Bush taking credit?!?!?!?!

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Its amazing how intellectually dishonest you are. Either that or just plain fucking retarded. Saying that the identification of the courier by Bush's CIA in 2007 had nothing to do with locating him 4 years later is like saying the first 3 games of the World series had nothing to do with Giants winning the world series in game 5, or that beating the Phillies in the NLCS had nothing to do with them winning the World series as well. Ever heard of causality? perhaps not. Its a term for those who understand reason and logic. You are all about connecting the Dots huh? Why cant you connect the dots on this? Oh, because it contradicts your earlier post saying there was no link to the previous administrations intelligence gathering efforts and Bin Laden's death. Fuckn rediculous Vinyl. Notice how none of your ass buddies here are coming to your defence? You need to just quit here dude. Oh, and sorry a NYT article and an interview with the former CIA director wasnt credible enough for you. Sorry for giving you the benefit of the doubt concerning you not knowing about the NYT article and them detailing that the intelligence that led to Bin laden's death began in 2007. If you did know of this article and then still wrote that there was no intel link between the two administrations then I am wasting my time debating an irrational person and this conversation is over. No point in arguing with me over their content. Argue with the NYT and the former CIA director over it. i was just relaying info that you asked for in your earlier post.

Barack Obama deserves alot of credit for what happened on sunday. Bush deserves credit for gathering intelligence and working through thousands and thousands of leads in order to determine that the only way Bin Laden would be found is if we could find, identify, and locate his couriers. Bush found and identified his courier long before Obama was in office. Obama then located the courier based on the lead in August, which ultimately lead us to the compound in Pakistan. Obama simply continued down the path that Bush laid out for him, and Obama deserves credit for that.

What impressed me about Obama was not that he found Bin Laden. the wheels were already set in motion long ago. He was gonna be found anyways. What was impressive was when and how he handled the situation. First, rather than letting Bin laden stay there under surveilance in the compound for a more politically expedient time to kill him (like next summer) Obama decided to act immediately. Second, rather than simply dropping a bomb on the joint, Obama took a huge risk in sending in the seals. Had that mission failed and Bin laden escaped it would without a doubt cost him his presidency (when dropping a bomb would have insured his death). It was a gutsy call and he decerves ALL the credit for that.

Great logic!!! Now -- I can hardly WAIT to hear the news that Bush's Tax break for the wealthy (and the Republican's insistance that it be extended for 2 years) has "stimulated" an economic recovery!! .................waiting..............I said I'm waiting................waiting still (maybe THIS is going to take another 9 years huh!??)
 

B_24065

1st Like
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Posts
639
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
163
Great logic!!! Now -- I can hardly WAIT to hear the news that Bush's Tax break for the wealthy (and the Republican's insistance that it be extended for 2 years) has "stimulated" an economic recovery!! .................waiting..............I said I'm waiting................waiting still (maybe THIS is going to take another 9 years huh!??)

Explain to me how raising taxes on anyone (not increasing spending) will, would, or could stimulate the economy. Please.
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Explain to me how raising taxes on anyone (not increasing spending) will, would, or could stimulate the economy. Please.

Well........let's see.........did extending the Bush Tax cuts ADD $700 billion to the deficeit or not??? And did we borrow that money from China??
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Bush’s consistent failure to respond appropriately to bin Laden -- as a potential threat, as a fugitive, or as a public enemy no. 1 -- represents one of the greatest shortcomings of his presidency. Obama has now succeeded where Bush failed. And it was impossible to hear Obama declare that "justice has been done" without thinking about how long it went undone.

The Bush record on bin Laden, of course, starts with him failing to prevent the attacks in the first place. As has been exhaustively documented by now, during the summer of 2001, his White House waved off repeated warnings of an imminent attack from former counterterrorism director Richard A. Clarke and then-CIA director George Tenet.

Former President Bill Clinton in 2006 notably complained that he came close to killing bin Laden in a 1998 missile strike, while Bush and the "right wingers ... had eight months to try [before 9/11]. They did not try. I tried. So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted."

Bush and his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, were said to be more focused on their pet issue, missile defense, and the hunt for a reason to attack Iraq. Bush, according to Bob Woodward, said he wasn't interested in "swatting flies."

