E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe participants pictured in the famous photo of the White House Situation Room taken during the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound speak with NBC's Brian Williams.
Would Mitt Romney have given the order to authorize the daring mission that ended in Osama bin Laden’s assassination?
It’s impossible to say, but that hasn’t stopped President Barack Obama’s campaign from stoking doubts that a President Romney, essentially, wouldn’t have had the guts to make that order.
“Thanks to President Obama, bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive,” Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday in a campaign speech. “You have to ask yourself, if Gov. Romney had been president, could he have used the same slogan – in reverse? “
Jason Cohn / Reuters
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney addresses supporters at a rally at Consol Energy's Research and Development facility outside Pittsburgh, Pa.
Marking the one-year anniversary of the mission that successfully killed bin Laden, the mastermind behind the Sept. 11, 2011 terror attacks, has undoubtedly given the Obama campaign an opportunity to remind voters of one of the president’s biggest accomplishments on foreign policy and national security.
“He took the harder and more honorable path, and the one that produced, in my opinion, the best result,” former President Bill Clinton said in a web video released Friday by the Obama campaign – one that directly asks the question about what Romney would have done if he were in that position last year.
But some Republicans are crying foul. For starters, the Republican National Committee was eager to highlight the 2008 Obama campaign’s own complaint against then-rival Hillary Clinton, accusing her of trying to “invoke bin Laden to score political points” by depicting the infamous al-Qaida leader in a campaign ad.
“I think it's irresponsible and unfair,” said Brian Hook, a foreign policy adviser to both President George W. Bush and former White House hopeful Tim Pawlenty, said of the Obama campaign’s questioning of Romney. “What person running for commander in chief doesn't want to bring bin Laden to justice?”
“In my experience, every president will try to do the right thing,” said Charles Hill, a conservative foreign policy expert and lecturer at Yale University. “You can't say one person would do it and another person wouldn't; it depends on the operational plan.”
And Sen. John McCain, the 2008 GOP nominee and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, protested in a statement: "No one disputes that the President deserves credit for ordering the raid, but to politicize it in this way is the height of hypocrisy. The Obama campaign asks whether Mitt Romney would have made that decision. Of course they want to focus on this one tactical decision because the other decisions this president has made have harmed our national security."
By most press accounts, the decision to authorize the mission that killed bin Laden was fraught with difficulties; there was no “slam-dunk” guarantees that the risky strike would end with success. Biden himself has said that he had counseled the president against the Special Forces mission.
The Obama campaign’s effort to translate that decision into a political chit is two-fold. First, they’re looking to build up the president’s stature as a commander in chief, and their efforts are meant to cast Obama as a figure of fortitude in the face of Republican criticism that he’s too weak.
The other prong – and this is where the claim that Romney wouldn’t have acted comes into play – is intended to seize on the instances in which the former Massachusetts governor’s foreign policy positions have seemed muddled or, worse, inconsistent.
Political strategist Ed Gillespie lambasts the Obama campaign's use of Osama bin Laden's killing as a political tool.
The crux of that argument stems from comments Romney made in 2007 when, in reference to bin Laden, Romney said “it’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.”
That comment, said former Gen. Wesley Clark, a onetime Democratic presidential candidate and surrogate for the Obama campaign, made it fair to question whether a Romney presidency would have ended in the same outcome of killing bin Laden.
Clark argued that Obama deserves credit not just for ordering the mission, but for initiating an overall shift in strategy that helped collect the actionable intelligence that allowed the president to make the call he did.
“It’s not quite a fair comparison to say Gov. Romney might have decided to go after him, too, if he had that information,” Clark said. “But that information is the result of thousands of man hours of effort at the exclusion of not focusing on other things. The decision was just one step of many that led to the takedown of Osama bin Laden.”
Rudy deLeon, a senior vice president of national security and international policy at Washington’s Center for American Progress, concurred.
“You had actionable intelligence, which is something the president doesn't always get. But in swinging the forces from Iraq to Afghanistan, you were able to swing with it the kind of surveillance that was able to get you actionable intelligence,” he said, referencing the surge in troops in Afghanistan that Obama had authorized.
Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen tells NBC's Brian Williams he worries 'a great deal' that the Osama bin Laden raid will be spun into election politics.
“He basically took on his own party. That's not a sign of weakness or indifference,” deLeon added.
Hook cautioned, though, against overly politicizing the bin Laden mission, referencing the instance in which Obama said he was wary of appearing to “spike the football,” referring to the photos of a dead bin Laden.
“Didn't Obama say we shouldn't be spiking the ball in the end zone?” Hook asked. “Well, isn't this spiking the ball in the end zone?”
Leave a Comment:
Depends whether the coin landed on 'heads' or 'tails'...
As far as the GNOP whinng about this, who else remembers Bush/Cheney trotting out Osama bin Laden the week prior to the 2004 election?
The boogey-man is gone - the chicken hawks don't have anyone left to trot out to scare the country with!
No wonder the chicken hawks are out of gas & crying FOWL!
Folks,
Exactly what ******* use is this kind of speculation?
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Depends
Yea like how much money Willard "Myth" Romney could scam from bin laden. So since neither bin Laden nor the "Myth" Rob-ney care about the American economy; I would say yes, yes, yes!!!!
Osama Bin Laden Wanted 9/11 Follow-Up to Doom Economy, Terrorist Says
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-bin-laden-wanted-911-follow-doom-economy/story?id=16201299
Would Al Gore have said "now you can say you covered your ass" when informed that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the United States?
I think Gore would have been better prepared for the attack than Bush was, considering Gore served as VP during the Clinton presidency and the one thing Clinton wanted to impress on Bush was the threat from al-Qaeda.
He is gone and good riddance.
This is the biggest hooha over something that President Obama accomplished and the right wing has a severe case of sour grapes. It is just another example of them having nothing and then trying to diminish someone else's achievements, well guess what? They still have nothing. This is MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
Now if only the media would stop giving a hand to the right wing megaphone, we can all go back to doing something else to help the country.
Ah Yes, I remember that whenever Bush/Cheney were losing support they would trot out another video (just released) of OBL with threats.
Scare tactics....Vote republican. You're either with us or against us!...and then of course Bush with his threat against countries that refused to send troops he told them that if they did not provide support, they would not share in the spoils ($$$).
Seems to me that a consequence of having changed positions as often as Romney has on many issues is that people are going to question whether he would stick to any position he took. You wouldn't hear a similar criticism of Rick Santorum, for example. I didn't agree with Rick on anything I can think of but I always knew that his positions weren't likely to change.
This is so much sour grapes from the Republicans and they don't seem to realize how petty it makes them seem.
EXACTLY! Thank you, Backhouse!
So why would Obama even raise the issue in that campaign add?
Besides, if Obama wouldn't take credit for it, Willard would try. Anyone see where Willard tried to take credit for rescuing the automakers?
