Mishandling Terrorism

[Lefty Wilbury]

Originally posted by bamthin
I love how the right wing-nuts conveniently forget Lebanon. Even after Bin Laden referenced it as an example of how weak the United States is.

Dubya had his chances at Bin Laden before 9/11 too and he blew it...three times.

Missed Opportunity
Officials: Bush Administration Was Slow to Approve Drones to Kill Bin Laden

By Ted Bridis and John Solomon
The Associated Press

— When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones had recently spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the al Qaeda leader.

But the administration failed to get drones back into the Afghan skies until after the Sept. 11 attacks later that year, current and former U.S. officials say.

Top administration officials discussed the mission to kill bin Laden as late as one week before the suicide attacks on New York and Washington, but they had not yet resolved a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the armed Predators and whether the missiles would be sufficiently lethal, officials told The Associated Press.

In the month before that meeting, the Pentagon and CIA successfully tested an armed Predator on at least three occasions — including once when it destroyed a mockup home resembling an Afghan structure bin Laden supposedly used, the officials said.



LINK

-Bam

if your going to quote an article at least read it first. bush didn't have three chances to get obl he was told of three chances they had to get him. who had the chances to get him: clinton. if you read the rest of your article you would have seen:


Hellfire missiles were attached to the drone after unarmed Predators flown by the CIA from Uzbekistan to Afghanistan spotted a man that several U.S. intelligence analysts believed was bin Laden, or his trademark Japanese truck, as many as three times in September and October 2000, the officials said.

"They were operating them before the United States military was involved … and doing a good job," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said, explaining why CIA operated the armed drones in Afghanistan. "And so rather than changing that, we just left it."

---------------

so clinton had three chances NOT bush. even the part that was was posted as proof that bsuh had three chance to get obl point out it wasen't him it was clinton. with just one line it does it:

When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones had recently spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the al Qaeda leader


had spotted recently when bush took office. it happend before he took office. there were no sighting of obl when bush was in office and the article clearly says that.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

and as far as bush planning the iraq war before 9-11 it seems everyone missed this:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/13/oneill.bush/index.html

"People are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war in Iraq early in the administration," O'Neill said.

"Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change in Iraq."

The idea that Bush "came into office with a predisposition to invade Iraq, I think, is a total misunderstanding of the situation," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon.

-----------

Retired Army Gen. Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he saw nothing to indicate the United States was close to attacking Iraq early in Bush's term.

Shelton, who retired shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, said the brass reviewed "on the shelf" plans to respond to crises with the incoming Bush administration.

But in the administration's first six months, "I saw nothing that would lead me to believe that we were any closer to attacking Iraq than we had been during the previous administration," Shelton told CNN.

----------------------------


there you go: o neil backpeddling, rumsfeld disputing it and the former chairman of the joint chiefs disputing it.

 

[jimnyc]

Thanks for the clarification, Lefty, I should have known better than to take it at face value. I guess Jones and Bam can stop whining now about how Bush was too busy planning an invasion. Clinton blew it and O'neill is a liar that is now spinning his own words.

 

[jones]

The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world's resources, it said, was "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the "new Pearl Harbor", described as "the opportunity of ages". The extremists who have since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right groups and "think-tanks" were established to avenge the American "defeat" in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a "peace dividend" following the cold war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.

 

[jimnyc]

 

[jones]

Just to clarify, Member(s) of the Project for the new american century said that if there was a "Pearl harbor" like event. Their goal would be reached alot easier.

the PNAC issued a 80-page report entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, And Resources For A New Century. The report has been the subject of much analysis and criticism. Conspiracy theorists, especially on the left, frequently quote out of context a line from Rebuilding America's Defenses which refers to the possibility of a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor"

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by jones
Just to clarify

Who asked for clarification?

 

[jones]

You did, when you said this..

I guess Jones and Bam can stop whining now about how Bush was too busy planning an invasion.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by jones
You did, when you said this..

Read again and show me where I asked for anything!

Even the dipshit O'neill is backing off his own statements now! All he succeeded at was making an ass of himself. He has now admitted that all the Bush administration did was continue what Clinton already started.

 

[jon_forward]

Conspiracy Theorist.... you most defininately got that right jones... Is that what you have printed on your shirts instead of monograms???

 

[jones]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Read again and show me where I asked for anything!

Even the dipshit O'neill is backing off his own statements now! All he succeeded at was making an ass of himself. He has now admitted that all the Bush administration did was continue what Clinton already started.

Funny how we didn't hear one word about a threat from the Bush Cartel, no added security, no air patrols, just a long vacation for Bush. But after 9/11 it was "Oh wow! we're being attacked and nobody knew they would even THINK of using airplanes" BZZZT. wrongo.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by jones
Funny how we didn't hear one word about a threat from the Bush Cartel, no added security, no air patrols, just a long vacation for Bush. But after 9/11 it was "Oh wow! we're being attacked and nobody knew they would even THINK of using airplanes" BZZZT. wrongo.

That's it, change your conspiracy theories every time you get cornered.

 

[jones]

No I didn't. Whats goin on with the conspiracy crap, Im not allowed to be suspicious?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by jones
No I didn't. Whats goin on with the conspiracy crap, Im not allowed to be suspicious?

Sure you are. But when you live and breath the conspiracies you then become an official tinfoil hat representative. 99% of what you post is theories.

 

[Truthmatters]

Acts of War were perpetrated against our country by al Qaeda during Clinton's term of office:

1.) The 1993 WTC bombing

2.) Aid to our enemies in Somalia

3.) The terrorist attack in Dharhan in 1996 that killed 19 American soldiers

4.) The 1998 attack on two American embassies in Africa

5.) The 2000 attack on a U.S. ship of war, the USS Cole

And Clinton basically did nothing. In certain instances he actually obstructed the investigations of these acts when it became apparent that some of them (like Dharhan) were state sponsored (by Iran) and the ramifications of such knowledge coming to light would have demanded action.

Should Bush have declared war as soon as he came into office? Yes. And had he, what do we suppose would have been the left-wing reaction to it? They'd doubtlessly have called it unilateral war mongering. At any rate, in hindsight it's obvious he should have anyways, but does that necessarily make 9/11 his fault? He did nothing with respect to no terrorist attacks on his watch. But how many acts of war were perpetrated against us before President Bush thought it was a good idea to respond? One. And was his response an attempt to simply punish those responsible for that one particular instance with trials or to wage a campaign to destroy those responsible and assure that it never happened again?

Blaming W for 9/11 is like saying George H. W. won the cold war.

Yeap blaming clinton was fine huh.

But NEVER mention that on 911 we were hit when the entire government was republican

 

[Truthmatters]

Annie seems to think David Kay was a disgruntled employee too