If Bush is the reason we haven't been attacked SINCE 9/11 is his incompetence the reason we were hit ON 9/11?

Question

I find it laughable for Bush supporters to give Bush credit for keeping America safe after he allowed 3000 US citizens to be murdered by 19 men with box cutters.

Bush supporters then retort "They trained during Clinton's years" as though they stopped training the day after Bush swore into office.

Your thoughts?

Answer 1

I agree and I laugh in anyone's face who spouts this nonsense. The reason why the USA was not attacked again was because the PNAC members already had their excuse for invading Iraq, they didn't need another attack. Also, Georgie Bush fulfilled EVERY SINGLE DEMAND Osama bin Laden had. US troops out of Saudi Arabia, oil price up, etc.



Especially nutjobs who say Clinton didn't do anything about the first WTC bombing, even though he had the perpetrators hunted down, and they stood trial and were jailed. The USS Cole happened a few months before Clinton left office and investigations were still underway. It was up to Bush, who dropped the ball, to prosecute the Cole bombers.



Bush was warned repeatedly before 9/11/01 and by many different countries and Bush ignored it. Clinton said anti terrorism is job one and Bush ignored it. The first plane hit the WTC and Bush ignored it, the second one hit and Bush ignored it. Bush was not only incompetent, he was deliberately incompetent.

Answer 2

Not a chance. President Pantywaist is hopping mad and he has a strategy to cut Kim down to size: he is going to slice $1.4bn off America's missile defence programme, presumably on the calculation that Kim would feel it unsporting to hit a sitting duck, so that will spoil his fun.



Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you liberals thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride. xoxo

Answer 3

He replaced into studying to little ones in a Florida college. He replaced into interrupted and recommended about the first airplane hitting the tower. He replaced into no longer particular the thanks to react (purely as no one replaced into, because maximum theory it replaced right into a freak twist of destiny) yet did not provide up or alarm the youngsters. even as the 2d airplane hit and the FAA alerted the White living house that many planes were astray and not responding to radio instructions, he stopped and Air stress One left Florida to flow to Louisiana. It replaced into component of a contingency plan for preserving the authorities in case of attack.

Answer 4

Although Bush has never been a favorite person of mine I do not think it is fair to blame him (or incompetence) for the the attacks. Terrorists had launched attacks in parts of Europe before 9/11, it was only a matter of time before they decided to try an attack on the United States. The only ones at fault here are the terrorists who planned (for years) this attack--no one saw it coming. They were heartless human beings, they had nothing to live for and so their life was dedicated to hurting others. It is, in my humble opinion, wrong to blame Bush for the unforgivable attack. It is alright though to blame him for what happened after the attacks, what he did have control over (the occupation of Iraq, the years it has taken to find and bring to justice the other terrorists who helped plan the attack, etc...). Bush did not keep our country safe, we, as citizens, have helped to keep our country safe by being more observant and aware of our surroundings.

Answer 5

Probably.



The Bush administration was warned about Al-Quaida and Bin Laden before taking office. They also were given a security brief about bin Laden's intention of striking in the United States a month before the attack.



Some of the highjackers were on the radar of the FBI...these guys weren't completely unknown to the intellegence agencies.



Bush probably thought that since his family was such good friends with the bin Ladens they had nothing to worry about.



It's so funny how the Republicans love to blame everything on Democrats. They were in power, they took the blame. I wonder if something happened tomorrow...would they say bush was to blame since all the planning occured during his administration. Doubtful.

Answer 6

The reason we have not been attacked since 9/11 is that the terrorists completed their stated goal, which was to bring down the World Trade Center.



This was a goal we learned of in 1993, after the first WTC bombing.



So, the lack of a target is the reason we haven't been attacked on our home turf.



Why did Bush ignore the specific, written warning?



And by the way, the body count for US soldiers is well over 4,000 in Iraq, from a war that Bush started by lying to the country. Those deaths lie squarely on Bush's hands.

