Bush given plans for war against al-quaida on Sept. 9

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Uhh, this article is about Clinton. What does that have to do with Bush being a hypocrite?
Well, in short, the information was dismissed and never passed along........................this was all re-discovered POST 9/11. Clinton was to busy trying to weasal out of his lies to the nation to address national security when it should have been and could have been................

 

LH

Golden Member
Feb 16, 2002
1,604
0
0
Dems wanna drag down the republicans for the fall election plan and simple. People blame Bush for the recession, even though we have come out of a recession under Bush, which actually puts the path to recession under the second Clinton term. Its the same way with this, the Clinton white house knew of this same crap. They knew about plans to blow up stuff, they were warned, all Clinton did was fubar the CIA even more.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
This tragedy was not caught in time because of at least 3 administrations and several goverment agencies, not just GW.
Thank you that's all I wanted to hear. That Bush is partially responsible. Now was this really that hard?
And I never said Clinton (or Bush Sr.) had nothing to do with this failure, but he isn't running for president, so right wingers can use him as cannon fodder all they want for all I care.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Thank you that's all I wanted to hear. That Bush is partially responsible. Now was this really that hard?
Well then hear this. The only thing I hold him responsible for is not correcting the mistakes of the two previous administrations quicker. Nothing more.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Thank you that's all I wanted to hear. That Bush is partially responsible. Now was this really that hard?
Well then hear this. The only thing I hold him responsible for is not correcting the mistakes of the two previous administrations quicker. Nothing more.
Yeah, yeah. That and forgetting to mention certain hijacking warnings to the American people.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Sorry. There is a huge difference between being prepared in the eventuality of war and knowing what is coming when.

When we fought the war against Iraq, there was already a plan in place to fight it.... long before Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. This is quite common. Battle plans are hatched far in advance.

If Bush knew that far in advance, don't you think everything (PATRIOT Act and the rest) would have been ready more than 2 days in advance?

Seriously, our Intelligence community knew something was going to happen. After the WTC attack back in 199~, we ALL knew something was going to happen. UBL was not going to go away with a firecracker in a subterranean garage. All intelligence suggested that he would do something.

UBL knew what he was going to do. His deranged, asshat Cell leaders knew. The flunkies in the back did not have a clue (See Video)

How to attack? That was obvious... airplanes. Hijacked airplanes... flown by religious zealots...

What was unclear - before 9/11 a hijacking was a leisurely flight to Cuba. After 9/11, the meaning has changed. We now look at planes as missles... with beverage carts.

The where - THAT IS THE DIFFICULT POINT... A nation so prosperous... from sea to shining sea with soooo many targets. Which one? Where? When? Can we shoot down an airliner over a metropolitan area? What to do?

These warnings were soooo vague.

Seriously - put down the bong for a second, think, and for the love of Christ stop typing. You are idiots.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
What the hell would a hijacking warning do for the American people?

Do you honestly believe that would have stopped anyone from flying that day? No.

We get warnings all the time... but we constantly disobey them. There are State Department travel advisories to Mexico - warning of murders and kidnappings - the ransom of Americans..... That does not prevent college students... and MTV from having their Spring Break orgies there.

Warnings are a farse. Thpse planes would have been full anyway.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Well then hear this. The only thing I hold him responsible for is not correcting the mistakes of the two previous administrations quicker. Nothing more.
How could Bush correct the mistakes of two previous administrations in a year and change? Do you have any idea how Washington works? You have to not only know there is a problem, but then you have to study it. After Congressional Hrgs, you may get your funding. After that, the Executive Branch (CIA, FBI) has to go to work to fix the situation internally...

The complete Intellgence breakdown under Clinton... yes Clinton.... woule easily take more that a year and a half to fix.
 

Mrburns2007

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2001
2,595
0
0
Nice to see Bush apologists squirming. Your guy was caught sleeping at the switch. Not only that, but your buddy Bush let the FBI and CIA take heat for 7 months as if they haven't told him anything, knowing full well that they have provided him with info that he himself failed to act on. This guy is the ultimate hypocrite.
They interviewed people who worked for the CIA in a piece for PBS about terrorism and they said that the terrorist were surprised that the United States hadn't taken millitary action agianst them since the 70's ! The country was to wrapped in the cold war to bother with some small time terrorist blowing up cars and highjacking planes.

I'm sure the FBI and CIA get a ton of bogus information about terrorist threats everyday that they have sift through.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
The CIA and the FBI gets thousands of "leads" regularly. How many come to fruition? An infintesimally small percentage.

Would you conspiracy mongers blame Gore for this, had he won the election?

Please do not waste our time with that "but he did win the election" whining... we have all been through that. The Electoral College elects the president. The Electoral College elected Bush.

Could Gore have put the WTC in a lock box (like Social Security) and protected it from the big bad terrorists? No. He would do what his predecesor did... nothing. Where was Clinton?

It was UNDER CLINTON'S PRESIDENCY that the first WTC attack occurred.
It was under Clinton that OKC suffered the previous "worst terrorist attack ever."

Where was Clinton's plan to bolster the FBI after Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City? What about the CIA following UBL's attack of the WTC in the 90's?

What did your political messiah do? He had the best opportunity to cut this off at the pass.

I dare you to respond.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Oh - left off the attack on the USS Cole...