Romney is a total wuss ..this isn't " playing Army"..Mitts hair would get messed up and his Prada shoes and suit would get dirty .
Hold the phone...the 43rd President gets to wave the bloody shirt in the 2004 election and that's just dandy. The 43rd President says, "I'm not that interesested" in Bin Laden and no right wing chicken hawk peeps one time. The Mittronic Rombot says don't move heaven and earth. Well, guess what, someone took the job a little bit more serious than all of that lip servicing blather. That someone is the President, Barack Obama; the Republicans are just jealous that they could only talk about the bogeyman, they couldn't deep six him.
There she is....right up on top shaking from the excitement of getting to post first...ms barack's payroll girl, Feisty Red Head. But she won't actually debate me so I'll just point out a few things about her post.
She likes to post the same statements over and over. Feisty why don't you remind everyone that Russia is no longer "Russia"? You haven't posted that anywhere in a day. It's probably like your "red hair" is not really red hair.
I'd like to ask anyone here how they can conclude what Romney or Pelosi, or Hillary, or Kennedy or Mickey Mouse would do? What kind of politicized, speculative bull sh&% is that? As far as "who else remembers Buch/Cheney" yada yada ding dong? Really? by Feisty's lack of logic, since her hero George Bush did it, it must be okay for her messiah barry Husein to do it. Hmmm, doesn't make sense, it's interesting...stupid but interesting.
"Girlfriend" the very thing that barry bitched and cried about putting the Bush administration on trial for is the very thing that allowed him to be in a position to make the call in the first place. The interrogation that happened at gitmo started the ball rolling on the whole thing. The interrogation that barry was defiantly against and called for criminal trials to take place on those who conducted them. But cut to the next scene and barry isn't mentioning anything about collaborating efforts throughout layers of political levels. But he is insinuating he made some ground breaking decision by giving the go ahead to take out public enemy #1. Really? Amazing display of reasoning there. Any president would have made that call, even Carter, and if they didn't they should be shot for treason.
So if barack had any couth whatsoever he'd leave this whole thing as a united celebration so the country could actually take some side by side pride in something. We just don't do it anymore and it's because of the great divide that barry lives for (as demonstrated by this story). It's his mission in life and it's working quite well.
As far feisty's rhetoric about "remember when?" Holy crap, you could spend the rest of the year pointing out multitudes of hypocritical political maneuvers on both sides! Political posturing over topics has taken place since the beginning of time and it's not going to change. But at least I'm logical enough that I can give some credit to barry for saying "yes", like I said, it would be treasonous not to. But God forbid any of the blind sheep out there think that anyone had anything to do with it except barry. If you really dig into feisty's head she probably thinks he lead the raid on the compound and was the first through the door. Ahhh, but she's paid to think that so there you go.
Feisty, all we have to do is trot people like you out there and that will strike plenty of fear into the country.
Foreplinger:
Who said it was okay for Bush to "wave the bloody shirt"? The logic you guys use is: "we hate when they do that so we're going to do it and then we won't hate it, in fact we'll defend it." In the mean time the republicans say "those damn liberals are politicizing things again, well two can play that game" and the cycle continues. WTF kind of logic is that? Is it any wonder that there's nothing but heavily divided gridlock across the country.
You guys are also the ones who stand on a soap box and rave about war spending. So if someone like Romney says they wouldn't move heaven and earth to get one person, that feeds right into the liberal philosophy. Am I wrong? You don't want big war spending correct? Romney makes a point that it's not necessary to "move heaven and earth" i.e. spend billions in a war effort to get one person. How in the hell does that mean he wouldn't still go after him with special opps?
Did Romney ever say he wouldn't go after Bin Laden if he had the right intel and the opportunity? No he didn't, as in he never said that. Nor did barack, or any other politician in this country. Anyone would give the go-ahead if the opportunity presented itself. So why is this being politicized and why is this being debated? If everyone held all politicians feet to the fire on the reality of actual topics the temperature would drop considerably.
One of these days instead of blindly following it might be a good idea to look at your leader and say...yeah, that wasn't cool, he should tone it down a bit. But you guys just can't bring yourselves to do it. barack did nothing more on this topic than take good intel provided by good people and listen to knowledgeable advisers and then make the right call. I give him an "atta-boy" for that one. But politicizing the matter based on asinine speculation is wrong, on either side.
To answer the question posed by the article.......Either way, regardless of who was president, the military is the one who tracked and monitored Bin Laden, and they are the ones who went in when the opportunity provided the greatest safety for our personnel and the best chance of success....No political leader in this country was in the front lines directing this....the military did a superior job and unfortunately, is not getting their share of credit for being prepared and ready when the order finally came. I agree to a certain extent that our country learned alot about the gaps in our intelligence network in this process. Once again, that is not the personal preserve of any President, or Senator, or Congressman....We have a CIA as well as military intelligence operations which are not to be controlled by political parties for good reason.
I personally don't believe Romney would have gotten bin Laden for the same reason George Bush didn't get him. Republicans need their boggy man. If they can't frighten the American public they have to rely on our overwhelming desire to continue trickle-down economics.
Obama and his cast of clowns are idiots for even wasting time creating a "what if" scenario. Lame ! Lame Democrats !!!
Mitt Flip Flopper would be playing Etch A Sketch with Bin !
Backhouse in 1.1 - Exactly! Good call! I notice the polling question that was included with this article did not discuss that at all.
If Osama were alive for a Romney presidency, it would mean that Bin Laden was resurrected, which would imply Islam is the one true faith, at which point Romney would flip flop and start saying Muslims are awesome and convert.
There's only one president who wouldn't have pulled the trigger, that would be slick willy clinton. He had the chance and didn't. Guess he was more interested in shooting (a load) at Monica.
Did romney say that he wouldn't go after Bin Laden? Yes, he did in 2007, look it up. He said that it would be too costly.
This wasn't going to automatically happen like the conservatives want to falsely believe.
The fact is that the Bush administration stopped looking for Bin Laden. They disbanded the group in the military that was tasked with finding and killing OBL. One of the first things President Obama did was to recreate this group and give it as many resources that was required.
Lets give credit to the leadership of President Obama for eliminating our enemies. He's still authorizing drone strikes while Pakistan seethes and disapproves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden
Mitt would be hiding under his Wife's skirt, draft dodging coward !
How ironic that the president who could have taken out Osama and didn't, (that would be Clinton), is calling into question Romney's resolve to make that decision. Yes Obama gave the operation the green light, good for him, but only after languishing about it for days if not weeks. But for some arm twisting from the military, Obama may well have punted this opportunity too. Bush would have made the decisions in about 2 seconds, look no further than the attempt to take out Saddam only hours before the zero hour for the beginning of the Iraq war. Had they got him then, its questionable if we would have gone into Iraq at all, certainly the strategy would have been different. Bushes big mistake was not stationing forces along the Afgan/Pakistanboarder at Tora Bora. We put too much trust in the locals who sold us out and let Osama slip away to Pakistan. Lets not forget that Bush authorized strikes in Pakistan too, when he had the intel that indicated Osama was in that local.
