SI
SI
discoversearch

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: carranza2 who wrote (28299)5/4/2002 12:39:17 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 281500
 
how Gore would have responded to 9/11 and its aftermath.

From everything we know about the guy, he would have "Micromanaged" it to death. I doubt if the Afghanistan situation would have been handled as well. The Republican people in the Defense Dept are a cut above what Gore would have appointed, IMO. But, we will never know.

One thing would have been the same. The absolute failure of the FBI to do their job on the 9/11 attack. The continuing leakage of info keeps confirming their ineptitude.

lindybill@theyscrewedupatrubyridgeandwacoto.gov



To: carranza2 who wrote (28299)5/4/2002 2:17:28 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
By the way, I'm not a huge fan of W, but I do feel that he's the right man with the right team for the historical moment we're in. No telling how Gore would have responded to 9/11 and its aftermath. Being a part of the Clinton administration would have made things difficult politically for him at a time when unity was necessary.

I think he would have done OK. His putative foreign policy team was the equal of Bush's in terms of experience. Better in terms of politics (imho).

He would have micromanaged. And that would not have been to the good.

As for the unity question, that has nothing to do with Gore or Bush but the unwillingness of the right to accept election results (as compared to the center-left). (Will that get a rise out of someone?)