Do most Republicans really think Bush deserves more credit for killing Bin Laden?

[woolfe9999]

Welcome to politics.

I am a republican. I believe Obama deserves all the credit. If Bush had still been president, I'd have given him full credit for it.

My only misgivings are that the intel required to find the guy, as I understand it, was acquired by waterboarding, which the left abhors. So I find it a little convenient that the left so readily (and partisan-ly) lionizes Obama for an act which could not have taken place but for a procedure they despise (and for which they excoriated the Bush administration). If Bin Laden had been killed under Bush, I doubt they would've been so euphoric.

Alas, it's all politics. It's about what team you're on, not what you've done.

Per Panetta's comments, the intel was actually gained from multiple sources, of which "enhanced interrogation" was one. That said, I'm not sure why you think whoever is in office deserves "all the credit." In my view, that is a problem with the way we view politics. The fact is, any President in office would have instructed the intelligence brass to make a top priority to find and neutralize OBL. That part of it was a no brainer. It was the people on the ground, gathering information, who really deserve the cred.

Similarly, we tend to blame whoever is currently in office for all mistakes on the ground, so it does go both ways. And it's often a fallacy whether it is a matter of either credit or blame.

 

[cwjerome]

The commander and chief deserves THE credit, for the success or failure, of the military operations that take place under him. It's only been that way since forever until now that it was Obama who bagged the biggest fish in the pond. To suggest I'm discounting all the other people and factors that contributed to this ludicrous, but nice job trying to turn this around to me not giving the proper people their due credit.

Well, I guess you truly are as dumb as you appear. I am not suggesting you're discounting all the other people or everything that has led up to this: You are saying exactly that in the bolded.

Just like Truman gets THE credit for the Japanese surrender... forget about what happened the previous 3 years, it happened on his watch so he gets THE credit Your perspective is immature and serves no useful purpose in analyzing historical and political events. Face it, your a partisan tool, just as bad as the people polled who you disagree with.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Wow...those must be some powerful meds your on.

Meds? MEDS???

Nemesis don't need no stinkin' Meds!!!

 

[rudder]

Bush-not the military-screwed up big at Tora Bora with the wrong decision. Bush then took his eye off the ball (despite PJ's spin) with his famous statements about not being concerned about where OBL was and by essentially abandoning the effort in Afghanistan and starting an absolutely unnecessary, expensive and diversionary war in Iraq rather than doing the heavy lifting to finish the job already started.

It is also looking pretty clear now that none of the necessary intelligence came from GWB's torture program but rather from the professional CIA traditional methods, dogged persistence, hard work and a few lucky breaks.

What source are you using?

The director of the C.I.A. disagrees with your statement regarding how the intelligence was obtained. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVuDO-3zzHU


... start about 8:06.

Anyway regarding Bush and his hunt for Osama... there was a different government in Pakistan at the time. There were different dynamics in play. Look at the history of drone strikes in Pakistan. During the Bush years when Musharaff was president... there were only a few strikes. In the time after Musharaff resigned.. drone strikes have increased significantly. between 2004-2007 there were 9 drone strikes. In 2010 there were 118. You mean to tell me that obama's peace prize was utter bullshit? And that he went into office hell bent on killing a lot of brown people in pakistan... or that the government changed in pakistan in 2008 which afforded the C.I.A. more opportunity to carry out drone strikes. In time it will be revealed that while Bush and Co. knew osama was in Pakistan the U.S. did not pursue him. Whatever the true reason it was surely not lack of desire or simply dropping the ball.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Well, I guess you truly are as dumb as you appear. I am not suggesting you're discounting all the other people or everything that has led up to this: You are saying exactly that in the bolded.

I am saying no more than exactly what I said. Now let's all take a look at what you say here vs. this from your previous post to me:

Why would you completely discount all the factors involved to say one person gets THE credit?

You're calling me dumb and you can't even keep your BS spin consistent within the same thread.

Obama is the Commander in chief, he gets THE credit, for success or failure, for the missions executed under him. Trying to give Bush credit for this is the same kind of week ass argument the right tried in giving Clinton "credit" for 9/11. Bush was on the job, he dropped the ball, he owned it. Obama was on the job, he ran with the ball, he owns this. You folks refuse to give him his proper due, and somehow I'm the partisan hack for pointing that out.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Per Panetta's comments, the intel was actually gained from multiple sources, of which "enhanced interrogation" was one. That said, I'm not sure why you think whoever is in office deserves "all the credit." In my view, that is a problem with the way we view politics. The fact is, any President in office would have instructed the intelligence brass to make a top priority to find and neutralize OBL. That part of it was a no brainer. It was the people on the ground, gathering information, who really deserve the cred.

Similarly, we tend to blame whoever is currently in office for all mistakes on the ground, so it does go both ways. And it's often a fallacy whether it is a matter of either credit or blame.

Harry Truman is the reason and he was merely stating the obvious.

 

[sunzt]

Interesting article here. The credit may need to be directed to Panetta.

