Democrats warned all along that we would need the support of the international community and the UN in order to successfully rebuild Iraq.
Apparently, the Bush administration now agrees.
Democrats warned all along that Iraqi reconstruction would cost far more than we'd recover from Iraqi oil revenues.
Apparently, the Bush administration now agrees.
Democrats said all along that we should negotiate with North Korea and demonstrate some flexibility in our approach.
Apparently, the Bush administration now agrees.
Democrats said all along that in order to prevent the re-emergence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in central Asia we needed to pay more attention to Afghanistan and allocate more money to its reconstruction.
Apparently, the Bush administration now agrees.
Quote:Clinton never did anything to significantly respond to terrorism, let alone try to capture its leader.
If only Clinton had issued an executive order giving the CIA free reign to assisinate bin Ladin! Or entered into an agreement with the Premeire of Pakistan to train 5 dozen Pakistani Special Forces units for the express written purpose of executing cross-border hits on Al-Qaida leaders, including bin Ladin! Or signed an agreement with Uzbeistan allowing US Special Forces to use Uzbeki facilities as a launching pad for Al-Qaida assisination attempt!
Oh wait, you mean to say he did these things? No! That must be the librul media talking!
I'm not a fan of the guy, but Clinton was clearly the best anti-terrorism president this country ever had. Other pretenders staggered through the 2000 Elections claiming missile defense was our biggest national defense need, I can't image what they were thinking. The only time Dullard Dubya mentioned terrorism was in defending his decision to withdraw from the ABM treaty - Al-Qaida might get an ICBM and THEN what would we do?
In 1996, Bill Clinton supported an anti-terrorism bill which increased "multi-tapping" wire-tapping authority of suspected terrorists so that individuals could be monitored even if they switched cell-phones. Who opposed this and insisted it be dropped from the bill? Was such legislation passed after 9/11?
Tell me, when Bill Clinton endorsed legislation to freeze terrorist assets in 1998, who blocked the legislation? One person took credit for stopping the bill, calling it "totalitarian". Was it Ted Kennedy? Was such legislation finally passed after 9/11?
In December of 2000, two terrorist attacks in America were thwarted - one intended for LA International Airport, the other for Seattle's "Space Needle". For stopping a planned terrorist attack when he was President, Clinton gets no credit. For terrorist attacks that happened well after he was President, he gets the blame.
And that "Department of Homeland Security", why, that has a familiar ring to it. In fact, I recall such a department as being recommended by a report comissioned by by a certain Vice President and delivered to the Bush White House in January of 2001. Was this Dick Cheney's doing, or a leftover of Dan Quayle's? Tell me about this report - like what the White House response was do it's delivery? Were its recommendations implemented after 9/11?
And on Fenruary 9, 2001, a report was delivered to the White House implicating Al-Qaida as the perpetrators of the 2000 USS Cole attack. Tell me, what bold and chest-thumping actions did AWOL Dubya's mighty cadre of warriors take against Al-Qaida? Surely they must have done something grand and powerful, since they weren't wimps like Clinton!
But Bill Clinton must've gutted our counter-terrorism intelligence, right?
FBI Counter-terrorism Spending:
1994: 79.3 million
1995: $171 million
1996: $287 million
1997: $393 million
[source: Combating Terrorism: Spending on Governmentwide Programs Requires Better Management and Coordination (Letter Report, 12/01/97, GAO/NSIAD-98-39).]
The CIA budget is harder to pin down, but the declassified portions of it indicate that counter-terrorism funding increased 250%.
Dozens of anti-terrorism laws and legislative efforts were ceaseless promoted by Clinton, and ceasely attacked by conservatives, who knee-jerk opposed anything Clinton did and wasted America's time with a ceasely barrage of worthless investigations yielding nothing. No? Perhaps some recent historical reading will refresh your memory, since this isn't the kind of thing you'll hear in the "librul media".
Clinton Anti-Terrorism Bill Guts Bill of Rights!
I know how important it is for any good conservative to be able to blame everything bad that ever happens on some evil "librul" skulking in the weeds. If you hear in on Rush, read it in the times, and see it on FAUX News, you assume it must be true. Next thing you know you'll be dredging up that phony story about Sudan offering to deliver bin Ladin to the lawn of the White House as a token of their friendship with America.
"Interestingly, since Sept. 11 almost every one of our recommendations has either been enacted by the executive branch or been put into law by Congress, which suggests that we probably had a pretty good menu of things to do before Sept. 11."
- L. Paul Bremmer III, Chairman, National Commission on Terrorism under Bill Clinton
Quote:To capture Bin Laden, while being a great thing, would only be symbolic in nature.
Standard party line thinking.
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
Question- If Bin Laden was such a threat in the late 90s, wasn't it pretty fucked up that while Clinton was trying to protect the US that the repubs were rooting around in his zipper?
Question- If Clinton was so soft on terrorism, then exactly what did Bush do from Jan 20, 2001 - Sept 10, 2001 that was so radically different then what Clinton had done?
Question- Why isn't Condi called on the whole "we never dreamed they'd fly planes into buildings" comment, when they had information prior to 9-11 that suggested exactly that? Why are there so many former business execs in this administration?
Ronald Reagan sells weapons to known Islamic anti-American terrorists, and who is soft on terrorism? CLINTON! Republicans block legislation to freeze terrorist assets, and who is soft on terrorism? CLINTON! Clinton orders covert assisination attempts against Osama bin Ladin while Dubya does nothing after receiving the USS Cole report, and who is soft on terrorism? CLINTON! The Hart-Rudman Report gets thrown straight into the garbage because Dubya says Dick Cheney will do his own report on terrorism and who is soft on terrorism? CLINTON?
If you can't blame Clinton, the terrorists win! And the Republicans would have very little to say about anything at all.