Oh and Romeny would have made the same decision, only much faster. Anyone would have.
In other words....would Mitt have authorized the intentional military breech of an allied nation, Pakistan, and ordered soldiers to murder an unarmed man.
I would like to think that Mitt would have been more of a GWB type and where the military targets a suspect and brings that suspect to account for his evils in a public trial like the Bush administration accomplished with Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Seems a bit to convenient to have located Bin Laden, murdered Bin Laden and dumped his remains off a ship in what was described as a religiously respectful manner. If the mission went as they said and Bin Laden was unarmed then why not a capture why take the low road with a kill order?
Yes the leader of the Free World, Barack Obama, boast about ordering the hit of what turned out to be an unarmed man....Bin Ladens victims, in America and abroad deserved true justice...Obama took that away from them.
This is a useless discussion and being an arm chair quarterback. The bad guy is dead and three cheers.
If we want to get picky the Democratic President Clinton had a chance presented to him to whack Osama and didn't which lead to the Twin Towers attacks and two wars. Chew on that Feisty.
What this shows is how desperate the Romney people are as well as how desperate the entire Republican Party is. Republicans began playing politics 9/11 about an hour after the towers fell. And everyone with the intelligence of the average 4 year old knows that had the mission failed and Bib Laden was still alive, Republicans would be screaming for the President’s head on a platter. This is just another example of Republican hypocrisy.
"Democratic President Clinton had a chance presented to him to whack Osama and didn't "
And don't forget how Republicans played politics what that. But then -- at least Clinton tried to get Bin Laden which is more than Bush did.
The real question is does Obama have the stones to keep the arab nations under the american thumb so we can play whack a mole as the new terrorist leaders emerge. I think he will try to be mr nice guy while the next Osama takes charge and makes his plans. Do you ever accidentally say Osama instead of Obama? I do because they are so close to each other haha
Bin Laden should have been taken alive. His value would have been inestimable. The information in his head and the ability to extract it is there. At first it was declared to be a capture/kill mission. Then immediately it was reversed on national tv to a kill mission. U.S. Navy Seals are trained in many ways to capture. This should have been a slam dunk. It is an embarrassment to have had this man alive in front of a extremely well trained, intelligent U.S. military officer and to have executed this man. Then we hear that the body was dumped before the DNA tests were concluded. Can we trust the U.S. government to tell us that the body disposed of at sea was really the body of bin Laden's after getting so many lies from the president and congress?
Hello folks, news flash; Osama was seen by a spy drone having lunch with Elvis in a cave west of Kabul. Not just any cave, but the cave where he orchestrated the 9-11 attacks with sophisticated can and string communication technology and a blackboard with chalk. The plans scribbled on the blackboard had details on how to penetrate the most heavily defended air space in the world.
He was also seen with crates of state of the art box cutters and manuals on how to fly jumbo jets for dummies. There were also sparklers that were used to jump from WTC1 and II to WTC7 which caused the building to free fall at demolition like implosion speed. He also had passports that are able to withstand the high temperatures of a jet fuel explosion.
Don’t worry, we will send Seal Team 7 to get him, again. They have been trained to locate 6’4” terrorists dragging a dialysis machine around with them.
txmom32 You are being too logical for these rabid liberals! Of course bin Laden should have been captured. You are 100% correct. All that knowledge and plans he had were thrown away. Don't think that humans can stand up and resist questioning. Even lies lead to truth. They had the computers and all the files etc. He could have been questioned and everything could have been run through check ups and back ups and other sources. Obama is a fool, a flake and a phony.
Would bin Ladin be alive if Romney (or McCain) were President?? @!$%#, he'd be running for Congress as a republican from Florida.
This is all the liberals have to run on, "what ifs" and "maybe's." Nothing concrete, or accomplished.
Either this President's ego is too big or his brain is too small to think that ANY US citizen would even hesitate to take out Osama, given the opportunity, is ludicrous. However, with a record like Obama's you really don't have anything else to run on so I can see why they are doing it.
Funny that Osama Bin Laden has been dead for years, as admitted by Bhutto in her 2007 interview only a few days before a failed attempted assasination, then a successful one a month later...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKDYZfEbEow
The Pentagon admitted they have no proof of the supposed raid on Bin Laden's compound, and of course, we can't even ask the seals that "participated", since they mysteriously dies in a helicopter crash...
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/323364
So no president can claim this one, they had nothing to do with it...
Bad day on the MSNBC news front to even bring this up for discussion? Of course any sitting president would make the call to have OBL eliminated.
The Barack Ness Monster happened to be the sitting president at the time. The media writes as if the Barack Ness Monster actually located and planned the mission, rather than sign the order to move forward. The American intelligence community and military should be commended, as the president for signing the required documents.
Any president, with the exception of Billy Bob Clinton, would have signed the order.
Obama was presented with several options. Biden and Gates were in favor of a drone attack. The President choose to send troops in instead, to make sure Osama was identified and killed, and added back up, in case a firefight ensued. If the mission had failed, winemaker, you'd be calling for Obama to step down, you would not be blaming the American Intelligence community and military, be truthful.
Amy,
Another Monday full of the Barack Ness Monster tribe going rah-rah!
In any military planning session, options are generated to aid in the planning of the mission. You are correct several versions were presented, the option of boots-on-the-ground as one option.
The Barack Ness Monster did not, as you present, develop the plan selected; he signed the order to proceed.
As for your assumptions had the mission failed? Get real Amy B. You should never assume honey; you are as incorrect as usual.
But you are correct, I am in favor of the Barack Ness Moster leaving office, and he will during this election cycle.
winemaker
You are absolutely correct. The bull crap Amy and the other Narwhal room wankies for Obama are trying to spread is laughable. Anyone who is too stupid to see what this failure has done to our economy and country and freedoms and Constitution should be given a one way ticket to whatever Socialist country they want to go to.
winemaker-4308406
Any president, with the exception of Billy Bob Clinton, would have signed the order.
First off, you haters gotta hate Shaking my head included.
Secondly, Bush did nothing to get bin laden. In fact , Bush let him go in Tora Bora in Afghanistan. Bush also said...Remember this?
Bush's response to not acting on bin Laden
Remember this is just SIX MONTHS after 9/11. In response to a reporters question, President Bush tells the world that he is "truly not that concerned" with catching the man who murdered 3,000 Americans just six months and two days earlier because "we've marginalized him."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o
Thirdly, you and Shaking my head have no idea what the hell you are talking about President Clinton. He did go after bin laden. President Clinton angrily schooled the Liars. "At least he went after bin Laden.
A clip of Clinton on Fox news as the Reporter Chris Wallace tries to make him look bad but ends up getting Put in his place.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y66_v0Eb5N0&feature=related
I don't believe for one second that a repub would have eliminated their main campaign slogan - that repubs will protect us all from the terrorists while the dems are not capable of doing so.
