| Posted: 22 March 2005 at 4:36pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
My grandfather is convinced, that it is an absolute fact, that is accepted, that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen, and allowed it to happen, in order to convince the country of the need for war.
And I have known several older people who think that way
Hindsight is easy. But when you're the people in charge who get many many warnings about many things, it doesn't look the same way at the time.
Neither Bush or Clinton# knew 9/11 would happen and neither is responsible. I do believe they both had opportunities that had they taken them, 9/11 itself wouldn't have happened the way it did, but other things could have.*
Even then, I think it would have taken a concentrated effort, that only occurred after 9/11, to make any impact in world terrorism.
The Country wasn't ready for that. Whether a President could have convinced a country of the urgency, as Bush did with Iraq, I don't know.
# There were several opportunities to kill Bin Laden, detailed in Bush at War and the 9/11 report, but there was a sense that Bin Laden needed to be captured. If killed, only if no one else (no collateal damage) was killed in the process. I think Clinton generally reacted weak to terrorism, not connecting the broad dots, and not acting tough enough, and believbing it to be mostyly law enforcement. I think past Presidents contributed to this weakness and the feeling that the U.S. was a paper tiger
*I also think the long fight over the election, and the sense by some that Bush was not legit, contributed to early inaction by Bush. Also, too much of a sense that if Clinton did it, let's do the opposite. I think we have to solve the problem of a quicker transition and getting people up to speed. Bush had to learn on the job, JFK did, but the consequences for both were high
|
Topic Closed)