Answer 7

Bush was pretty sure he couldn't attack the country a second time and get away with it ... although there WAS the anthrax scare just after that. PLUS, Bush and Cheney got what they wanted with their first attack ... no need for a second one.



Peace

Answer 8

Interesting question.



I guess the answer is that Bush, like Clinton, did not see the threat for what it was and didn't take it as seriously as he should have. But once the threat was made real with the attack, he took it VERY seriously.



What I find particularly interesting, then, is that fact that you and folks like you have been criticized his efforts to avert a similar attack ever since. As I say, that is interesting. With you guys he's sort of darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. Quite a pickle the partisan has put him in.

Answer 9

Maybe if your boy, Clinton, would have done anything about the previous WTC bombing, 9/11 wouldn't have happened. Bush actually did something after terrorist attacks that happened during his term.

Answer 10

No, that distinction mostly belongs to his predecessor. He knew where Bin Laden was, and he didn't take the shot. Don't forget, the first bomb attack on the WTC and the attack on the Navy ship happened under Clinton's watch. The terrorists tested Bush, in a big awful way, and it didn't happen again, and many subsequent potential attacks were thwarted because of his administration's watch.

Answer 11

Clinton sat there for 8yrs and never did a thing. Even turned down bin laden twice. Speaking of inheriting messes, Bush got handed this one,thanks to Clinton and his ilk.

Answer 12

Let's see - when the attack happened, he was holding "My Pet Goat" UPSIDE DOWN.

The attack took place after HIS TEAM repeatedly ignored the FBI agent's report specifying just about the entire plan for the attack.

Your thoughts?



Bush supporters have had far too much moonshine to have remained sane, that's all. All that inbreeding had to cause some damage, too.

Answer 13

So you think years of Al Qaida planning during the end of the Clinton administration means nothing but the first seven months of a new presidents office does?



Are you saying all the trouble now is Obama's fault?

Answer 14

I hold Bill Clinton completely responsible for the events that lead up to 9/11.



(Did your forget the 1993 WTC attack, embassy bombings and the USS Cole??? And who was President from 1992- 2000??? Who cut back the military budget??? Who could have really done something to stop Osama Bin Laden but did nothing to stop him??? Who said that "International terrorism is not the USA problem"??? "Could that be "Slick Willy"???)



How ya like them apples...GOTCHA

Answer 15

There hasn't been any since, have there? What did Clinton do about the WTC bombing in '93 and the bombing of the USS Cole? Yeah, nothing, not a thing. You better start paying attention the president we have now and not one that is in history.

Answer 16

What have you done? Did you enlist in the army or special forces to stop terrorists? Maybe, if you're truly concerned, you could start there.

Answer 17

No, we were hit on 9/11 because of a group of morons that don't even understand their own religion. Bush was just there when it happened, like when the Great Depression started during Hoovers term, and then was made worse by him.

Answer 18

How do you like the Patriot Act, chi? You cannot have it both ways, you know.



God forbid that the damn terrorists get blamed for 9/11.



The pilots were trained on US soil and the planning and training took longer than 8 months. You know it.

Answer 19

Please!!! Bush didn't ALLOW 3000 US citizens to be killed. No one did for that matter. Idiots like those that took over those planes have/had been training for years.

Answer 20

Even if not.

Answer 21

Great Question

Answer 22

i find it just as laughable that you think bill clinton has no blame for september 11th





i promise you those plans were founded long before george bush went to washignton.

Answer 23

No doubt this hurts their strong feelings...

Answer 24

Yeah it wasn't planned on Clinton's watch at all. Osama was handed to Clinton on a silver platter, but for some strange reason he didn't want him.

Answer 25

August 2001 -- "Al Quaeda Determined to Strike Within United States"



Read by George Bush when he was on one of his 77 vacations, one month before 9/11.

Answer 26

must be Obama caused the pirate attack on a US ship then......at least that is your reasoning....

Answer 27

yes

Answer 28

I find your statement laughable

Answer 29

No, that would be Clinton's incompetence.