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

Skip to comments.

Clinton accuses Bush of contracting out US security to Pakistan
AFP ^ | 8/7

Posted on 08/07/2004 12:05:29 AM PDT by ambrose

TORONTO (AFP) - Former US Pre-sident Bill Clin-ton on Thursday accused President George W. Bush’s administration of contracting out US security and the hunt for Osama bin Laden to Pakistan, in its zeal to wage war in Iraq.

Though he didn’t mention Bush by name, Clinton, on a book tour in Canada, said the Iraq war had drained resources which could have been better spent chasing the suspected mastermind of the September 11 attacks. “We will never know if we could have gotten him (bin Laden), because we didn’t make it a priority,” Clinton said in an interview with CBC television.

Clinton, who is supporting Bush’s Democratic opponent Senator John Kerry in the November 2 US election, said that at the time of the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein was only Washington’s number five security threat.

“Why did we put our number one security threat in the hands of the Pakistanis with us playing the supporting role and put all our military resources into Iraq which was I think at best our number five security threat?” asked Clinton.

“How did we get to the point where we have 130,000 troops in Iraq and 15,000 in Afghanistan?” Clinton said other top security threats after the September 11, 2001 attacks on which the Bush administration should have concentrated were the Middle East, the India-Pakistan conflict, and North Korea’s nuclear program.

Clinton also said that, had he been President during the run-up to the Iraq war and former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix told him Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, he would have sided with Blix in the face of US intelligence data to the contrary.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: execrableslime; pissant
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

1 posted on 08/07/2004 12:05:30 AM PDT by ambrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

this might get one or two replies.


2 posted on 08/07/2004 12:05:58 AM PDT by ambrose (Kerry is endorsed by the Communist Party USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
“We will never know if we could have gotten him (bin Laden), because we didn’t make it a priority,” Clinton said in an interview with CBC television.

I think he was talking about the dozen or so chances his administration had to get Ossama.

3 posted on 08/07/2004 12:07:15 AM PDT by GeronL (geocities.com/geronl is back, or will be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
“We will never know if we could have gotten him (bin Laden), because we didn’t make it a priority,” Clinton said in an interview with CBC television.

He's right. HIS administration did not make it a priority.
4 posted on 08/07/2004 12:08:23 AM PDT by Tom_Busch (Vote Bush/Cheney in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

You beat me to the punch. :-)


5 posted on 08/07/2004 12:08:56 AM PDT by Tom_Busch (Vote Bush/Cheney in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Speaking of clinton, whatever happened to the Sandy Burglar story?


6 posted on 08/07/2004 12:09:02 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Do Chernobyl restaurants serve Curied chicken?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

What are you talking about? The media has much better things to do, like cover Abu Graihb and the President's six minutes with the school children on 9/11. So the guy was stealing/altering top-secret documents. Everybody knows he's just sloppy.


7 posted on 08/07/2004 12:13:25 AM PDT by Tom_Busch (Vote Bush/Cheney in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

He used "we" as in the royal "we" as in "I". So technically, he was telling the truth for once!

Slicker 'n ever...


8 posted on 08/07/2004 12:15:07 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Why didn't you do anything for eight years you scummy bastard?!?


9 posted on 08/07/2004 12:16:18 AM PDT by beaversmom (Michael Medved has the Greatest radio show on GOD's Green Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Bill Clin-ton on Thursday accused President George W. Bush’s administration of contracting out US security

At least Bush is doing smth about it unlike the syphlitic, cocaine snorting rapist that was in office from 1993-2001

10 posted on 08/07/2004 12:20:51 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Many a law, many a commandment have I broken, but my word never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Though he didn’t mention Bush by name, Clinton, on a book tour in Canada, said the Iraq war had drained resources which could have been better spent chasing the suspected mastermind of the September 11 attacks. “We will never know if we could have gotten him (bin Laden), because we didn’t make it a priority

Well, we do know that CLINTON didn't capture Bin Laden because CLINTON didn't make it a priority. When Richard Clarke said kill him, Sandy Berger said no. And Clinton was too busy with his indiscretions in the Oval Office to care.

By the way, why do these libs always have to leave the country to make these allegations. Do they think the American people are too stupid to find out what they said by doing searches on the Internet?
11 posted on 08/07/2004 12:24:15 AM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Okay, two points:

1) The failure of this idio...., um former President, to honor the tradition of silence regarding his successor is one of the reasons the country is so divided. He just can't stand to be sidelined (even though his time IS over) and not have his name in the headlines. So much so that he would do harm to the nation in the process.

2) What is this obsession with one man - Bin Laden, this is a WAR on Terror, not no Bin Laden! If he had been captured on 9/12 we would still be at war! This is not a LAW ENFORCEMENT type MAN HUNT!

Of course the President has counter this point over the past 3 years, but is our memory really that short?
DKK
12 posted on 08/07/2004 12:31:29 AM PDT by LifeTrek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Someone please tell me again why President Bush was nice to Xlinton during his portrait unveiling.


13 posted on 08/07/2004 12:32:51 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

15,000 troops in Afghanistan is 15,000 more than Clinton ever had there.


14 posted on 08/07/2004 12:32:54 AM PDT by oolatec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Sounds fair to me.

Didn't Old Slick contract out our security to the Red Chinese when he was in office?

15 posted on 08/07/2004 12:35:18 AM PDT by sonofatpatcher2 (Texas, Love & a .45-- What more could you want, campers? };^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofatpatcher2

Methinks Bubba doth protest too much. He's trying to cover for the fact that he let Sandy Hamburgler talk him into not doing anything about Bin Laden. He is nothing more than a sleazy opportunist trying to protect a nonexistent legacy.


16 posted on 08/07/2004 12:40:48 AM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel (I'll put Bush's four years in office against Kerry's four months in Vietnam any time! Bring it on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

If Osama is in Pakistan, and the Pakistani gov't won't allow American troops to conduct offensive operations in its territory, and the Pakistani gov't is willing to hunt for bin Laden on its own... then what the heck is wrong with the status quo? Should we start a war with Pakistan?


17 posted on 08/07/2004 12:45:56 AM PDT by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Or the fact that Bubba ordered to capture, rather than kill him. Ya know, it was a law enforcement issue...


18 posted on 08/07/2004 12:55:48 AM PDT by endthematrix (Go balloons. Go balloons. Go balloons, balloons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

sorry for being blunt... but doesn't he have a whore or two that needs his attention?

why is he trying to screw us, when he has so many hotties to bag?

clinton will do hard time in his lifetime.
he just can't let it go.
it can be a mistake
to hang on
when the
time's
run
out
.


19 posted on 08/07/2004 12:59:40 AM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (the madridification of our election is now officially underway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xm177e2
Re: Should we start a war with Pakistan?

Always wondered if they wouldn't let us in back in '01. Heck right now they're putting down a quite Islamic insurrection akin to Saudi Arabia. Support the regime...for now. Machiavelli strategy.

20 posted on 08/07/2004 12:59:54 AM PDT by endthematrix (Go balloons. Go balloons. Go balloons, balloons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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