but again can't be answered for sure.


Is saying no WMD's were found still a valid point to be made after all these years?
This being said because Democrats also voted for the war also believed WMD's were in Iraq.
We did not go to Iraq because they were responsible for 9/11 either, I'm tired of hearing this one as well.
How about, if you agree with the war then you need to be in Iraq. Did you go to Somalia?
Bush can't get bin Laden. Well, he tried. Clinton did have better Intel on bin Laden.

Answer 4

Here's the reason for "blaming" Clinton. He failed to take action in the early days of his administration, when islamic fundamentalists started spreading terror against the US. He failed, because of a lack of backbone and a lack of understanding of radical islam. Now, some 18 years later, his wife, who's intellect is far below that of her husband, and he, who's ego is far above that of his wife, want to move back into the White House. Their supporters do not see past his good looks (questionable), gift of gab and charisma and her self-confidant rhetoric (entirely superficial) and would love to relive the soap opera that was the Clinton administration. The tabloid mentality that leads a person to think that Mrs. Clinton is fit to lead the US needs to be sidetracked so that both she and her shallow, philandering husband, both of whom are completely lacking in integrity and character, are kept as far away from the White House as possible, for the rest of their lives. We sidetrack their efforts by pointing out, with as much repetition as is necessary to get the job done, that the the blame for our current situation rests almost entirely on Bill Clinton's shoulders, where it rightfully belongs. We will not let up until we have succeeded in helping our country send the Clintons packing back to Arkansas. If liberals want to continue to support Bill in the manner to which he's become accustomed, good for them, but we don't want him or his wife involved in government any longer. They've done enough damage to our country.

Answer 5

To answer the question of what people are thinking - Blame is easier than working toward solutions.

Distracting from serous problems NEVER makes the problem easier to deal with, but it makes people feel as if they are "doing something" by spouting venom. It is a form of intellectual laziness that drives me crazy.

While I rarely agree with a couple of your answerers, today I have to agree - the vituperative and building of straw men comes from both sides of the aisle.

Of course going after Bin Laden in Afghanistan seemed to be the more logical action, rather than the "nation building" in Iraq that had been decried during the 2000 election. None the less, now that we are in Iraq, we better deal with that mess directly, rather than just blaming Bush for it. I DO blame our current President, but my point is that we have to deal with where we are now, NOW.

Answer 6

consistent with possibility Clark grow to be asserting this because of the fact 9/11 occurred decrease than his watch and he grow to be attempting to pass the greenback? Do the maths dude. Clinton had 8 years, Bush grow to be in place of work for 8 months. easy fact there sparky. it quite is a prevalent fact that 9/11 grow to be planned decrease than Clintons watch. His destruction and branch of our intelligence community's i'm specific made it lots much less stressful for them to drag it off. supply up and picture. They probaby have been waiting to assault in the past 9/11, yet waited till after Bush grow to be in place of work to humiliate him because of the fact the Islamofacist hate republicans because of the fact we traditionally make lifestyles lots greater durable for them. Republicans do no longer appease them.

Answer 7

The focus of republicans is so limited that the blame game on Clinton serves as a distraction of what Bush is messing up. It has always work because republicans have less education and lower IQ's. Thats what attracts them to the party. THey really dont understand or grasp whats going on because of their lower mental status so they easily believe lies due to lack of knowledge.

Answer 8

Blaming Clinton has become passe. The new rage is blaming Carter.

Answer 9

United We Stand Divided We Fall.

Answer 10

Like your user name suggests, many people have an irrational hatred of President Bush. They accuse him of many things; terrorist, murderer, going AWOL, war criminal, stupid,... You get the idea.

So when people continue to say these idiotic things, it only seems right to point out that his Democratic predecessor had REAL flaws. He did some REAL idiotic things. He failed to do REAL things that would have made this planet better.

You could say that, by bashing on Clinton, Bush supporters are showing the ignorance of Bush bashers.