If you had to choose either Clinton or Bush to be next president?

[ReBirth 0]

It's called joking...get a sense of humor.....or get over it....could care less which

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

It's called joking...get a sense of humor.....or get over it....could care less which

Still more attacks.

Is that the only way you have to communicate? If so please don't bother to try and communicate with me anymore.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

I listed several reasons, one of them was how a religous group thinks the US is morally corrupt. You choose to only listen to one of the reasons.

The reason that he attacked the US are his opinions. He is certainly entitled to them. As a matter of fact, I think that most of the "religious right" in the US hates Hollywood for the same reasons.

Here is the issue, nobody gets to blow up embassies because of a difference in opinion. He can control the culture of his own backyard by legally restraining others from reading Playboy. Attacking the warship of another country is not just an opinion.

There are millions of people in the world with beliefs that are just as fervently held. If they want to discuss opinions, there are diplomats and politicians everywhere. When they start blowing stuff up, they live by the rules of war - not discussion.

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

When OBL sent fighters to Somalia, he was expecting a Russian-type protracted battle over years. Failure 1 - Clinton failed to commit the necessary resources to support the ground troops. 2- After the Rangers suffered casualties, he pulled out quickly.

It was Bush 1 who sent in the troops and promised the American public not to make this a prolonged commitment. Wasn't this also done in the last month of his Presidency. Didn't he also say that the troops would be home in no time. Nice to see how Somalia is then handed to Clinton and then its his fault for the screw up and the poor planning. Kindof like giving your two week notice, starting a big project and then screwing it up so the next guy can clean it up. Hey what do you care, you're not responsible for it now. What did you expect of Clinton. Would you want him to launch a full blown war the first few months of his Presidency.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Nice to see how Somalia is then handed to Clinton and then its his fault for the screw up and the poor planning. Kindof like giving your two week notice, starting a big project and then screwing it up so the next guy can clean it up.

No, the fact is that Clinton took office in Jan. 1993. It wasn't "two week notice". Clinton authorized the action to catch Aidid in August, not Bush. It wasn't until Sept that the trouble started.

Clinton had refused to allow armored personnel carriers, tanks, or Bradley fighting vehicles in Somalia to support troops. (Put troops in harms way, but not give them the tools.)

On Sept 9th, a UN patrol (Americans and Pakistanis) were clearing a roadblock and attacked by a crowd. The response was that US helicopters killed 100 Somalis. This angered Clinton.

Gen. Montgomery requested four M-1 Abrams tanks, 14 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and some heavy artillery.
On Sept. 23 the request, titled "Protection of Forces in Somalia," was rejected by the Clinton administration.

Clinton had 7 months in office and he started making bad decisions.

He withdrew troops from Somalia.
He withdrew armor.
Then, he ordered the Aidid mission.
When things fell apart, he pulled out the troops and gave the world an appearance of running away.

[Casurf1978 0]

Here's a timeline that will clear things up. It was Dec 4th 1992 that Bush one ordered troops in. I'm 27 and I even remember that speech.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/etc/cron.html

If Somalia was so important why didnt Bush act sooner? Maybe because it was an election year and he didnt want to start a war. I love it how the right puts full blame on Clinton for Somalia. The bottom line is Bush 1 was a lame duck and really didn't give a damn what would happen. I'm also sure the American public would've supported a full blown pronlonged war in Somalia from a President who took office less than a month after troops were put in.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Here's a timeline that will clear things up. It was Dec 4th 1992 that Bush one ordered troops in. I'm 27 and I even remember that speech.

I agree with you. Bush 1 did ordered troops there. At one point, there was a large contingent of Marines there. They were trying to stabilize the region enough to allow the UN to distribute food without it being stolen.

Quote

If Somalia was so important why didnt Bush act sooner?

Bush did act. He sent troops to Somalia. Personally, I was against the idea. I think that the the UN should let other people settle their own civil wars. I also think that the US should not be involved with the UN.

Bush sent 25,000 troops. Clinton reduces it to 1,200 combat troops.

Quote

I love it how the right puts full blame on Clinton for Somalia.

It's not just the right, it's pretty much everybody. I don't think that there is even one report of the events that doesn't just scald Clinton and Aspin.

I blame Clinton for the series of f-ed up decisions that he made. I listed them. He made f-ed up decisions for 7 months that led to the events of Sept and Oct.

One of them was using Jimmy Carter as a resource during the decision-making process during that period.

In December, Aspin was also forced to resign over his part in this chain of disasters.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Here is the issue, nobody gets to blow up embassies because of a difference in opinion.

Correct, but do you not think it is foolish to ignore the guys reasons why he blew up the embassy? I mean if a guy does something and he then tells me why he did it, I think that might be important enough to atleast listen to it even if I do not agree or support his reasons.

Only a fool would not want to know why he was attacked.

[mx757 4]

Clinton sucks! I can't stand the guy!