Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : G&K Investing for Curmudgeons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: unclewest who wrote (16680)	9/14/2001 2:00:15 PM
From: Dr. Id	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22706

Doc, are you just going to gloss over the fact that you were posting garbage about clinton defense budgets as fact? Show me data that the intelligence budget was cut under Clinton's watch. I have been told the contrary. there is little that can be done to stop such a suicide attack. someone willing to commit suicide can figure out a way to overcome nearly any defense. Exactly. We agree on that. BUT that DOES NOT make us helpless. with enough information, we can take early action and we can counter attack. those were exactly the successful responses to the baader-meinhof and red brigade terrorist factions in the 60s and 70s. it worked against the japanese attack too. I also agree with this. We can't eliminate the threat, but we can increase our odds of stopping it (or slowing it down). the current attacks have been increasing in frequency and scope...this was all happening on clinton's watch. the defense of America was his primary job yet he did nothing to counter the attacks and he did nothing to prepare us to counter such attacks. in fact even as the intensity was escalating, clinton continued to preside over the dismantling of our self-defense organizations. Weren't there terrorist attacks under Reagan's watch? I don't remember him coming up with a great plan which the Democrats then dismantled... how the hell do you justify that? what did no response get us? should we continue to do nothing and hope they will stop hitting us? Of course not. No one is advocating doing nothing. this attack was stoppable...but it had to be done early. i believe if clinton responded appropriately to the other attacks this one very well may not have happened. the attacks will stop when we take action to stop them. I think this is total b.s. So Clinton didn't speak to the Joint Chiefs or other military leadership in how to "respond appropriately"? Or do you accede that this may be such a complex problem that solutions are difficult to come by. Again, you seemed to dodge the question about the Israeli military, but they don't seem to suffer from the problems that you attribute to the Clinton Administration, but they don't seem to have much of a solution either. i am thrilled to see NATO step to the plate and become so involved. we absolutely need our allies right now...and not for political reasons. the cold hard fact is...like kuwait...we are presently too weak militarily to handle this threat alone. I am glad to see NATO involved too. But not because we are "too weak militarily". I don't see how a "stronger military" (meaning more weapons and more troops) would have prevented something like this (or been a deterent to extremists). when you tire of studying clinton's military blunders...go study the 95 and 96 clinton administration changes to the defense and CIA intelligence acts. learn how he eliminated some of our very best intelligence sources. sources that we used to get early warnings of imminent attacks. Do you have ANY data to support this? That Clinton "eliminated some of our very best intelligence sources"? I'd like to see it. btw, a few days ago, you were concerned that i seemed to be the only one criticizing clinton's military policy...i hope you have been watching tv. I have been. Haven't seen a SINGLE criticism of the Clinton Administration in regard to this. But then again, I don't watch or listen to kooks like Rush Limbaugh. I have watch doubya stumble through a news conference instilling zero confidence that he has a clue... If Clinton had been teary eyed talking about the issue, you would have had a field day talking about how weak he looked to the international community. this will make you happy...i am finished writing about clinton, gore, les aspin and the other weak minded military strategists of the past 8 years. i have to stop. It will make me happy when I see it. I find it hard to believe that we've heard the end of your diatribes against Clinton... cDI