This is nonsense. Clinton deliberately ordered not one but two decapitation strikes against bin ladin specifically. The CIA had him at both locations and the intent was to kill bin Ladin. There was no "knowingly empty cave", they were active training bases and were not empty, but our "friends" in Pakistan tipped off bin ladin when we had to request overflight permission for the cruise missiles. He got away by a couple of hours. Agreed. Bush did his job (like Clinton did) and it just happened to be political relief when he really, really needed some. But politics was not the driving factor in either case. Clinton was making deliberate retaliations for the USS Cole bombing and the African embassy bombings that bin Ladin orchestrated. Bush was making deliberate retaliations for the roadside bombimgs, beheadings, and general Iraqi chaos that Zarqawi orchestrated. Fortunately we had to inform no "allies" that could betray us this time. The two situations are really not very different. Just the spin from far right and far left.
Maybe. Of course there is a story from Clinton's administration to support their actions, how could there not be? That doesn't make it truthful. I choose to believe that Clinton had no real intent on killing Bin Ladin because I think it is his character. Clinton was a politician, and a pretty good one at that. He didn't like using the military and was not a forceful person, but he needed to take some action to appease people so he did.
Clinton did not dislike using the military. He disliked using them stupidly. We bombed Iraq and deployed troops there during the Clinton regime. We also won the Kosovo war without losing a man. Clinton was not only willing to use military when necessary, he was very efficient about it. To suggest that he really didn't want to kill Bin Laden is foolish. He not only tried the airstrikes, but he also contracted the British SAS to kill him.
Whatever you say. Let's get Salty or someone in the military during his presidency to comment on this.
I did not say Clinton was popular with the military. That would be a stupid thing to say. What Clinton did do is not involve us in stupid occupations and policing efforts. He did not overly mis-estimate the cost of military operations to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.
And I didn't say we should ask whether Salty liked Clinton, but rather whether Clinton was hesitant to use them. I can remember Salty's description of his service under Clinton, and I believe he said that he forgot he was in military because all he was doing was little peace missions. Just because Clinton didn't overuse the military doesn't mean he didn't under-use them. It's quite obvious to me that Clinton was not a fan of military force. It doesn't matter whether you like that or not - it's true.
Your personal opinions aside, the nature and intent of the air strikes is public record. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/08/21/wemb21.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/155252.stm If you mean to say he was a shrewd and prudent commander who never squandered troops needlessly and only entered military action when it was in our interests and supported by the American citizens, I agree. Clinton was a good politician and a good president. Forceful? He used military force whenever it was required and he used overwhelming force if neccessary to win. Here are the major ones. 1. Clinton maintained the Iraqi No-fly zones for all eight years, hitting Iraqi radar sites with missiles and bombs whenever they lit up. 2. Clinton launched a cruise missile attack against the headquarters of the Iraqi Intelligence Service in Baghdad in retaliation for the assassination attempt on former President Bush in 1993. 3. Clinton launched cruise missile and air strikes against suspected Iraqi WMD sites in 1998 in retaliation for Saddam expelling the UNSCOM inspectors. After three days of this treatment Saddam offered to let the inspectors return. 4. Clinton sent skilled US troops into Bosnia to get control of that situation after our NATO allies couldn't get it done without us. 5. Clinton conducted an air war against Yugoslavia over their atrocities in Kosovo. Yugoslavia gave in to NATO without the loss of a single American life and now Milosovich is being tried for war crimes. 6. Clinton twice attacked bin Laden's Al Qaida bases in Afghanistan with cruise missiles after the USS Cole and embassy bombings. And what he did NOT do was allow Bush 41's humanitarian relief mission in Somalia to turn into an dangerous occupation of a bitterly hostile country engaged in a civil war where both side hated us. Like Reagan in Lebanon and Bush 41 in Kuwait, Clinton knew when a potential war wasn't our fight.
No that's your opinion. Clinton not being a fan of the military has nothing to do with how often he used them. It cannot be denied that the military was deployed several times during his administration. Your attempt to overlook this fact does not dis-credit Clinton, but it does overlook the valor of the men who served during his presidency.
What I said was when he decided military force was needed he applied them effectively and won. And Somalia was an example of shrewdly deciding that Somalia was not our fight. Some times you win by letting the locals fight their own fights. Tell me, what was our overwhelming national interest in Somalia? Zippo! We were there to protect the UN famine relief workers from being attacked and robbed by Somalia muslim war lords. When all of the Somalis turned hostile, it was time to go and leave them to stew in the mess they created. When you go to help people and they crap all over you, you say "fug 'em" and leave. We have more important work for our military than to let them die in the sand just so a president can "stay the course". It is the height of foolishness to imagine that simple political resolve is the solution to every crisis. We have to be more clever than that.
