NationStates Jolt Archive

So, everyone's blaming Bush for 9-11, whether through planning (pfft) or by not doing anything, or whatever. Well...
During Clinton's presidency, they were makin' a big deal about coming into America. In fact, I clearly remember seeing ads that getting a visa was available online. Now, there are supposed to be some background checks, interviews, ya know, typical security checks. I mean, I go through that much security just to apply for a job. But, the policy was, get a visa online. Now, how easy do you think it would be for a group of Saudis to get a visa into America if you can get one online?

Hrmm...can we assume that 20 years from now we can still use Clinton as a the Republican scapegoat for things occurring then as well?

Hrmm...can we assume that 20 years from now we can still use Clinton as a the Republican scapegoat for things occurring then as well?

Gotta admire the man's longevity. Four years out of office and he's still controlling the free world.

So, everyone's blaming Bush for 9-11, whether through planning (pfft) or by not doing anything, or whatever. Well...
During Clinton's presidency, they were makin' a big deal about coming into America. In fact, I clearly remember seeing ads that getting a visa was available online. Now, there are supposed to be some background checks, interviews, ya know, typical security checks. I mean, I go through that much security just to apply for a job. But, the policy was, get a visa online. Now, how easy do you think it would be for a group of Saudis to get a visa into America if you can get one online?
Yes, and it was such a clear danger that once Mr. Bush got into office, he sprung into action, taking clear steps to secure our nation from harm.

Granted Clinton didnt help, but I blame global terror on Jimmy Carter. Before you dismiss this statement read on. Prior to Carter we supported the Shah of Iran. The Shah was an A**hole but he was our A**hole. Carter pulled support for the Shah in favor of the Ayotollahs. The Ayotollahs are the foundations of fundamwntalist Islam. Plus losing Iran as an ally pushed the US out of its foothold in the middle east. Furthermore Carters blunder during the hostage crisis only embolded the terrorists and thus planted the seeds for global terror.

Yes, and it was such a clear danger that once Mr. Bush got into office, he sprung into action, taking clear steps to secure our nation from harm.
I'm not sayin' it's all Clinton's fault. Lord knows that Bush could have done at least a little better. But it wasn't all Bush's fault either.

And I can blame Clinton all I want, cuz it's all true. If people can even think that Bush could plan 9-11, then I'm allowed to retain my sanity in giving Clinton a little blame for it.

Clinton knew Osama was plotting but he did nothing.
He only sent terrorists to florida to beat up on little kids and to waco and ohio to beat up on defenesless religious folks.

Clinton knew Osama was plotting but he did nothing.
He only sent terrorists to florida to beat up on little kids and to waco and ohio to beat up on defenesless religious folks.
Whereas Bush really y-know, took BIG steps to stopping him. So really, 9/11 is just bad luck.

<<censored>>

Whereas Bush really y-know, took BIG steps to stopping him. So really, 9/11 is just bad luck.

<<censored>>
Like I said, Bush wasn't the strongest link, but he sure as hell wasn't the weakest.

So, everyone's blaming Bush for 9-11, whether through planning (pfft) or by not doing anything, or whatever. Well...
During Clinton's presidency, they were makin' a big deal about coming into America. In fact, I clearly remember seeing ads that getting a visa was available online. Now, there are supposed to be some background checks, interviews, ya know, typical security checks. I mean, I go through that much security just to apply for a job. But, the policy was, get a visa online. Now, how easy do you think it would be for a group of Saudis to get a visa into America if you can get one online?I've come to America twice since 9/11, and both times I was less than impressed by the visa application process. I was very tempted to tick "yes" on the were you a Nazi supporter in 1945 question. (btw, on international flights, you fill them out on the plane and they're not checked til you land: great for plane-hijackings, no? Also, after all the security checks, at Heathrow airport you can buy razor blades duty free at Boots Chemist. Insane.)

Like I said, Bush wasn't the strongest link, but he sure as hell wasn't the weakest.And Clinton, who actually had funded counter-terrorism measure prior to 9/11 WAS the weakest link?

