So on 9-12-01, did you expect ?...

[JoeContrarian]

It takes a someone with a complete lack of knowledge of the facts to make this statement. The attack on the USS Cole occured at the tail end of the Clinton administration. The results of the subsequent investigation that identified the perpetrators of the crime were made available while the Bush administration was in power. Any retaliation for that act would've been the responsibilty of the Bush administration. Meanwhile, many of the actual perpetrators were apprehended, tried, and jailed.

Nonetheless, the talking points for the morons that receive their marching orders from the RNC/GOP, is that the Clinton administration did not retaliate for this act.

Oh, but they did retaliate, as you well noted -- with lawyers and police officers which predictably led to the 9/11. hno:

Had the Clinton administration treated the al-Qaida attacks as the Bush administration -- an act of war -- there would not have been a 9/11.

Clinton had the opportunity to take out bin Laden on several occasions with air strikes but alas there were always too many pesky "innocent civilians" around the target to pull the trigger. ("Innocent civilians" -- always good for a laugh. :missingte)

Instead, 3,000 of our own "innocent civilians" perished within seconds months after the USS Cole.

Lesson learned.

Memo from the Pentagon:

From now on, all "innocent civilians" shall now be referred to as "collateral damage."

 

[cutacrossshorty]

Oh, but they did retaliate, as you well noted -- with lawyers and police officers which predictably led to the 9/11. hno:

Had the Clinton administration treated the al-Qaida attacks as the Bush administration has -- an act of war -- there would not have been a 9/11.

Clinton had the opportunity to take out bin Laden on several occasions with air strikes but alas there were always too many "innocent civilians" around the target to pull the trigger. ("Innocent civilians" -- always good for a laugh. :missingte)

Instead, 3,000 of our own "innocent civilians" perished within seconds.

Lesson learned: from now on "innocent civilians" = collateral damage.

If you are going to quote me, please stick to the point I made regarding the talking point that the Clinton admin did not respond to the attack on the USS Cole. What I wrote are the facts. What I responded to is a lie. Perhaps that's too complicated for a paid partisan ass like you?

 

[JoeContrarian]

 

[cutacrossshorty]

The fucking paid partisan ass-clown can't dispute what I wrote, so he just just throws more non-sequitor shit at the wall in hopes to distract from the facts that I presented. The question is, are others stupid enough to fall for it? Obviously, that is his goal.

 

[Seymour]

9-12-01 Did you expect us to go after and get Bin Laden or Saddam?

What a fucking blunder this was - though we did half ass go after Bin Laden

 

[JoeContrarian]

If you are going to quote me, please stick to the point I made regarding the talking point that the Clinton admin did not respond to the attack on the USS Cole. What I wrote are the facts. What I responded to is a lie. Perhaps that's too complicated for a paid partisan ass like you?

Clinton responded -- with lawyers and subpoenas. Ooooo....betcha that scared them.

Why did Clinton not go after al qaida with our military? Only he can answer that.

It's funny, Democrats wave their fingers and say "Bush took his eye off the ball" when the truth is Democrats never had any stomach for fighting "the ball" when they had the chance.

Liberals are always busy fighting the last battle because the current battle is too frightening. Any excuse not to fight. It's all smoke and mirrors.

So now you know why Democrats can't be trusted to defend America's national security.

:howdy:

 

[cutacrossshorty]

Clinton responded -- with lawyers and subpoenas. Ooooo....betcha that scared them.

Why he did not go after al qaida with our military? Only he can answer that.

It's funny, Democrats wave their fingers and say "Bush took his eye off the ball" when the truth is Democrats never had any stomach for fighting "the ball" when they had the chance.

Liberals are always busy fighting the last battle because the current battle is too frightening.

So now you know why Democrats can't be trusted to defend America's national security.

:howdy:

You keep trying to change the subject. Actually, #16 in the list is an accurate statement. The Clinton admin did not order a retaliatory strike. However, in the end, they were not in a position to do so when the facts came to light. By the time the facts were determined, the Bush admin was in the White House. It would've been their responsibilty to retaliate.

Here is the statement I replied to, followed by my reponse:
---------------Quote:
Originally Posted by billhill999
The Clinton administration:

16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.

