Reply #9: He could have started a war by ignoring terrorism, just as Bush did.

[terisan]

We had a number of incidents when Clinton was prez---
Somalia (started by first Bush at very end of his term--it went badly and Clinton pulled out. He could have escalated.

Bosnia-little loss of life and treasure.

Maintain the Status quo bombings of Iraq and places like the so-called pharmaceutical factory (he was heartily denounced by Republicans for these).

Prosecution of World Trade Center Bombers. I guess he could have attacked, in retaliation, some country in the Middle East that had nothing to do with it. But as we see from GWs invasion of Iraq--maybe that kind of response is not so smart.

I don't want to minimize the 3000+ deaths on 9/11, but I think the it was an obvious target, given the previous attack and the fact that the bombers had been convicted in June 2001. The screaming intelligence throughout the summer regarding a big attack planned made the protection of the WTC and its occupants a no-brainer. Bush protected himself in Europe that summer, but his administration left the WTC as exposed as the Navy fleet in Pearl Harbor in December 1941.

....and he never did bring the named perpetrator to justice. ......and now our country is verging on economic ruin (the modern method of destroying your enemy.

Bush has pledged our lives, our honor, and our fortune to his war.....he is scheduled to walk away in several months with his life, and his personal fortune ---instead of honor his will have a small army of secret service protectors (over 100) paid for by us.


Starting wars is easy; ending them takes courage; building peace takes brains.

Getting Americans to destroy the future of their children and their country-the oldest continuous Republic in the world.? That takes just one con man from Texas.