Granted Clinton didnt help, but I blame global terror on Jimmy Carter. Before you dismiss this statement read on. Prior to Carter we supported the Shah of Iran. The Shah was an A**hole but he was our A**hole. Carter pulled support for the Shah in favor of the Ayotollahs. The Ayotollahs are the foundations of fundamwntalist Islam. Plus losing Iran as an ally pushed the US out of its foothold in the middle east. Furthermore Carters blunder during the hostage crisis only embolded the terrorists and thus planted the seeds for global terror.

Are you sure about that? From what I remember of American history, Carter might not have been a big supporter of the Shah, but he sure as heck wasn't in favor of Ayotollah Khomeini. If memory serves, Khomeini came to power primarily through taking advantage of the power vacuum after the fall of the Shah, so unless you're using enemy-of-my-enemy logic, you can hardly blame Carter for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. Your argument would have a lot more legs if you blamed Reagan for supplying the Afghanis with weapons during their war with the Soviets.

And Clinton, who actually had funded counter-terrorism measure prior to 9/11 WAS the weakest link?
not exactly true.
Clinton was too busy banging Monica too care about funding counter terrorism.
The welfare people got all the money that should ahve been used to counter terror.

And Clinton, who actually had funded counter-terrorism measure prior to 9/11 WAS the weakest link?
Did I say that?

And yeah, Clinton sent some cruise missiles...Wow, that reeeeeeeaaally helps. All that did was make them mad.


I mean, how many times did Osama attack the trade centers before 9-11? Like, three? And again, all Clinton did was send some cruise missles...

not exactly true.
Clinton was too busy banging Monica too care about funding counter terrorism.
The welfare people got all the money that should ahve been used to counter terror.

Oh please, Clinton was too busy defending himself from a political witchhunt and mired by a rabidly Anti-Clinton Congress to get anything done.

Banging Monica took at most five minutes.

Oh please, Clinton was too busy defending himself from a political witchhunt and mired by a rabidly Anti-Clinton Congress to get anything done.

Banging Monica took at most five minutes.
Well, he did lie under oath, so it's his own fault.

Cruise missiles solve more problems than you know.

Did I say that?

And yeah, Clinton sent some cruise missiles...Wow, that reeeeeeeaaally helps. All that did was make them mad.


I mean, how many times did Osama attack the trade centers before 9-11? Like, three? And again, all Clinton did was send some cruise missles...
Saying thats all he did displays a clear lack of... y-know, the truth. He was funding major counter terrorism programs to protect the country, in fact there was at least one leading expert on terrorism prevention who said that Clinton's strategy was almost a textbook example of how to deal with terrorism.

I would be cribbing more blatently from Franken's book, except that I'm worried I'll get into trouble if I post copyrighted material on a free website.

Well, he did lie under oath, so it's his own fault.

You really want to open the can of worms that is Presidential lying?

You really want to open the can of worms that is Presidential lying?
No, not really. At least Bush wasn't under oath, right? Even if you think he lied, he wasn't in court under oath...

And that is all that will be said about that!

Well, he did lie under oath, so it's his own fault.
Lied under oath to a question he should never have had to answer, but thats beside the point. Yes Clinton lied. So did Bush I, so did Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman, FDR, Hoover etc etc etc.

Also, lets not forget, the huge, titanic, Iraqi-information-minister quality lies of George W. Bush. Lies like "There are WMDs in Iraq", "there are terrorist training camps in Iraq", "Saddam Hussain is a major threat to regional security". Lets also please not forget the 10,000+ Iraqi civillians and US soldiers that died because he lied.

Clinton got head, and the only people actually hurt by this were him, his wife, his daughter and Monica. Just a moderate amount of perspective when we're talking about lying presidents, please.

No, not really. At least Bush wasn't under oath, right? Even if you think he lied, he wasn't in court under oath...
Right, cos expecting presidents should tell the truth most of the time is just stupid, right?

No, not really. At least Bush wasn't under oath, right? Even if you think he lied, he wasn't in court under oath...

Ah, gotcha. Lying is only bad if it's under oath. It's okay when it gets over 900 American servicemen killed as well as a lot of grubby little foriegners we could care less about.

You started the ball rolling, so now you have to deal with it.

And that is all that will be said about that!Yeah, right.

