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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (376402)	4/5/2008 2:40:19 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1577025

>> And now you have those like i-node who will be claiming that it is all damage left over from the Clinton years. There is no doubt that 9/11 was a direct result of Clinton's incompetence in dealing with the issue. One can make the argument that Bush should have been more proactive in the short time he was in office, but 9/11 was caused by Clinton's innumerable, repeated failures more than anything else. Had he gotten Osama -- at any one of several opportunities he passed on -- it may have changed the outcome. Had he responded to Saddam with extreme violence instead of the usual, liberal-lay-down-and-take-it, terrorist might have had second thoughts. He had 8 years -- 7 of which were after the first attack -- in which to act, yet he didn't. So, yeah, Clinton bears most of the responsibility, and this is the way I believe history will remember it -- Bush succeeded where Clinton failed miserably.