The war on terror is not a war against any one country. It's against the terrorists themselves. And Obama is showing them that they are not safe anywhere. Thankyou Mr President.
Billy Bob Clinton? Let me guess, you were one of the ones screaming "wag the dog" right after Clinton sent cruise missiles in an attempt to kill Bin Laden.
@Al - Billy Wahl did have Osama in his sights but couldn't get Billy Bob to sign the order to eliminate him. Guess Billy Bob was too interested in his next meeting with Monica. lol! And this was before the missile you site.
@Bev the Chicago bigot, yawn. Gee, did Bushie give him a free pass? Please site your factual sources.
Or why don't you talk about the slow-jamb dumbing-down of the presidency thanks to the Rock Star president?
Better yet Bev, why not site your sources for this statement:
Beverly in Chicago
Not so, Winemaker. Bush had bin Ladin in his grasp and let him go to focus on Iraq expanding Iranian influence in the Gulf. It took Obama to refocus the effort on bin Ladin. Bush would never have had the opportunity to "make the call". Obama deserves credit not only for making the right call, but making the call possible.
Thank You Seal Team 6 for doing the REAL JOB!
Leon Panetta, not Obama, issued order to kill bin Laden?
Was it Leon Panetta – not a waffling Barack Obama, supported in his indecision by Valerie Jarett – who finally ordered the assassination of bin Laden. A “White House insider” was quoted tosay the following:
Beverly
Why are you always typing in bold?
I think people like you and feisty and anyone else that puts so much energy into slamming fox are showing your cards to those of us with our eyes open. I mean seriously, do you have a vendetta that runs so deep that you would spend time making your avatar "fox lies" or in Feisty's case "dumb fux" which is appropriate in her case. And they say I'm un-civil. So apparently the check you cash has a little stamp in the corner that reads "media matters". If not than you've got some serious issues. Really who does that? Do you have a no wal-mart bumper sticker in hopes that it will actually sway someone to not shop at wal-mart? I wonder how many people have seen your avatar and thought "yeah, fox lies, I'm never watching them again". According to the ratings it looks as if your influence is doing a bang up job. So anyway...media-matters rules!
Now onto the topic. In communication there is something called belittling that sometimes goes hand in hand with sarcasm. In your summary of Bush's press conference you obviously didn't understand it or even hear it. If you were the President and your peeps were hard at work looking for someone would you tell the whole world that you were putting tons of energy into it? I'm not saying he was at that moment but to take away the importance of someone publicly is a very common tactic.
I am right in line with everyone else in celebrating that the piece of garbage was eliminated but you forgot a key line in Bush's conference; "Terror is bigger than one person and he's a person that's been marginalized, his host government has been destroyed" There's a method here that you nor I understand but two things are certain. 1) we were not attacked again under Bush's watch and we've had multiple small scale radical muslim attacks since he left. 2) the killing of osama although awesome did not end terrorism which is exactly what Bush and Romney have said. No doubt they would have taken him out, to think differently is just pig headed and silly.
This is exactly what was said, take it and interpret it however you'd like. I can guarantee we will probably interpret two totally different ways. But if you're going to insinuate something about someone at least put the factual information out so people can draw a conclusion.
"Deep in my heart I know that mans on the run if he’s alive at all. Who knows if he’s hiding in a cave or not, we haven’t heard from him in some time. The idea of focusing on one man indicates to me that people don’t understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person and he’s a person that’s been marginalized, his host government has been destroyed. He’s the ultimate parasite that found weakness and exploited it and met his match. You know as I mentioned this is a fellow who commits youngsters to death and he himself tries to hide if he’s hiding at all. So I don’t know where he is and I don’t spend that much time on him. I’m more worried about making sure our soldiers are well supplied, that the strategy is clear and that the coalition is strong, that when we find the enemy bunched up like we did in Shahi-kot mountains that the military has all the support it needs to do the job which they did. There will be other battles in Afhghanistan and there will be other struggles like Shahi-kot and I’m just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahi-kot where our soldiers are performing brilliantly, they’re tough they’re strong, they’re well equipped, we have a good strategy. We’re showing the world that we know how to fight a gorilla war with conventional means. JUMP TO THE END---I’ll repeat myself, I truly am not that concerned about him, I know he is on the run. I was very concerned about him when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the taliban, but once we set up the policy and start executing the plan we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al-qaeda killers anymore."
ssmithlg
Interesting, I'm digging into that one.
winemaker-4308406 - I suggest you take a lesson in Military operations.
The Commander in Chief was responsible for deciding which option would be used and he was responsible if it failed.
As to your second comment, you're either very young or have a very short memory. President Carter was utterly destroyed by the Republican party because he made a tough choice and the mission failed. Obama would have been toast. Romney would have made the safe choice given our history with decision makers. You people are pathetic. You can't even give the man credit for making the tough call.
Next time you reprint lying right-wing propaganda, at least check to see if there is any truth to it at all:
It's come to this: Islamophobic crank Pam Geller (last seen on Fox Business lying about President Obama's "photoshopped" birth certificate) is now reporting that Obama didn't actually want to kill Osama bin Laden, but the military "overruled" the Commander-in-Chief and conducted the mission anyway.
As anyone familiar with the Constitution and the concept of civilian control of the military can tell you: it doesn't work that way.
Her source for this shockingly stupid report is NewsFlavor.com, which claims to have received a "communication" from their "long time D.C. Insider" in which intimate details of the most closely-guarded national security deliberations in recent memory are laid out, portraying the president as weak, vacillating, and overly concerned with politics -- basically, the right-wing caricature of Obama.
But then if the right-wing doesn't have lies...they have nothing!
To..Ol Doc""""
Funny nobody ever mentions this cluster flk....
Gerald Ford: Mayaguez Incident
Ford ... faced a foreign policy crisis with the Mayaguez Incident. In May 1975, shortly after the Khmer Rouge took power in Cambodia, Cambodians seized an American merchant ship, the Mayaguez, in international waters. Ford dispatched Marines to rescue the crew, but the marines landed on the wrong island and met unexpectedly stiff resistance just as, unknown to the US, the Mayaguez sailors were being released.
In all phases of the operation, fifty service men were wounded and forty-one killed, including three men believed to have been left behind alive and subsequently executed and twenty-three Air Force personnel killed earlier while enroute to the staging area at Utapao, Thailand.
It is believed that approximately sixty Khmer Rouge soldiers were killed out of a land and sea force of about 300.
The GOP/T-Baggers are still Choking over Bin !
Ol doc,
So by your statement you are saying that Romney would have made the safe choice and the safe choice would have been to go with drone attacks. Okay, let's say you are the all knowing and can actually determine what someone would have done in a given situation. (can I borrow your magic ball, I've got a couple lottery numbers I'd like to know). But anyway, lets say you're 100% right about that.
Did the drones take out osama?????? Is your magic crystal ball giving you that answer?