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

==============================================

It takes a someone with a complete lack of knowledge of the facts to make this statement. The attack on the USS Cole occured at the tail end of the Clinton administration. The results of the subsequent investigation that identified the perpetrators of the crime were made available while the Bush administration was in power. Any retaliation for that act would've been the responsibilty of the Bush administration. Meanwhile, many of the actual perpetrators were apprehended, tried, and jailed.

Nonetheless, the talking points for the morons that receive their marching orders from the RNC/GOP, is that the Clinton administration did not retaliate for this act.



==============================================


What exactly is inaccurate about this response?

 

[JoeContrarian]

The broader point isn't about the USS Cole incident per say, it's about terrorism during the 90s in general.

The USS Cole, the first WTC bombing, Saddam's Iraqi intelligence officers caught trying to assassinate a former commander in chief, the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the US Embassy bombings in Africa etc. etc. etc.

Bin Laden held a press conference openly declaring war against the United States. Saddam threatened to poison the NYC water supply, among other things. They were laughing and mocking the American "paper tiger."

What did Clinton do? Delegate the responsibility to Janet Reno. Or as you put it, "subsequent investigation that identified the perpetrators of the crime..."

Thank you -- he siphoned it off to the Justice Dept.

"CRIME," NOT WAR = Police matter.

Al-Qaida declared WAR -- Clinton responded with...oh right, there was no response to the Cole. Just as there were no serious responses to the other attacks, because Clinton's approval ratings were more important than national security.

Under the Bush administration, whenever we get any actionable intelligence on al-Qaida anywhere in the world -- from Sudan to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan -- they call in air strikes, "innocent civilians" be dammed.

Those kinds of policies will change under an Obama administration -- and we'll be attacked again.

You can count on it.

"Took our eye off the ball..."

What a load crap!

 

[cutacrossshorty]

My broader point isn't about the USS Cole incident per say, it's about terrorism during the 90s in general.

The USS Cole, the first WTC bombing, Saddam's Iraqi intelligence officers caught to assassinate a former commander in chief, the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the US Embassy bombings in Africa etc. etc. etc.

bin Laden held a press conference openly declaring war against the United States. Saddam threatened to poison the NYC water supply, among other things.

What did Clinton do? Delegate the responsibility to Janet Reno. Or as you put it, "subsequent investigation that identified the perpetrators of the crime..."

Thank you -- he siphoned it off to the Justice Dept.

"CRIME," NOT WAR = Police matter.

Al-Qaida declared WAR -- Clinton responded with...oh right, there was no response to the Cole. Just as there were no serious responses to the other attacks, because Clinton's popularity took higher precedence than American national security.

Under the Bush administration, whenever we get any actionable intelligence on al-Qaida anywhere in the world -- from Sudan to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan -- they call in air strikes.

Those kinds of policies will change under an Obama administration -- and we'll be attacked again.

You can count on it.

This is a bunch of unrelated crap to what I wrote in an attempt to save face. What I wrote is true. I know it and you know it (unless you are really clueless). It's about facts and exposing misinterpretations of facts. It's all partisan with you. However, facts are facts. The findings of the investigation of the USS Cole bombing did not come in until after Clinton had left office and George W Bush had been sworn in. Why is that fact so hard to admit?

 

[artiesliver]

The Clinton administration:

1. Did not follow-up on the attempted bombing of Aden marines in Yemen.

2. Shut the CIA out of the 1993 WTC bombing investigation, hamstringing their effort to capture bin Laden.

3. Had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key bin Laden lieutenant, slip through their fingers in Qatar.

4. Did not militarily react to the al Qaeda bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

5. Did not accept the Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden.

6. Did not follow-up on another offer from Sudan through a private back channel.

7. Objected to Northern Alliance efforts to assassinate bin Laden in Afghanistan.

8. Decided against using special forces to take down bin Laden in Afghanistan.

9. Did not take an opportunity to take into custody two al Qaeda operatives involved in the East African embassy bombings. In another little scoop, I am able to show that Sudan arrested these two terrorists and offered them to the FBI. The Clinton administration declined to pick them up and they were later allowed to return to Pakistan.

