I would not have reponded militarily to 9/11.
I would have used a faith based response.
Being a VictoriasSecretian I would have just sent naked women to Iraq and Afghanistan and waited for the sand monkey sinners to kill themselves.
But, as bpb says, it's all Bush's fault. He figured out not only how to attack Iraq (long overdue), but he also figured out how to make hurricanes hit poor black folks where it hurts (right in the working class' wallet).
Bear, we go way back and I often enjoy your ****, but this is pure ****.
katrina is not bush's fault.... the bush league response was though...
New Orleans, being a gigantic tax sinkhole, has never been high on the list in D.C.
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:real life wrote:Do you suppose that the Iraqis wish that Gore had been elected in 2000 and that Saddam was still in power, filling mass graves with the bodies of his political enemies?
Now at least they have a fighting chance to elect their own leaders, and rid their country of the terrorist elements that Saddam sheltered and financed.
Do you suppose that the citizens of Afghanistan wish that Gore had been elected in 2000, and that he had responded to 9/11 in the same way that Clinton responded to multiple terrorist attacks (i.e. doing virtually nothing) on America during his terms in office?
are you kidding me.......
no
But David Horowitz says it better than I do.
Quote:
Al Gore Set the Stage for Terrorism
Friday, July 13, 2007
When he was in office and responsible for protecting us, Al Gore was absent from the war on terror.
As vice president, he was part of an administration that failed to respond to the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993; that cut and ran when al-Qaida ambushed U.S. Army Rangers in Mogadishu; that called for regime change in Iraq when Saddam expelled the U.N. weapons inspectors but then failed to remove Saddam or to get him to allow the U.N. inspectors back in.
He was part of an administration also failed to respond to the murder of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia or the attack on an American warship in Yemen; that reacted to the blowing up two U.S. embassies in Africa by firing missiles at an aspirin factory in the Sudan and empty tents in Afghanistan; that refused to kill or capture Osama bin Laden when it had a dozen chances to do so; and that did not put in place simple airport security measures, its own task force recommended, that would have prevented 9/11.
In short, to every act of war against the United States during the 1990s, the Clinton-Gore response was limp-wristed and supine. And worse. By refusing to concede a lost presidential election, thereby breaking a hundred-year tradition, Gore delayed the transition to the new administration that would have to deal with the terrorist threat.
As a result of the two-month delay, the comprehensive anti-terror plan that Bush ordered on taking office (the Clinton-Gore team had none) did not arrive on his desk until the day before the 9/11 attack.
so bush said f*ck 'em then? that's about right...
real life wrote:Bi-Polar Bear wrote:real life wrote:Do you suppose that the Iraqis wish that Gore had been elected in 2000 and that Saddam was still in power, filling mass graves with the bodies of his political enemies?
Now at least they have a fighting chance to elect their own leaders, and rid their country of the terrorist elements that Saddam sheltered and financed.
Do you suppose that the citizens of Afghanistan wish that Gore had been elected in 2000, and that he had responded to 9/11 in the same way that Clinton responded to multiple terrorist attacks (i.e. doing virtually nothing) on America during his terms in office?
are you kidding me.......
no
But David Horowitz says it better than I do.
Quote:
Al Gore Set the Stage for Terrorism
Friday, July 13, 2007
When he was in office and responsible for protecting us, Al Gore was absent from the war on terror.
As vice president, he was part of an administration that failed to respond to the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993; that cut and ran when al-Qaida ambushed U.S. Army Rangers in Mogadishu; that called for regime change in Iraq when Saddam expelled the U.N. weapons inspectors but then failed to remove Saddam or to get him to allow the U.N. inspectors back in.
He was part of an administration also failed to respond to the murder of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia or the attack on an American warship in Yemen; that reacted to the blowing up two U.S. embassies in Africa by firing missiles at an aspirin factory in the Sudan and empty tents in Afghanistan; that refused to kill or capture Osama bin Laden when it had a dozen chances to do so; and that did not put in place simple airport security measures, its own task force recommended, that would have prevented 9/11.
In short, to every act of war against the United States during the 1990s, the Clinton-Gore response was limp-wristed and supine. And worse. By refusing to concede a lost presidential election, thereby breaking a hundred-year tradition, Gore delayed the transition to the new administration that would have to deal with the terrorist threat.
As a result of the two-month delay, the comprehensive anti-terror plan that Bush ordered on taking office (the Clinton-Gore team had none) did not arrive on his desk until the day before the 9/11 attack.
this is such typical GOP bull crap I should not even respond but I have a feeling we will hear more of it in the general election. Iraq is not and was not part of the AQ which was responsble for 9/11. In point of fact Iraq has been and still is a huge distraction from the 'war on terror'. Bin Laden is still footloose and fancy free in Pakistan and the Taliban has regrouped.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/09/27/pakistan.musharraf.binladen/index.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/08/AR2006090801614.html
