[donh]

Yours was Clinton's approach. Dead Americans at the hands of Arab terrorists means that you call the cops.

That's exactly what it means. Clinton's general incompetence doesn't change that equation. You don't need to declare a full-scale war on a country that can barely be supervised by it's own government, and which none of the attackers, planners, and virtually none of the money was native to. That's just ham-fisted incompetence, which, all by itself, you ought to be fired for.

[sinkspur]

You don't need to declare a full-scale war on a country that can barely be supervised by it's own government, and which none of the attackers, planners, and virtually none of the money was native to.

How many al-Qaeda have we killed in Afghanistan? Hundreds? How many have we captured, which captures have led to almost total disruption of al-Qaeda planning through the information supplied?

Plus, it let these cretins know that we're serious about stopping them where they live. No more playing around, as Clinton did.

[Logophile]

You don't need to declare a full-scale war on a country that can barely be supervised by it's own government, and which none of the attackers, planners, and virtually none of the money was native to. That's just ham-fisted incompetence, which, all by itself, you ought to be fired for.

You characterize that the attack on Afghanistan as "ham-fisted incompetence" and propose that the situation could have been handled by calling "the cops."

Please explain who these cops might have been, and how they should have operated against Al Qaeda.