My magic ball says yes the drones took out osama. So now what? You've got a moot point because by your own hypothetical conclusion he's still dead under Romney.
I rest my case. It's so utterly ignorant for MSNBC to write an article on this and for "you pathetic people" to be assuming anything. IT"S HYPOTHETICAL AND THERE'S ZERO WAY TO KNOW. But just to separate myself from your accusations I think if you looked just a little you will see that many of us "pathetic people" did give credit where credit was due and didn't give credit where it wasn't due. It's called "objective reasoning" and ANYONE who is using their magic crystal ball isn't practicing it.
Yeah, he made the call to get osama, he also made the call to give Solyndra 535 million, or 118 million to Amonix and 249 million to A123 for a return in campaign contributions (fact) and they all busted. He also made the call that he would bankrupt the coal industry, he also made the call for a moratorium on oil drilling in our own frickin' country while propping up the industry in Brazil, he also made the call to close gitmo which thank God never closed, he also made the call to make the racist piece of Shi% Van Jones the energy czar who had to step aside months after appointment.
So what's the point of any of this? I'm not speaking for everybody but I will certainly concede the whole frickin operation including pulling the trigger to the guy if you'd like. But in return I'd love for just one liberal to show a little backbone and concede that all of these truths (and many more I can list) are seriously detrimental to the nation. But if I'm asking for a liberal to show some backbone, I might as well be asking for a magic crystal ball, neither one seems to exist.
Ol doc, thanks for posting what I was going to post, but saying it much better than I could. So, the wingnuts are "still" quoting birthers?? What the hell? They must be totally without "hope" aside from being delusional liars. Keep keeping 'em honest - well, as honest as a wingnut can be. They are scary folks. Still believe The President is "coming for" their guns, FEMA camps and the filth that spews from the mouths of Beck and Limbaugh. Sad - but frightening.
Patriotic you are just infatuated with tea-bagging aren't you? Is it because you've never done it, you always do it, you've had it done to you too often or what?
See, unlike you I'm not calling anyone names but since you chose to stoop to the level of name calling I figured I would give you a chance at reprise and ask you to clarify how you figure the teaparty are actually tea-baggers? Hmmmm, could you please explain that to me. You can ask for help from any of the other very civil and well mannered liberals who grace us with their presence. Do you know what tea-bagging is? Could you explain the liberal name calling correlation between an activist party seeking small government and people who drop their male genitalia into the mouths of others.
Wait, if you're calling the tea-party, tea-baggers then who are the tea-bagged? Oh, it must be like a yin-yang thing. The tea-party are tea-baggers so the liberal/progressive or democrat party must be the tea-bagged. Okay, I get it, and I guess I'll accept that. Carry on
Hey patriotic, way up on your high horse...just having some fun right?
Ol Doc
When you start with lines like
You increase your viability to the left, and decrease it from everyone center to right.
To use such language, all you are doing is using very clear language to say you are from the extreme left wing.
Will someone tell Mitt Romney his 15 minutes of fame is up !
Uh, the answer to the headline question is "of course".
Next dumb, hypothetical question?
Will someone tell Patriotic American that she needs a little more creativity in her statements. Her boss is going to dock her pay because nobody likes an obvious boring poster. Oh wait, I'm supposed to bold everything...I guess that makes my more official...there we go.
winemaker, what you fail to realize and point out is that a Romney administration, iile the Bush administration, would never have gotten the opportunity to make the call on capturing or killing Bin Laden, since a Romney admin, like the Bush admin, would have no clue where he was. You know, basically Republican incompetence doesn't get a lot of valuable work done. But you'll always have "Brownie".
The only division this issue is raising is with those who "weren't worried about him" and "really didn't know or didn't really care" and those of us who truly never forgot.
Jones Very well said. Someone posted something about Jimmy Carter. The fact is Ronny had connections with the military, and they made sure that raid failed. The planing was flawed. The choppers were rigged to fail. All so Ronny could get elected. One thing people need to know is that Obama learned from Carders failures. When making these plans, it was Obama that insisted there were 3 choppers instead of 2 the plans called for. It took several weeks to make these plans because the president was involved with the planing. He wanted to get it right and he did. Not just for politics but for the lives of those brave men. Ragans people didn't care about the men that were killed in the Carter raid, they needed it to fail, the military people that had a hand in that should be shot.
Has anyone noted the "poll" options? Choice #1:
"He's taking an appropriate amount of credit, and deserves praise for authorizing the mission."
Of course he "authorized" it. The generals came to him and said: "We found him. We think we can get him. Should we go ahead?" And Obama said "Yes" just as any President would have done. Obama had nothing to do with the planning and probably didn't know what a Seal looked like in combat gear until he watch the video of the raid.
Just more NBC spin and biased polling.
Would “President Romney” have gone after Bin Laden? We will never know because Romney will not be elected President and Bin Laden is dead. But we do know several things.
Brilliant argument. Did you learn logic in first grade?
There are only 3 types of people claiming BHO is trumpeting the death of OBL
1- the ignore-ants
2- those who are CHICKEN-HAWKS & never served or were discharged dishonorably
3- those racists who hate America
It isn't good enough that OBL is dead, as soon as he died BHO had 3 new camps of enemies & so did America .
You can't FIX stupid, you can only destroy it or wait for it to destroy itself .
Bad day on the MSNBC news front to even bring this up for discussion? Of course any sitting president would make the call to have OBL eliminated.
whinemaker-
But Romney had once stated it wasn't worth the time and resources to keep chasing Bin laden. If that were the case, they wouldn't have found him in the first place to make the call. It wasn't like our intel people ran into him by accident.
gt
Love your mis-spelling of the namne - just another progressive tactic when times are going south.
Politicians often say one thing while meaning the second. You and I will never know the true meaning of the statement since he wasn't president when Osama was located.
Actually, it was difficult to find OBL. Our intelligence community is accustomed to using high end elint/sigint technologies, when the OBL group used low level comms tactics. Human intelligence activity was all but ended in budget cuts to the appropriate agencies tasked with this type of intelligence gathering.
But the man was found, with the appropriate action taken. The raid netted much valuable intel also.
But keep obcessiving GT - and your avatar is appropriate for you. Seems you do have a fixation about being a rump-ranger.
Oh rump ranger BT, why don't you read his speech and take it in context? You'll find that your statements are false.
Mr. Flip Flopper is highlighting his appeal for Etch A Sketch !
But, since Romney will basically re-employ people from the Bush administration, he will have the opportunity to capture or kill any high value target like Bin Laden, so it's not a question that he ever will need to answer; it's not a decision he would ever have to lose sleep over; it's not like this is a question that will have reality in Romney's life (assuming that he was miraculously elected to office), like, say, the question of whether to put the dog on the roof or in the car. (And for that one, Romney could have actually sent the dog in his wife's second Cadillac with a driver that he hired without even really noticing the cost.) Like everything else, Romney can duck the real answers because he will never get to that point.
re-stating Jon above..... Romney is now owner of the SIRHAN DEFENSE
He has the only national security people in the world who failed to capture or kill OBL working as his national security people.
It's like John Lennon wrote in "Eric Herble"....
" sorry but I can't have disabled people teaching my spastics to dance !"
Reckon President Obama has taken the decision out of his hands so it's a moot point. All the rest of it is a whole lot of shoulda coulda woulda.
We cannot and should not wait to dump Mr. Flip Flopper !
Hi Patriotic...don't you just hate people like me? I make your job a pain in the ass because there you are, trolling around copying and pasting the same things you've said in numerous posts, bolding the font and jumping on every topic line even though you're just attempting to throw worthless zingers (all in fun of course). Just working through your day getting a few bucks an hour to call Romney names and attempt to get others to see how many people are against him. THEN THAT a--HOLE RIGHTWING COMES AROUND and all of a sudden you have to actually work a little for your money.
You're failing by the way, the statements you make are the equivilent of me making fun of baracks ears. They're hollow and pointless...I'll bet you $10,000 you've been recruited to troll and post, troll and post. They should at least feed you some professional bumper sticker sayings because yours are really thin. Ah well, see you in the next one...I'll know it's you by the bold font and the same old irrelevant sayings.
I like some of my old post, are you inspired by them - be cool !
I expect the people at First Read to call Mitt Romney names but i was disappointed that MSNBC's Alex Wagner thought it was alright to call Gov. Romney "mittens". I thought it was very juvenile and extremely unprofessional.
Lisa -I agree - that is juvenile and unprofessional of Wagner. I have never seen First Read call Romney names and if they do - then the verdict remains the same - unprofessional. I don't even like it when posters do it. As much as I have never cared for Newt - calling him by his first name is as familiar and common as I care to get.
Katheryn Brandy, I did not mean the First Read staff. Sorry for any confusion.
lisa - does Wagner do it because she's young? Is this lack of civility a youth thing? Or have we as a nation become so immuned to caustic remarks because it's such a staple of our entertainment culture? Sad no matter how we got here.
Katherine Brandy, Yes it is sad.
Where was Mr. Etch A Sketch when "W" was bankrupting our Nation !
barack hussein obama = Five Trillion in 3.5 years That's $5,000,000,000,000!!
More than all the other presidents combined! Who's bankrupting the nation? You give cheesy one liner opinions I give indisputable facts.
What about two unfunded wars "W" dumped on Obama that cost us 2 Trillion, take that from 5 Trillion you have 3 trillion in 3.5 years.
The fact is that Mittens is his given name.
Lisa---did you express similar outrage over Mark Halperin's name-calling of the President?
What did he call him?
Steeler fan, Yes I did. I often reflect on how I feel about the lack of civility the permeates our society.
LOL...and there you have it. Steelerfan? Steelerfan???
The GOP/Fleabaggers must be getting desperate with them backing a Flip Flopper !
I'm GOP all the way, but the Prez deserves the credit for making the right decision on this issue, If the mission had failed he certainly would be getting the blame for a bad decision. Folks move on
Tex,
I am with you. Let's us move on. The "hateful villain" is no longer on the planet.
Steeler #6, Mark Halperin - got his mouth mixed up with his butt !
Hey, tex- ya think?
http://news.investors.com/article/609557/201204271858/navy-admiral-made-bin-laden-decision.htm?src=IBDDAE
Like everything else- it's a ruse. Not his call at all.
Tex bless you for that statement. You are on in a million. That is the way we all should be. No more no less.
Tex--Thank you!! I'm sure there's lots to disagree about, but as Americans, we should be proud of an operation like that, and give credit where credit is due. If you want to slam Obamacare or some other policy you don't like, you will have infinitely more credibility than somebody who is still arguing about birth certificates or whether Obama is a closet muslim.
No, not every sitting President would have made the same call to go after bin Laden. Everyone would have if they could have been guaranteed that the information was 100% reliable that bin Ladin was indeed at the compound and that it was a no risk operation.
I doubt Romney would have made the exact same call unless it was within those parameters.Choosing the politically safer choice of bombing the compound would not have yielded the same results. While Romney is quite willing to say we should invade every country the reigning GOP says is a go,he seems much more reluctant to take a personal political chance,just as he was reluctant in his earlier career to take chances that were a risk to him personally.
Obama did not just order the hit on bin Laden, he made a command decision and took the risk that came with it. The politically safer option was to bomb the compound and not put men on the ground or wait until they were 100% sure. But with the bombing you risked unnecessary civilian deaths (worse if the intel had been faulty and bin Laden wasn't there), you would have had the possibility of a martyr's body left behind and you would not have gotten all of the intelligence that was taken and which led to further hits on bin Laden's top associates. If anything had gone wrong, Obama would have taken the full brunt of the failure as Carter did. He gets full credit for the success because he acted as a Commander in Chief and made the politically riskier choice.
If the Osama bin Laden raid had gone south,you can bet Romney would have had that baby front and center. But since it was successful and is a good analogy for Obama as Commander in Chief, the Republicans want it neutered.
Nope - not gonna do it.
Katheryn Brandy
You are dead wrong. Romney is so much more successful and intelligent than Obama he would definitly have given the go ahead. The only President we know of that didn't is one of your Democrats, Bill Clinton. They had Bin Laden in the sites of a drone and he wouldn't give them the ok to blow him up. The one in our Whitehouse is either the weakest President we have ever had or of questionable intent. Who else would write an Executive Order to give our tax dollars to the Palestineans who are led by Hamas a know terror group.
Shaking - there you and I disagree. I think Obama is one of the strongest foreign policy Presidents we've had. He has shown the good judgement to use diplomacy when needed,but take action when he has to.
Weak on his foreign policy? Some on the left say a little too strong!
telling the Russian President to tell Putin to hold on until after the election and he will take care of him, is a good foreign policy move?
Ms. Brandy,
one of the strongest foreign policy Presidents we've had? Please take a few foreign policy classes at an accredited university before you make such a foolish statement. He's not even in the top 10.
Boner's hangover endorsement was schizophrenia !
Did Bin Laden get killed?? Let's see the body. lets see some pictures of the body. Something??
If Seal Team Six did kill Bin Laden, they didn't do it because of Obama, they did it in spite of Obama.
Obama knows how to play golf, and take a great vacation, and how to read a teleprompter, and not much else.
Al Qaeda seems to think he is dead as well.
Maybe, Joe, you could explain why the Bush Administration was pumping tens of millions of dollars to the Taliban, in May of 2001, just months before we were attacked. There are plenty of interviews with the administration in May of 2001 on the subject. But what was the real objective?
Don't you believe Seal Team Six when they said they got him?
He would probably know how to ignore you, which many on this website already do.
I have always wondered why they didn't interrogate Bin Laden instead of killing him...they could have water-boarded him and maybe have gotten some intelligence out of him before they offed him. Just sayin...
