Quote: Matter-eater Man said: Is it really unreasonable to want the made up stuff that contradicts the 9/11 commission report changed? Is it really more important to take swipes at Clinton no matter the facts?
do you disagree that Clinton could have assasinated bin laden multiple times but chose not to so he wouldn't suffer in his beloved polls.
Not sure how that would have hurt Clinton in the polls. I'm sure some people in the "I hate Clinton" club would have been demanding that Ken Starr get on that right away but the more average citizen would have cheered if Clinton had succeeded in assasinating Bin Laden.
The same way Somalia hurt Clinton in 1993, following the fiasco in Mogadishu, where Clinton had not deployed adequate backup for our forces in Somalia, if they were actually fired upon, and they were.
The same way a bungled military operation hurt Carter in 1980, a plan to clandestinely rescue the 52 Iranian hostages, where the helicopters crashed, and the operation had to be humiliatingly aborted.
Any deployment of troops is pretty much guaranteed to lower a President's popular opinion poll numbers, no matter how good or bad the war goes, and especially as casualties mount and the war goes on. I think Desert Storm was the one exception, because it was over so quickly, with barely 100 casualties. (But remember that this could have gone another way. The military ordered about 8000 body bags, far more casualties were expected byu the experts)
Which is why Clinton at every turn did the easy thing, bombing Sudan and Afghanistan after the U.S. embassy bombings in 1998, bombing Serbia and Kosovo in 1999, making a posture of military toughness, without deploying troops to do the job right. And not even responding to the U.S.S. Cole bombing in Yemen in October 2000.
Which I think the 2-part Road To 9-11 captures pretty well.
I was surprised at how sophisticated it was, for a TV movie. And how well it encapsulated roughly 10 years of complicated events.