So the ones complaining about Bush lying are all going to vote against Kerry, right. He lies all the time, and lord know, we don't want a liar in office.

So the ones complaining about Bush lying are all going to vote against Kerry, right. He lies all the time, and lord know, we don't want a liar in office.
Right, we didn't actually start the liar thing, we were responding to the accusation against Clinton

I'm sick of hearing how Bush lied about WMD's. If he lied, so did Clinton, Kerry, and just about everyone else. Everyone thought that Iraq had WMD's. Otherwise, why didn't Sadamm just coorperate with the UN weapon inspectors and get the sanctions lifted? Either the WMD are well hidden, or Saddam himself didn't know they weren't there. There's a difference between lying and being wrong.

I'm sick of hearing how Bush lied about WMD's. If he lied, so did Clinton, Kerry, and just about everyone else. Everyone thought that Iraq had WMD's. Otherwise, why didn't Sadamm just coorperate with the UN weapon inspectors and get the sanctions lifted? Either the WMD are well hidden, or Saddam himself didn't know they weren't there. There's a difference between lying and being wrong.
Except for the small matter that they didn't start a war that is costing us hundreds of dead and billions of dollars. Just those small things.

I'm sick of hearing how Bush lied about WMD's. If he lied, so did Clinton, Kerry, and just about everyone else. Everyone thought that Iraq had WMD's. Otherwise, why didn't Sadamm just coorperate with the UN weapon inspectors and get the sanctions lifted? Either the WMD are well hidden, or Saddam himself didn't know they weren't there. There's a difference between lying and being wrong.

That was sort of the point.

Right, we didn't actually start the liar thing, we were responding to the accusation against Clinton
whatever, but, because Kerry is a liar, you will vote against him, right?

whatever, but, because Kerry is a liar, you will vote against him, right?

Only if you vote against Bush for the same reason.

And that is all that will be said about that!
AND THAT IS THAT WILL BE SAID ABOUT THAT!

Did I say that?

And yeah, Clinton sent some cruise missiles...Wow, that reeeeeeeaaally helps. All that did was make them mad.


I mean, how many times did Osama attack the trade centers before 9-11? Like, three? And again, all Clinton did was send some cruise missles...
Those missiles hit a dairy plant in the Sudan.
Terrorist strike the USS Cole, and Clinton took it out on children.

Those missiles hit a dairy plant in the Sudan.
Terrorist strike the USS Cole, and Clinton took it out on children.
Asprin. Asprin.

Asprin. Asprin.

Actually a shot might be better!

Actually a shot might be better!
Mmm vodka...

HA! Clinton's 'funding' of counter terrorism was really not that much. At best you can say he didn't castrate that part of the military. Under Clinton, the military shrank by almost 50%.

Heres some military numbers of the Clinton era:

800,000 personnel were eliminated from military forces
Army was reduced from 18 devisions to 10
Air Force was cut from 24 combat fighter wings to 12
232 strategic bombers and 2000 Air Force/Navy combat fighters were eliminated
Navy was reduced from 567 ships, to just over 300
Every last one of our battleships were decommissioned
Eliminated 13 ballistic submarines, 4 aircraft carriers, 121 combat ships and attack subs, and most of the support bases, shipyards, and logistical assets needed to sustain remaining forces.

On top of all this he froze military wages. 80% of the armed forces personnel earned less than $30,000 a year. 20,000 families of enlisted personnel qualified for food stamps

But at least he didn't cut out the already under funded Counter Terrorism operation . . .

HA! Clinton's 'funding' of counter terrorism was really not that much. At best you can say he didn't castrate that part of the military. Under Clinton, the military shrank by almost 50%.

Heres some military numbers of the Clinton era:

800,000 personnel were eliminated from military forces
Army was reduced from 18 devisions to 10
Air Force was cut from 24 combat fighter wings to 12
232 strategic bombers and 2000 Air Force/Navy combat fighters were eliminated
Navy was reduced from 567 ships, to just over 300
Every last one of our battleships were decommissioned
Eliminated 13 ballistic submarines, 4 aircraft carriers, 121 combat ships and attack subs, and most of the support bases, shipyards, and logistical assets needed to sustain remaining forces.

