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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (20441)	3/2/2002 2:24:12 PM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I was talking about Fleischer, and will agree to disagree on that one. But I believe the record will show that Clinton's drive-by responses were driven by the lack of sufficient intelligence to track OBL and Co. accurately, plus the lack of public support that Bush has been able to harvest from 9-11. As John has noted, Clinton's record on terrorism had plenty of precedent from his predescessors. Political backbiting still views the missile attack on Sudan as a wag-the-tail thing... on that, I'm guessing the jury will remain out till some years hence when his Presidential records are unsealed. When we consider the level of intelligence support and scrutiny applied to the hunt for OBL which as yet has him at-large, how can anyone fairly critique Clinton's efforts when a lesser support system was in place? Blaming Clinton for the Israel Palestine dispute is playing games. Blame the guilty, whose record precedes Clinton's tenure. One could easily make the counter argument that bringing a major peace inititiative forward was what finally made clear to the world that Arafat has no desire for peace at all. But Fleischer's attack had Clinton responsible for 9-11, which is as ludicrous as the Prince's words to Giuliani.