[slimer]

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.

[Dolphy]

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.

Yes, I remember. I would expect that a few of those who now say that the President should have bombed earlier are the same ones who predicted a quagmire.

[GOPrincess]

Amen re lobbing missiles at empty tents.

And as was pointed out yesterday (was it Rumsfeld?) if Bush had acted immediately, he'd have been facing the same "You're a unilateral cowboy" lies which have come up with Iraq. He's darned if he does, darned if he doesn't.