Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CheezyD
Thanks. From what I can gather from the recent hearings the question is why Bush didn't start bombing Afghanistan right after he was sworn into office. The whole thing is so absurd considering it comes from the same jerks who yell about international cooperation, arrogance and proportionality.
365 posted on 03/24/2004 10:05:03 AM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies ]


To: Dolphy
From what I can gather from the recent hearings the question is why Bush didn't start bombing Afghanistan right after he was sworn into office.

Remember when we launched the attack in Afghanistan? The naysayers were saying we were going to get bogged down in a quagmire and we would take a lot of casualties.

The reason that we were so successful in Afghanistan is precisely because President Bush took the time to plan the action and lay the ground work before launching the attack. The plan was greatly escalated after 9/11 but the overall strategy was being developed and things were being put into place well before 9/11.

This is the difference between lobbing cruise missles at empty tents and swating flies, which is what Clinton did, and had little to no effect at all.

451 posted on 03/24/2004 10:29:52 AM PST by slimer ("The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson