Convince me to vote, someone.....

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

Yes, I know, to some folks on the left, the Afghan campaign consists of a singular event - Tora Bora - and the Iraq war only involved Abu Grahib.

We had bin Laden at Tora Bora, but Rumsfeld (and the Pentagon) had by then so screwed up the military that Gen Franks, believing he could run the war from the Florida beaches, screwed up royally and let the bastard get away.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Its far less a foreign policy blunder, as our friends on the left love to portray this, as it is Monday morning quarterbacking.

Nope. The current commander-in-chief, Mr. Obama, was against it from the beginning, as were France and Germany. It seems that they were prospectively correct (as opposed to just retrospectively, as you imply). Remember the "Freedom Fries" silliness in the Senate cafeteria? Many a learned historian has called it perhaps the greatest foreign policy blunder in the nation's history. I was being charitable.

Another thing on the Right's apologist's stance on Dubya's Iraq fiasco - Aren't they supposed to be the party of personal responsibility? Maybe the GOP should "man up" and admit they f*cked it up royally when it comes to Iraq, rather than concocting new reasons for having started the thing in the first place.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by merrylander

We had bin Laden at Tora Bora, but Rumsfeld (and the Pentagon) had by then so screwed up the military that Gen Franks, believing he could run the war from the Florida beaches, screwed up royally and let the bastard get away.

Rob, you seem to forget that there are known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns. Rumsfeld gave idiots a bad name.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by merrylander

We had bin Laden at Tora Bora, but Rumsfeld (and the Pentagon) had by then so screwed up the military that Gen Franks, believing he could run the war from the Florida beaches, screwed up royally and let the bastard get away.

Saw an interesting piece on the time bin Laden escaped death in 1998. This is the infamous instance that Limbaugh and the right-wing punditry like to refer to as the time Clinton "let" him go.

It's true that his position had accurately been pinpointed and that plans to launch cruise missles were in place and waiting on the Presidents order. However, what you never hear from the talking heads is the reason whythe President didn't fire.

It seems General Dynamics was working on a deal to sell F-16 to the Saudis, worth billions, at this time. There was a Saudi prince in OBLs company as the decision was being made. The President came under pressure from the Pentagon and executives from GD to stand down. They were afraid that if the Prince was killed, the deal would fall through.

One could say that the President could have had the stones to do it anyways, but I wonder how many wing-nuts know that it was done to protect the financial interests of a private corporation?

What did Ike say about the Military-Industrial Complex?

Dave