1. 1993 World Trade Center conducted by who? A group of arabs relying on training supplied by the USA for Mujahedin fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with support from a Muslim cleric living in New York City and members of a group years later identified as al Qaeda. So, what country would you have had us send the army to invade? Please specify what exactly we should have done, given the situation as we knew it at that time to treat the bombing as anything other than a crime.
2. "If you think Bill Clinton handled the USS Cole attack in Yemen correctly, then be prepared for more of the same with the Democrats in charge?" To borrow from the 9/11 Commision report:
"On January 25, Tenet briefed the President on the Cole investigation. The written briefing repeated for top officials of the new administration what the CIA had told the Clinton White House in November. This included the "preliminary judgment" that al Qaeda was responsible, with the caveat that no evidence had yet been found that Bin Ladin himself ordered the attack... in March 2001, the CIA's briefing slides for Rice were still describing the CIA's "preliminary judgment" that a "strong circumstantial case" could be made against al Qaeda but noting that the CIA continued to lack "conclusive information on external command and control" of the attack.[21]
According to Dr. Rice, the decision not to respond militarily to the Cole bombing was President Bush's. She said he "made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al Qaeda one attack at a time. He told me he was 'tired of swatting flies.'"
So, do you think Bush handled the Cole attack correctly?
You obviously seem to imagine we are somehow preventing attacks by our presence in Iraq where we went before we completed killing alQaeda when we had the bastards pinned. Do you think Bush handled that correctly?
What planet are you on? Let's review.
1. 1993 World Trade Center conducted by who? A group of arabs relying on training supplied by the USA for Mujahedin fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with support from a Muslim cleric living in New York City and members of a group years later identified as al Qaeda. So, what country would you have had us send the army to invade? Please specify what exactly we should have done, given the situation as we knew it at that time to treat the bombing as anything other than a crime.
2. "If you think Bill Clinton handled the USS Cole attack in Yemen correctly, then be prepared for more of the same with the Democrats in charge?" To borrow from the 9/11 Commision report:
"On January 25, Tenet briefed the President on the Cole investigation. The written briefing repeated for top officials of the new administration what the CIA had told the Clinton White House in November. This included the "preliminary judgment" that al Qaeda was responsible, with the caveat that no evidence had yet been found that Bin Ladin himself ordered the attack... in March 2001, the CIA's briefing slides for Rice were still describing the CIA's "preliminary judgment" that a "strong circumstantial case" could be made against al Qaeda but noting that the CIA continued to lack "conclusive information on external command and control" of the attack.[21]
According to Dr. Rice, the decision not to respond militarily to the Cole bombing was President Bush's. She said he "made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al Qaeda one attack at a time. He told me he was 'tired of swatting flies.'"
So, do you think Bush handled the Cole attack correctly?
You obviously seem to imagine we are somehow preventing attacks by our presence in Iraq where we went before we completed killing alQaeda when we had the bastards pinned. Do you think Bush handled that correctly?
Keep drinking the cool-ade