Good going Bush---CIA now believes Usama has fled the entire region by sea

Gore would've got him by now.

 

What do you think this is, a big video game where Bush is holding the joystick, moving the troops around and making "strategery" decisions himself?

"Aw, dangit, lost another quarter. Cheney, git in here and git me some change for this dollar!"

 

LOL

 

Bicker we must.

Clinton was offered OBL by third party national police forces 3 times, and Clinton turned them all down. Before 9/11, OBL was styling compared to any other wanted man in this world. He had 250 million bucks, a small army to protect him, and all the burcka babes he could handle.

 

<B>Clinton was offered OBL by third party national police forces 3 times, and Clinton turned them all down. Before 9/11, OBL was styling compared to any other wanted man in this world. He had 250 million bucks, a small army to protect him, and all the burcka babes he could handle.</B>

Does anyone know the reason that Clinton turned those offers down, by the way?

On another note, everyone gets blame here because no one took terrorism seriously before 9/11. The Bush Admin supported the Taliban up through 9/11, even though we knew they housed and supported OBL. We confiscated millions of dollars within a week after the attacks, so it obviously wasn't very difficult -- why didn't we do any of that earlier? We knew it was terrorist money -- we just didn't care up to that point.

Basically, no administration has taken a very strong stand against terrorism (except maybe Reagan), and this is the result.

 

Wow, thanks Brian for that wonderful lesson on how our military works. No **** sherlock, I know it's not like a video game. My entire point, which went over your crying for The Black Crowes, graying head was that it's not that ridiculous for someone to point the finger at Bush over this.

I'm not, but I can see how someone would think that since he is the commander in chief, while you made it sound like it was as reasonable to blame him for this as it was to blame him for you going gray.

Fuzzy logic.

 

nice going, FDR and Churchill....Hitler got away!!

 

Rm95 -

If you actually think that it is Bush's fault that we haven't caught Osama - if you think there's something else we could have done that would definitely have nabbed him - then you really don't understand how this works. You must think this is some sort of video game if you think this should somehow be easier than it is...

Guess what? It's a big f*in' planet, and there are plenty of places to hide. There are thousands of criminals on ther loose in this country alone, and the police can't find them. I guess the police must be in a big conspiracy to let them all run loose so they can get funding... There's your fuzzy logic.

You're so goddam blinded by leftist ideology that you've got to blame Bush for every goddam little thing. I swear, college students today... It's pathetic.

 

maybe the problem is we're all so willing to blame somebody for everything in our society. in this case, we've made tons of progress against al qaeda and against terrorism worldwide...do we have osama today?? no...might we have him tomorrow, next week, next month, 6 months...perhaps...and when we do nab his ass this thread will be rendered worthless...however, some of the posters here complaining of Bush will be the same ones telling us how mean we all are for wanting to see him dead.

 

Nothing funnier than RM95 getting his panties in a bunch.

It's not my fault you're stuck trying to justify an absurd position.

Hell, I blame Bush for that too!

 

Something else being talked about is taking the frozen money from al Qaeda and giving it to Afghanistan for rebuilding.

Is that just total bs or what?!

If anyone should benefit from that, it should be those survivors at WTC, Pentagon and on-board the flights instead of it being taxpayer-funded!

 

We had the first WTC bombing, the embassy bombings, the Cole bombing, the Taliban propped up half way through Clinton's watch, and it's Bush's fault Osama couldn't be found in the last 3 months?

 

cmr...that link was great! The best part is the alleged reason why the person created the page.

 

I hope enjoyed this part of the page. Inside of a burqua, I feel free!

 

Gettinbranded.....I have learned to avoid your threads in the Rockets board, but being new to the Hangout, I scanned for subjects rather than for who was posting. I'll remember to do so in the future. Well I'm here now, may as well say something. I can't believe you got even this much reaction to such an absurd post. Well disguised though. I guess you really meant to say "Bush Sucks!"...or something like that.

It's pretty safe to say that after the events of 9-11 it wouldn't matter who our president was or whether he leaned to the left or right, we'd still be in this war. When or if Bin Laden is captured or killed, it will not mean the war is over. There are still other Bin ladens and other Al Quedas. It pains me to come to the defense of Dubya, because I generally don't agree with his policies, but the proper forum for addressing that is on Election day, not in the hang-out.

I agree with Madmax that there seems to be a "blame" mentality going around. I'm not ready to address the country or the world about it, but I sure would like to see less of it around cc.net. I cant' say its fair to blame Bush for every detail that goes wrong in this war anymore than I can agree with blaming Rudy T for everything that goes badly for the Rockets. As Briankagy mentioned earlier this isn't like a video game. There are a hell of a lot more buttons that need to be pushed by a lot of players to wage a successful campaign, whether that be a war on terrorism or a Rockets season.

Luke....errr..Rocketman: Don't fall prey to the dark side of the Force.

 

It's funny that most of you can't read, so I'll go ahead and point it out for you illiterate morons:

If you can pull your collective heads out of your asses, please take the time to read my previous post made at 12:13 pm on Tuesday January 15th where I stated that I don't point the finger at Bush for letting Bin Laden escape. I'm also sorry that you went ahead and <b>ass</B>umed that by understanding how someone could take such a position, that I agreed or even supported that.

 

I do blame Bush, though I doubt Clinton or Gore would have done any differently.

Why? American politicians are terrified of casualties. If Bush'd sent in a gazillion troops, bin Laden probably would not have escaped. He preferred to let the Northern Alliance do our fighting for us, with a little help from Way Above Where Nobody Can Be Killed and a few special ops. What did he expect? I anticipated this at the time. The Northern Alliance wanted the Taliban out of power, but didn't really have a huge grudge against bin Laden. If they could look the other way and save some of their own lives, then why not?

I guess one could also say it was politically expedient in the region to minimize US presence to avoid having the situation look like a crusade. But if Bush really cared about that, he should have avoided some of the rhetoric he used at the time. Besides, as long as we didn't stay long, I think such perceptions could have been avoided.

Once again, this is a choice any politician would probably have made. But it's a time when it's too bad the US doesn't have stronger executive leadership. No remedy for that, except a king... and I don't think that'll happen anytime soon (nor would I want it, of courses).

 

haven -- why do we find ourselves on opposite sides of the fence everytime???

the problem is...if had sent in a ton of troops, like you suggested, and we would have had a ton of casualties...you'd be the first one on here blaming Bush for that.

 

MadMax:

No I wouldn't... it's what I wanted to do at the time .

Of course, if I did blame Bush, you could have properly labelled me a hypocrite.

 

fair enough...suffice it to say that many on this board who are now blaming Bush for this would have labelled such an effort as overkill or overreaching in some way.