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-h...panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/

But to reply to the original question, OBL was terminated under the watch of the Obama administration. They did their job - nothing more and nothing less. No gold star on the forehead needed or required.

Very interesting if true....

I wonder where Valerie Jarrett is now.


Credibility of author seems lacking, especially since the author's next article is titled "President Obama Shouldn’t be Trusted: Osama Bin Laden Might Resurrect"

 

[Thump553]

What source are you using?

The director of the C.I.A. disagrees with your statement regarding how the intelligence was obtained. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVuDO-3zzHU


... start about 8:06.

Anyway regarding Bush and his hunt for Osama... there was a different government in Pakistan at the time. There were different dynamics in play. Look at the history of drone strikes in Pakistan. During the Bush years when Musharaff was president... there were only a few strikes. In the time after Musharaff resigned.. drone strikes have increased significantly. between 2004-2007 there were 9 drone strikes. In 2010 there were 118. You mean to tell me that obama's peace prize was utter bullshit? And that he went into office hell bent on killing a lot of brown people in pakistan... or that the government changed in pakistan in 2008 which afforded the C.I.A. more opportunity to carry out drone strikes. In time it will be revealed that while Bush and Co. knew osama was in Pakistan the U.S. did not pursue him. Whatever the true reason it was surely not lack of desire or simply dropping the ball.

I've already seen the Panetta interview you linked. Panetta did not explicitly stated usable evidence came from waterboarding-he just hasn't denied it either, he's being coy. I've seen seen numerous unattributed sources that say while the first time USA learned the false name of the courier it came from Gitmo detainees, but not from waterboarding but from conventional interrogation months later.

Frankly I think we will all have to wait a few months for the Bob Woodward book to find out what really happened and when. Right now it's mostly swirling rumors.

I suggest you listen to Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to better understand his philosophy and methodology of achieving peace-it is not simple Gandhi style nonviolence, but (very over simplified) a little war now is worth it to avoid a big war later.

 

[cwjerome]

I am saying no more that exactly what I said. Now let's all take a look at what you say here vs. this from your previous post to me:

You're calling me dumb and you can't even keep your BS spin consistent within the same thread.

Obama is the Comander in chief, he gets THE credit, for success or failure, for the missions executed under him.

LOL... are you a child? I am not SUGGESTING that's what you're doing, it IS what you are doing by your own words. There is no suggestion idiot, you ARE saying it. When you say: "Obama is the Comander in chief, he gets THE credit, for success or failure, for the missions executed under him," you do realize by giving him THE credit you are discounting everything else.

If English is not your primary language I can understand, otherwise you are a fool.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I am a Republican and I believe Obama deserves a good chunk of the credit. Moreso than Bush. Bush does get some credit here though because of what he started and all the information gathered during his era.

I see this as running a company. When you don't deliver the #s that investors want, your CEO gets changed out. Who cares if you brought the technology, the ideas, the innovation. You lacked the execution. When the board throws you out and brings in some new top notch CEO and the company takes off, who gets credit? There you go. Even if you did a great job in getting things going, results matter.

But I think too many on the right see this as the greatest achievement in the war on terror. Regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan might have been dirty but to me they were very meaningful. Osama is just one guy and while his death has great significance, in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't do much. It's a morale thing.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I am saying no more than exactly what I said. Now let's all take a look at what you say here vs. this from your previous post to me:

You're calling me dumb and you can't even keep your BS spin consistent within the same thread.

Obama is the Commander in chief, he gets THE credit, for success or failure, for the missions executed under him. Trying to give Bush credit for this is the same kind of week ass argument the right tried in giving Clinton "credit" for 9/11. Bush was on the job, he dropped the ball, he owned it. Obama was on the job, he ran with the ball, he owns this. You folks refuse to give him his proper due, and somehow I'm the partisan hack for pointing that out.

Lol...love is blind, deaf, and dumb!

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

LOL... are you a child? I am not SUGGESTING that's what you're doing, it IS what you are doing by your own words. There is no suggestion idiot, you ARE saying it. When you say: "Obama is the Comander in chief, he gets THE credit, for success or failure, for the missions executed under him," you do realize by giving him THE credit you are discounting everything else.

If English is not your primary language I can understand, otherwise you are a fool.

I am not discounting anything else. Everyone deserves the proper credit for the role they played in this. But it was ultimately Obama's responsibility as Commander in chief, and he deserves THE credit for that. Credit that the right wants to spread around to everyone BUT Obama. I realize you folks have problems with nuance and such, but it should be even within your realm to grasp that Obama ultimately deserving THE credit for this because this was ultimately HIS responsibility to handle. Yeah, and I initially misread your post, because it was making such a ludicrous accusation it didn't even register as such the first time.

 

[Steeplerot]

Bush dismantled Clinton's search for OBL only thing republicans did was invade the wrong country and let OBL get away at Tora Bora. By 2005 bush had dismantled the osama search teams.altogether


Now republicans want credit? Typical childish mindset from spoiled children who need to go to the political corner for a big timeout along with their democracy poisoning bullshit media.

 

[Siddhartha]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_new...e-point-bounce-for-obama-after-bin-laden-news



I'll put something here to keep this from being locked for lack of comment, but if I put real comments it would likely earn me a vacation. What is it going to take with you guys? If setting the priorities and making the calls that take down the number one terrorist in the world doesn't earn proper cred with you folks you really need to take a good, hard look at yourselves and own up to just why that is.

This is a classic knee jerk partisan response from the NObama crowd. As far as they are concerned, no matter what Mr Obama can not do anything right, he can not have any successes, etc. They will go to almost irrational lenghts to make the facts fit their reality.

Does anyone here think if the situation was switched, that Mr Bush was a Democrat and Mr Obama was a Republican that these people would be arguing that the Democrat should get at least half if not all the credit?

 

[cwjerome]

I am not discounting anything else. Everyone deserves the proper credit for the role they played in this. But it was ultimately Obama's responsibility as Commander in chief, and he deserves THE credit for that. Credit that the right wants to spread around to everyone BUT Obama. I realize you folks have problems with nuance and such, but it should be even within your realm to grasp that Obama ultimately deserving THE credit for this because this was ultimately HIS responsibility to handle. Yeah, and I initially misread your post, because it was making such a ludicrous accusation it didn't even register as such the first time.

You are one and the same with those on the Right who want to give Obama no or little credit... you want to give him THE credit. You're both wrong, things are not that simple and people like you who want to try and single out credit are trying to come up with the right answers to the wrong questions. It's counterproductive and essentially meaningless... we need to focus on the right questions. You're a partisan hack in a war with other partisan hacks and other than providing minor entertainment value, you have nothing of substance to add :'(

 

[jackstar7]

Turns out that Hope and Change worked out.

 

[manimal]

imagine if the raid went south like the one Jimmy Carter did before his reelection?


Yes the President had alot riding on this if things didnt go well. He should get most of the credit. Especially if you parse GWB's comments about not thinking about osama etc..

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

You are one and the same with those on the Right who want to give Obama no or little credit... you want to give him THE credit. You're both wrong, things are not that simple and people like you who want to try and single out credit are trying to come up with the right answers to the wrong questions. It's counterproductive and essentially meaningless... we need to focus on the right questions. You're a partisan hack in a war with other partisan hacks and other than providing minor entertainment value, you have nothing of substance to add :'(

Asking how and why righties can be so biased against someone as to deny him his due credit for taking down OBL, the world's number one most wanted terrorist for the past ten years, is the right question. He deserves THE credit, it comes with THE responsibilities of THE presidency and getting THE job done.

 

[Steeplerot]

Seems righties are in the bartering phase of their denial.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Asking how and why righties can be so biased against someone as to deny him his due credit for taking down OBL, the world's number one most wanted terrorist for the past ten years, is the right question. He deserves THE credit, it comes with THE responsibilities of THE presidency and getting THE job done.

Relative of yours?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc

Get a grip on yourself.

 

[Jaskalas]

Bush authorized the military to lay the groundwork.

Obama authorized the military to execute the mission.

Our military gets the credit, the two Presidents get a wink and a nod for not getting in the way.

 

[fskimospy]

What source are you using?

The director of the C.I.A. disagrees with your statement regarding how the intelligence was obtained. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVuDO-3zzHU


... start about 8:06.

Anyway regarding Bush and his hunt for Osama... there was a different government in Pakistan at the time. There were different dynamics in play. Look at the history of drone strikes in Pakistan. During the Bush years when Musharaff was president... there were only a few strikes. In the time after Musharaff resigned.. drone strikes have increased significantly. between 2004-2007 there were 9 drone strikes. In 2010 there were 118. You mean to tell me that obama's peace prize was utter bullshit? And that he went into office hell bent on killing a lot of brown people in pakistan... or that the government changed in pakistan in 2008 which afforded the C.I.A. more opportunity to carry out drone strikes. In time it will be revealed that while Bush and Co. knew osama was in Pakistan the U.S. did not pursue him. Whatever the true reason it was surely not lack of desire or simply dropping the ball.

Nowhere in that video does Panetta say that any information used in this operation came from waterboarding.

 

[theeedude]

Do most Republicans really think?

 

[classy]

Obama deserves the credit. His admin stuck with it and given a window of opportunity, he sent folks covert into another country to get him. Obama may have dropped the ball in a lot of areas, but when it comes to bad guys, he wields his power like a true bad ass. He definately has shown he will have the bad guys killed.

 

[xj0hnx]

This is a classic knee jerk partisan response from the NObama crowd. As far as they are concerned, no matter what Mr Obama can not do anything right, he can not have any successes, etc. They will go to almost irrational lenghts to make the facts fit their reality.

Does anyone here think if the situation was switched, that Mr Bush was a Democrat and Mr Obama was a Republican that these people would be arguing that the Democrat should get at least half if not all the credit?

You and Gonad are so full of shit. Plenty of republicans have given Obama a lot of credit for this action. The point is that you two have you lips wrapped so tightly around Obama's nut sack that you just can't possibly accept that they have given him credit.