So when you leftist, limp-wristed, candyasses are pondering my previous question... Why did Bill Clinton do nothing about addressing domestic security and fighting international terrorism, remember that the following occurred under his "watch:"

  • The First WTC attack
  • The attack on the USS Cole
  • The Murrah Federal Bldg Explosion - Oklahoma City
  • Ruby Ridge
  • The Waco debacle

My answer: He was crotch deep in a fat intern's mouth, and really did not care.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Yeah, yeah. That and forgetting to mention certain hijacking warnings to the American people.
There was nothing more to warn us about than any other time in the last 20 years you thick headed moron. My god you are dense.

How could Bush correct the mistakes of two previous administrations in a year and change? Do you have any idea how Washington works? You have to not only know there is a problem, but then you have to study it. After Congressional Hrgs, you may get your funding. After that, the Executive Branch (CIA, FBI) has to go to work to fix the situation internally...
As someone who is career military I am acutely aware of the federal goverments budgetary process. Bush knew there was problems, he mentioned them numerous times in his campaign. There are also plenty of career civil servants who know/knew exactly what the problems are/were who have been screaming their heads off for over a decade. GW gets a little bit of the blame. The remainder goes to his father( 2 years worth) and clinton (8 years worth).
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
I have to disagree. At least Bush acknowledged that there was a problem. That was more than we had received under Clinton's nonfeasance.

I don't believe that you can really fault Bush. There was no way he could have possibly fixed the situation in the short time before the WTC attacks. Keep in mind that the mid-term elections are upon us this November.

How do you fix a broken CIA and FBI in 1 year? Even if all of the resources in the world are thrown at it.

Why isn't the INS fixed yet, if it is so easy? It has been 8 months since the attacks, Dave? :)

You really can't fault a man when he was there for a year. Clinton was there for 8. He had the most ample opportunities.

He did nothing with them.
 

FrancesBeansRevenge

Platinum Member
Jun 6, 2001
2,181
0
0
lol SuperTool completely ignores the article about Clinton doing the same thing he is bashing Bush for.

Lets see.... Clinton ignored the warnings FIRST... so seems to me a fair bit of blame can be laid at his feet as well.
 

Yeeny

Lifer
Feb 2, 2000
10,848
1
0
Before Sept 11th, none of us ever had a concern about some little dinky country made up mostly of sand and camels being able to hurt the superior USA. Now if we as civilians didn't worry, why would our leaders, who have access to high tech weaponry be concerned. It was a lack of communication, coupled with our arrogance that did us in, not one certain person.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
I didn't ignore no article. I said that it is fine to criticize Clinton, but Bush isn't off the hook either. He is the president, and was for 9 months on 9/11.
Clinton is not running for and isn't in office anyways. It doesn't matter to me if you criticize Clinton all you want.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
GW gets a little bit of the blame. The remainder goes to his father( 2 years worth) and clinton (8 years worth).
Read that again. clinton gets the lions share of the blame for ignoring and exasperating the problems. His father(Bush,Sr) gets some blame for initiating all the drawdown crap. GW gets some blame because he did not listen to the career civil servants and move faster to fix the problems that may have, probably not, contributed to this. His attention was focused on the economy and no one, NO ONE, thought that we would be attacked on our soil. If he wants to take credit for the recovering economy and the military success in Afghanistan, etc,etc, then he is going to have to shoulder a little bit of the blame for this. Just a little bit though. JMO
 

railer

Golden Member
Apr 15, 2000
1,549
64
91
Yep...it's all Clinton's fault. He's probably got an Osama t-shirt on right now. Yes sir...

Some of you people are so god damn dumb it's frightening. Not that I think that it's Bush's fault either, mind you. Arrogant american policy has something to do with it. Throw some really crazy arabs into the mix...and you've got yourself a problem or two...
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
He is the president, and was for 9 months on 9/11.

Precisely.

What can a president do in 9 months with a system mired with inadequacies?
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Yep...it's all Clinton's fault. He's probably got an Osama t-shirt on right now. Yes sir...

This is the best you can come up with? Seriously.

It is largely his fault because he chose to do nothing with his 8 years in the White House.

Some of you people are so god damn dumb it's frightening.

Agreed. Which ones of us are you refering to?

Not that I think that it's Bush's fault either, mind you. Arrogant american policy has something to do with it. Throw some really crazy arabs into the mix...and you've got yourself a problem or two...

The failure in the intelligence community is the issue at bar. I concede that the Arabs in question are crazy. American foreign policy is arrogant by nature. That is understandable give the fact that we are the most powerful nation on Earth.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: Format C:
Gore lost. Get over it.



How many of your 1100 posts have you wasted saying that? Seems like thats all you post anymore.
 

Piano Man

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
3,370
0
76
I love how all the dumba$$es here who are either blaming Bush or defending him continue their crusade for a cause that has no end. Face the facts people, Bush would have stopped the damn thing if he would have known about it. So would Gore(just for you Format C: )This isn't an attack on Bush, this is an attack on the intelligence agency. And the intelligence agency f*cked up. No one can deny that. So stop pointing fingers at Bush, Clinton, or Gore and look at where the real problem is. God damn I'm tired, and I'm going to bed.................:|
 

Format C:

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,662
0
0
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Format C:
Gore lost. Get over it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






How many of your 1100 posts have you wasted saying that? Seems like thats all you post anymore.
Apparently not enough. BTW, Lucky.... Gore lost. Get over it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY