Quote:
Originally posted by sjwalter@Oct 19 2004, 03:47 AM
Chastise him for diverting attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandel? Is that opposing the strikes on the camps?
IMO i remember the scandel and i remember the attacks, and he did do it to divert attention away.
Clinton had five previous attacks on America before he decided to strike back, why not strike back after the first one?
As the article says, if he would have kept his promises, 7,000 people would be alive today.
|
Please, give the talking points a rest. In one post you whine about Clinton not doing anything in response to terrorism, and in this one you whine about it being a diversion for the "Lweinsky" affair. According to Richard Clarke the Lewinsky affair never entered into decisions regarding the country. He did not allow his personal life to affect his decisions on the country and the bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan were part of those decisions that were no impacted.
Also you're full of crap on your "Clinton had five previous attacks on America before he decided to strike back". Do your research. Come back and post something to support this.