Are you off your meds, sound paranoid to me. Think the govt. lies about eveything oh look they are planting electroids in your head to control your mind. LOL
SIESTASIS, I think the electrodes are in Mitt's Head !
GOP had 8 years. Wasted all opportunities. Now wants to steal Obama's thunder and give Romney credit without doing anything. Believe me he would have spolied his pants.
Don't really know why I'm responding to this but...steal baracks thunder huh?
Question; how did we obtain the primary information that led to his whereabouts?
Answer: Through advanced interrogation techniques that were used continuously on sheik Muhammad where at first he laughed at our attempts because he knew we couldn't really harm him. Then after a period of time he broke like a little girl (probably a little fake red headed girl).
Question: what did most liberals call those advanced interrogation techniques?
Answer: Torture
Question: how did the supreme ruller barack hussein obama feel about those "torture" tactics. And for a bonus how did he feel about Gitmo?
Answer: he felt that the Bush administration and all those involved with those tactics should be tried as war criminals. He backed off when fearful of a coup if he went ahead with prosecutions because it would be bad for his political career and that comes first with barack. He wanted Gitmo closed within his first year of office because it didn't send a nice message to the rest of the world.
Question: True or False: If barack had his way and all tactics were removed from the table and Gitmo was closed (which he signed the order to do, but failed at doing it) he wouldn't have had the opportunity to make the call on that day at that time in that location.
Answer: TRUE
Now with all of that being said I will say barack made the right call and he was able to do so because of earlier tactics enacted by Bush. I'll also say, it was a collaborated effort by the United States that resulted in success. You'll say that barack personally shot that piece of garbage in the head using his Glock model 40 with adaptive night vision goggles after he took out six of osamas guards. Then returned to the west wing for the telecast.
As far as Romney? You know damn well he'd do what made the most sense from his advisers which would be to take him out.
Could Mitt's advisers be the far rightwing 1%, some call them money pimps for the GOP/Tea Baggers !
Rightwingwac What a bunch of bull. They found OBL by following a messenger back to him. I am not sure if the Bush people had one thing to do with it. But encase you missed it, President Obama asked Bush to join him in the announcement, Bush declined. Bush never wanted OBl killed in the first place.
@chuck-2111043...It has already been confirmed by the head of the CIA interrogations in Guantanamo that information that was obtained using Expanded Interrogation techniques approved by the Department of Justice. That information led to the identity of OBL's courier.
In October 2010, OBL's location had been confirmed and courses of action were developed.
The only point I would like to make is...A great leader, in any business takes responsibility for anything that goes wrong whatever the reason. A great leader never takes credit for the accomplishments of the organization. Instead, the credit is given to the team. That commercial, as well as the president's recent rhetoric is not that of a great leader.
Given the complexity of the mission, we should see this as a win for the nation, not politicians or parties.
The result of intelligence and spies/informants on the ground, not Bush's torture/water boarding, civil liberty violations and unnecessary wars, led to the finding and killing of OBL. Obama gets the credit for risking a mission that could have gone badly. He put nation above the risks so he should get credit.
I think he can claim this as an accomplishment. However, politically, it should be highlighted more as a win for the country.
"Would bin Laden be alive under President Romney?"
State-run media MSNBC "leaning forward" yet again and bowing to the Obama "forward" reelection campaign...
Brian Williams, bowing literally and figuratively to his hero the President.
P a t h e t i c to call yourslves journalists...
Ahhh, Vaginal Probe McDonnell speaks!
The objective was one that was set by Bush when he promised to bring those responsible for 911 to justice. Bush lost interest and later admitted that he didn't give a lot of thought to Bin Laden....or by extension, his need to keep this promises.
Obama cleaned up the mess and finished what Bush promised to do.
Seems to be a theme developing here.
Considering the fact I never believed the tape was Bin Laden admitting to planning the attack, its clear that most other people did. We will never know if the right man was killed because the "fix is in" as it were and no way are we going to disagree with outcome. Since the attack on 9/11 most Americans don't want to know the truth and believe that anyone who looks at our country wrong should be assassinated!
The Osama killing was a military lynch mob slaying. He should have been brought back to the country to stand trial and face the families of those killed. We got out pound of flesh, what friggin point is it to ask what Romney would have done, or to go back and examine what happened! That would be tantamount to having sex, declaring yourself the best lover in the world, then trying to ask the woman you killed during sex, was it good!
A totally stupid subject! They say there is no dumb questions, I say that may be true if you didn't know the person asking it was an idiot!
I said this BEFORE, and I will say this AGAIN: If getting Osama Bin Laden were an Olympic sport, "Dubya"Bush would get the bronze medal out of pity's sake while being the president during 9/11, BUT failed to pursue him when he had him in the Tora Bora Region of Afghanistan; "Bubba"Clinton would get the silver medal for coming close to killing him, YET the Tomahawk missile strikes missed him by one hour; while the gold medal would go to the "Barackness Monster" for ACTUALLY getting the job done by giving "his blessing" to the SEALs for carrying out the most high risk mission EVER!!!! had it turned into a failure, MOST CERTAINLY, he would get the blame!!! We won't EVEN mention the number of high-ranking Al-Qeada Commanders whose heads are mounted over the mantle of the fire place in the White House BEFORE BIN LADEN, NOR will we mention HOW the American-born Al-Qeada Cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, got ass-@!$%#ed by a Hellfire missile by a UAV in Yemen!!!
He might not be able to get things right in this country because of the "bitch-ass-ness" of the GOP/TP, But President Barack Obama SURE AS HELL knows how to hunt down terrorist with near-lethal efficiency, and that...among other things... gives him my vote for a second term.
Kevin great post. I have a son with your name and he was over there, yet he hats Obama. One thing in this country needs to know. The Military is and has always been pro GOP. The Gop gives them whatever they want when ever they want it. So enlisted men are brain washed and ordered more or less to become Rep's or else. When I went to his graduation it was made very clear by the general giving the speech. Don't believe what you hear in the news about Cheny laying us into war. These redneck generals want war. that is why we don't let the military run things in this country. Less just take a look at what happens when the military has there way. We go into these country's to set them free. Give them free elections. every time they elect the people we oppose. So after all the money and all those lives lost in Iraq, they voted to go with Iran. Didn't anyone see that most of the Iraqis are the same religions as the people in Iran. Should have seen that coming.
Could you have asked any more stupid (or impertinent) a question?
I know, right? Since Romney is on the record as being opposed all the policies that got bin Laden in the first place, he wouldn't have gotten the opportunity to make the tough call in the first place.
Unless your argument that Romney was just pandering for votes with his statement that we'd never ever go looking for Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. If that's the case, then I really can't disagree.
I bet you $10,000.00 dollars that Romney would be hiding in a hole in the rose garden with a tough call !
I'm starting to think Patriotic is on the media matters payroll too. Can't you state any logical arguments about anything pertinent. Three different posts, three different stories, same bad line every time.