On top of all this he froze military wages. 80% of the armed forces personnel earned less than $30,000 a year. 20,000 families of enlisted personnel qualified for food stamps

But at least he didn't cut out the already under funded Counter Terrorism operation . . .


Of course, we all know how important those battleships are. Our brave sailors fight constant ship to ship battles with the cowardly terrorist navel units.

Oh, and who controlled congress?

Anyone who doesn't want to blame Bush will blame Clinton.

HA! Clinton's 'funding' of counter terrorism was really not that much. At best you can say he didn't castrate that part of the military. Under Clinton, the military shrank by almost 50%.

Heres some military numbers of the Clinton era:

800,000 personnel were eliminated from military forces
Army was reduced from 18 devisions to 10
Air Force was cut from 24 combat fighter wings to 12
232 strategic bombers and 2000 Air Force/Navy combat fighters were eliminated
Navy was reduced from 567 ships, to just over 300
Every last one of our battleships were decommissioned
Eliminated 13 ballistic submarines, 4 aircraft carriers, 121 combat ships and attack subs, and most of the support bases, shipyards, and logistical assets needed to sustain remaining forces.

On top of all this he froze military wages. 80% of the armed forces personnel earned less than $30,000 a year. 20,000 families of enlisted personnel qualified for food stamps

But at least he didn't cut out the already under funded Counter Terrorism operation . . .
Gotta love statistics, you can make anything look bad if you work it right. You must come from the Rush School of Thought(or would that be no-thought?)
Bush dropped the ball that was handed to him. He had everything in his hands to take care of Osama(see Richard Clark), but was too busy helping his Enron buddies rape thousands of Americans out of their life savings.

Hey how's that health care for the Vets doing under Bush? Oh, I forgot, he cut those...He really cares about our troops.

Of course, we all know how important those battleships are. Our brave sailors fight constant ship to ship battles with the cowardly terrorist navel units.

Welcome to the 21st century. Battleships can now be used for long range, accurate artillary strikes. Imagine that . . .

Alright then AbsoluteControl. Spruce up those stats and make them look good for us. I'd love to see how that can be beneficial to the U.S.

Welcome to the 21st century. Battleships can now be used for long range, accurate artillary strikes. Imagine that . . .

Alright then AbsoluteControl. Spruce up those stats and make them look good for us. I'd love to see how that can be beneficial to the U.S.
Welcome to the 21st century. We use aircraft and missles for that, not artillery shells.

Welcome to the 21st century. We use aircraft and missles for that, not artillery shells.

No, we use both. Actually, I don't really care about the navy that much. The most useful part of the navy is the nuclear subs. Still, we can't just get rid of everything and get caught with our pants down.

Oh, and it's a lot harder to shoot a ship that's below radar than a plane that's right there above you.

Terrorist strike the USS Cole, and Clinton took it out on children.

Umm, Clinton never responded at all to the USS Cole attack.. the CIA didn't come back with evidence that it was Al Qaeda until after Bush had assumed office. So, Bush never responded to the Cole, not Clinton.. Clinton has made it very clear he would of responded had he still been the elected president. Now, Bush didn't respond, however Bush is also quoted that Terrorism wasn't a priority for him despite all the info the Clinton administration had briefed them on before taking office. So, 8 months goes by, Bush does literally nothing, not even a cruise missile. Then 9/11 happened and he decided to freak out the nation instead of calm them as a true leader would. Yet, of course at that point after 9/11 Bush responded as any sitting president would of after 9/11. Yay Bush! :rolleyes:

Who trained Bin Laden, many of his Al-Qaida cronies, and hordes of other vicious thugs, especially Latin American death squads? Under whose presidency was the first attack on the World Trade Center planned?

Blaming Clinton for terrorism without giving the lion's share of the blame to Reagan and Bush, Sr. is pretty dishonest. They knew full and well Bin Laden would turn on them and used him anyway.

As far as Carter goes, America shouldn't have propped up the Shah in the first place. The entire situation is just one more example of why the CIA should never, ever be involved in determining who should be in charge of another country.

Hey, that was during the Eisenhower administration come to think of it.

Republican Presidents: The Terrorist's Best Friend.