10. Ordered an ineffectual, token missile strike against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory.

11. Clumsily tipped off Pakistani officials sympathetic to bin Laden before a planned missile strike against bin Laden on August 20, 1998. Bin Laden left the camp with only minutes to spare.

12-14. Three times, Clinton hesitated or deferred in ordering missile strikes against bin Laden in 1999 and 2000.

15. When they finally launched and armed the Predator spy drone plane, which captured amazing live video images of bin Laden, the Clinton administration no longer had military assets in place to strike the archterrorist.

16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.

Bill--

I am asking seriously, are there any books that document the Clinton Administration's f'ck-ups related to this? I may be interested in reading them so I have a balanced view. Thanks.

--AL

 

[Uno]

This is a bunch of unrelated crap to what I wrote in an attempt to save face.

way to man up and admit it.

 

[JoeContrarian]

This is a bunch of unrelated crap to what I wrote in an attempt to save face. What I wrote is true. I know it and you know it (unless you are really clueless). It's about facts and exposing misinterpretations of facts. It's all partisan with you. However, facts are facts. The findings of the investigation of the USS Cole bombing did not come in until after Clinton had left office and George W Bush had been sworn in. Why is that fact so hard to admit?

r
No, it has nothing to do with partisanship, I'm agreeing with everything you said.

"Investigation of the USS Cole bombing..."

Good thing FDR didn't wait for an "investigation" after Pearl Harbor or we'd all be dead.

Why did Clinton wait for an "investigation" to hunt down bin Laden after numerous attacks (including the USS Cole) AND an open declaration of WAR from bin Laden?

Why, cut across shorty? Why?

Do you have the answer?

 

[Mistermj]

For the record...we lost a home town boy on the USS Cole.

And as ususal...cut shorty is a complete lying POS about the facts.

Who is this guy?

Every word is a lie or an excuse.

Jesus Christ.

Buy a clue shorty.

 

[cutacrossshorty]

r
No, it has nothing to do with partisanship, I'm agreeing with everything you said.

"Investigation of the USS Cole bombing..."

Good thing FDR didn't wait for an "investigation" after Pearl Harbor or we'd all be dead.

Why did Clinton wait for an "investigation" to hunt down bin Laden after numerous attacks (including the USS Cole) AND an open declaration of WAR from bin Laden?

Why, cut across shorty? Why?

Do you have the answer?

I don't have those answers. Perhaps there's a good reason, perhaps not. I would presume that you don't know the answer either. Regardless, the results of the investigation were known after the Bush admin came in power. Since there had been no retaliation to that point, it's fair to ask why didn't they then retaliate?

It is curious that the Bush admin was briefed on Al Queda and more or less warned that they would be a top priority in defending this nation from threats. However, when Richard Clarke got his meeting of department deputies, Paul Wolfowitz (as you know, a key member of PNAC) downplayed the Al Queda threat. I find that somewhat humorous (or sad), because you've written in the past how members of PNAC are the only ones who truly understand the threats we face.

 

[cutacrossshorty]

For the record...we lost a home town boy on the USS Cole.

And as ususal...cut shorty is a complete lying POS about the facts.

Who is this guy?

Every word is a lie or an excuse.

Jesus Christ.

Buy a clue shorty.

It may be a lot to ask, but I hope people are paying attention to what I write and what you write. If they are, I trust they realize what a lowlife you are and that there is no low that you won't stoop to.

 

[Doug]

Big brother is slowly winning control of our lives.

I can see requiring ID to fly, especially internationally where the foreign country is going to require a passport anyway, so OK on domestic air travel seems reasonable enough

They take it up a notch, It's now at the point that you need photo ID to ride a Greyhound bus or an Amtrak train, big brother needs to know where you are at all times !

I don't like giving up my rights, they slowly get stolen by our Commie gov't.

I'm not a big fan of assault rifles, but don't want to surrender the right to own one either !

I'm glad I've lived the majority of my life already, I don't think I'd want to be alive 20,30,50 years from now !

 

[Willie99]

So much of the bullshit they put us through is cosmetic. While government and dealing with government gets more and more frustrating

A bunch of clueless fucking idiots given way authority then they're even capable of comprehending

Really stupid people who couldn't possibly be successful in a competitive environment get to win elections with bullshit and idiocy