That's Preconception !
Ash,
your messiah is on the record as opposing every technique used to get osama. Plus he was willing to prosecute Americans for doing their job in getting that information but backed off because of political popularity. Soooo??? How do you make your point now?
One question that was never answered (let alone, asked) why on earth were we pumping tens of millions of dollars to the Taliban, just months before September 11th? May of 2001 to be exact, anyone out there know why (besides me, that is).
Actually ,John, I think you are the only idiot under the sun that has ever uttered such an idiotic statement or asked such a stupid question.
So you obviously didn't read the May, 2001 interview with Powell.
To..BK""""
Sorry....John is right ...
Looks like Bush gave Taliban $43 million in May
IN THE NEWS
USA: Bush's Faustian Deal With the Taliban
by Robert Scheer
Los Angeles Times
May 22, 2001
Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists, destroy every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this nation still takes seriously.
That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the U.S. the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention.
Never mind that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan, from which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998.
Sadly, the Bush administration is cozying up to the Taliban regime at a time when the United Nations, at U.S. insistence, imposes sanctions on Afghanistan because the Kabul government will not turn over Bin Laden.
The war on drugs has become our own fanatics' obsession and easily trumps all other concerns. How else could we come to reward the Taliban, who has subjected the female half of the Afghan population to a continual reign of terror in a country once considered enlightened in its treatment of women?
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_deal.htm
ATTENTION any who have read John L and Amunaka
Come on man, what, did you ask Michael Moore for this information?
First of all when you hear something that really sounds pretty ignorant and outrageous, as in, why in the hell do you honestly believe that any politician would do it? Dig down a little to find some more information on it. God I hate having to be a watchdog but when it comes to insanity at this level I must post.
The truth is contained in the transcript of a briefing given by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who on May 17 announced the $43 million grant; it was aimed at alleviating a famine that threatened the lives of four million Afghans. Far from handing the money over to the Taliban, Powell went out of his way to criticize them, and to explain the steps the United States was taking to keep the money out of their hands.
" We distribute our assistance in Afghanistan through international agencies of the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, " Powell said. " We provide our relief to the people of Afghanistan, not to Afghanistan’s ruling factions. Our aid bypasses the Taliban, who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it. "
Seems the leftist Robert Sheer a columnist for the LA Slimes wrote the piece that was quickly debunked but because of wizards like you it made it's way around the circuit before most of the truth came out. Seems he slanted the story and left out a bunch of things like FACTS but liberal reporters are really good like that. (and there's people on here that live to rip Fox) I'll give you the sources if you want but I'd love for you two goofballs to actually learn to dig a little and find out for yourselves. It's not that hard to find and you obviously need the practice. Wake the hell up!
Lets not make another mistake like "W" again, 43 million to the Taliban terrorist cost us thousands of American life's, what a fool "W" was !
To..Right"""
Attention...Facts are a liberal bias ..and you know cons will have nothing to do with anything liberal ...try again
What???? What the hell does that even mean. Oh so it's conspiracy theory and enormous coverup by a whole boat load of people in Washington. Ahhh, okay I get it. I don't need to try again, facts are what we look at in the real world. If you (or Patriotic American) think the US paid the taliban 43 million for???? and then got everyone involved including powel to cover it up to this day and their is evidence to back up the contrary...then I must refer to BK's post. Put your salad bowl hat on 'cause their listening to your thoughts.
Patriotic American
Let's not make a mistake like Jimmy Carter again, inflation and interest rates were 17%-18% what a fool Carter was.
Maybe I'll make my list of senseless and redundant one liners then start trolling forums and post them at the end of every topic. Then I'll be civil and cool like you.
To..Right""""
I shouldn't even bring this up ...but...
Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war
January 24, 2008
Study searched database for statements by Bush, aides, in 2001-2003
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.
"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.
The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations
The overview of the study also calls the media to task, saying most media outlets didn't do enough to investigate the claims.
"Some journalists -- indeed, even some entire news organizations -- have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical," the report reads. "These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq."
The quotes in the study include an August 26, 2002, statement by Cheney to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/#cnnSTCText
To..Right""""
Well what Carter Inherited from ford.. from what ford inherited
Ford's WIN buttons remembered
December 28, 2006
Ford had the bad luck of serving as president during one of the worst economic decades in American history short of the Great Depression of the 1930s.
The country was being hit by successive oil price shocks which sent inflation soaring and economic growth tumbling. Economists used the word "stagflation" to describe the twin evils of stagnant job growth and surging inflation.
During Ford's time in the White House from August 1974 until January 1977, the country was faced with a serious recession, which pushed unemployment up to a high of 8.8 percent in June 1975, and severe inflation with consumer prices rising at the double-digit rate of 12.3 percent in 1974.
"Ford inherited probably the worst economy we have seen in the post World War II era," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "The country was going through a rough period under Ford and in the early years of the Carter administration."
Many analysts blame the bad economy in large part for Ford's defeat at the hands of Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Carter's defeat four years later by Ronald Reagan.
Inflation was not brought under control until Paul Volcker, selected as chairman of the Federal Reserve by Carter and re-nominated by Reagan, pushed interest rates up to the highest levels since the Civil War.
That brought on the 1981-82 recession, the worst downturn since the Great Depression, but it finally broke the back of the 1970s cycle of stagflation, setting the stage for the economy to enjoy a period of more than two decades of growth interrupted by two relatively mild recessions in 1990-91 and 2001.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/12/28/fords_win_buttons_remembered/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/28/AR2006122801002.html
Did Rightwingwacko say Watergate ???
Amunaka... Good job bro... Keep it up..
Bin Laden would have probably gotten it under Romney, in that whoever is president in such situations undoubtedly has ump-teen military advisers advising them to do just that.
The Obama minions on here seem to think that he simply decided to assassinate OBL and it happened. Dumb arses don't realize that he just HAPPENED to be the POTUS when intelligence and undercover programs were initiated by the Bush administration located OBL. Please tell me what other command he could have issued?? Didn't want to play the Willie Bubba Chickensh*t Boy Clinton card again would he and pass on the opportunity. Bubba passed on OBL TWICE, not once...TWICE. Obama is lucky. That's all....nothing more.
"You are drawing flies"
The Gaseous Old Pharts want to deny President Obama any success. One of Romney's minions was on television saying that the saving of GM and the killing of Osama Bin Laden were Romney's ideas and Obama was following Romney's advice. You Righties are a bunch of lying sickies.
Ah, the administration attempts to create another straw man.
The only division this issue is raising is with those who "weren't worried about him" and "really didn't know or didn't really care" and those of us who truly never forgot.
Your man of straw is Romney and he's about to go up like a roman candle.
jones your lier in chief is a pos im sure you are a 25 % er would vote of any one on the dem ticket forrest gump would probably be you style lets see what nov brings hope you can stand it
jock.
Repeat third grade and learn to spell, or get off the crack pipe.
Typical clueless rightie!