The unsuccessful attempts to engage Bush culminated in a briefing he got while vacationing on his Texas ranch. As investigative reporter Ron Suskind reported in his book, "The One Percent Doctrine," an unnamed CIA operative flew to Crawford to call the president's attention personally to the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

"All right," Suskind reported Bush saying after hearing out the operative. "You've covered your ass, now."
..................................................

Bush’s post-9/11 swagger may go down as one of history’s worst examples of false bravado. After the invasion of Afghanistan, the Taliban government quickly fell and al Qaeda retreated into the hills. But in December 2001, when bin Laden was unquestionably within reach of U.S. troops in the mountains of Tora Bora, Bush didn’t pull the trigger.

"I truly am not that concerned about him," Bush said at a White House press conference on March 13, 2002. And of course the following March, he shifted America’s focus to Iraq, which proved to be a gigantic diversion.

In 2005 Bush dismantled his CIA bin Laden hunting task force, ironically around the same time construction began on bin Laden's fortified compound in Pakistan.
............................................

Obama took a different tack.

"Shortly after taking office," the president explained Sunday night, "I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network."

Obama's comments on Sunday night were clearly directed not just to the American public but to the world, evoking images of the horror of 9/11 in an effort to dampen any possible al Qaeda propaganda value from bin Laden’s death.

By contrast, the tactics and the rhetoric of Bush’s “war on terror” -- most notably his decision to invade Iraq and the torture of Muslims in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere had served as al Qaeda’s most potent recruiting tools.

And to a nation of people who, nearly ten years after the terrorist attacks in America, are overwhelmingly despondent about both of the wars launched by Bush, Obama was at long last able to deliver something that, at least for a moment, seemed like victory: "The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda,” he said.
.............................................

After the 2008 presidential election, during which politicians from both parties publicly renounced him, Bush finally admitted some regret in an ABC News interview. "Do I wish we had brought Osama bin Laden to justice? Sure," Bush said. "But he's not leading a lot of parades these days."

Bush stalwarts are now trying to make the case that [he] deserves some, if not most, of the credit for dispatching bin Laden.

 
Last edited:

B_Doodleman

1st Like
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Posts
24
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
LA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Unless I've missed some major articles, if Bush didn't deserve any credit then why hasn't President Obama's reelection group tried to spin it as something only a Democrat could do, namely Obama? All I know is before announcing to the public, President Obama called former president Bush and spoke with him about the event for several minutes. He didn't have to do that at all, which seems to speak of some sort of respect or connection there. I would imagine since most CIA and SEAL's files are classified for years, it may take just as long to fully realize how committed Bush was or was not to locating Osama Bin Laden.

The original poster cited Rush as giving Bush credit. Has Bush given himself credit? Bush, who refuses to speak ill of any sitting president and has stayed by-and-large out of politics since leaving the presidency?

Personally, I hardly believe Bush wasn't authorizing more than enough resources to continue following Osama leads. I congratulate the decisions made by President Obama, especially his changing his mind to carpet bomb the compound with 2000 lb explosives since that risked many civilian lives and evidence. However, I think most of the heroics here go to the uniformed men who risked their lives to gather information and take Osama down.

The only thing better would have been to have him alive so that I could listen to whatever ridiculous defense he could muster for his actions.
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Unless I've missed some major articles, if Bush didn't deserve any credit then why hasn't President Obama's reelection group tried to spin it as something only a Democrat could do, namely Obama?
Maybe because they (so far) are staying above being so nakedly opportunistic and manipulative of public sentiment like the previous administration was. And in case you missed it, I posted a detailed "major article" linked within to a shitload of other articles a mere three posts before yours. Did you bother to read it?

All I know is before announcing to the public, President Obama called former president Bush and spoke with him about the event for several minutes. He didn't have to do that at all, which seems to speak of some sort of respect or connection there.
Yes, "respect". That speaks to the current president's standards of conduct and protocol that he would inform the former president, despite the former being a sock puppet and an incompetent idiot.

I would imagine since most CIA and SEAL's files are classified for years, it may take just as long to fully realize how committed Bush was or was not to locating Osama Bin Laden.
Most of those files will never be revealed, unless they're Wikileaked. You don't have a clue how the CIA and elite Navy SEALs operate, do you? Again, did you bother to read the article I posted above? It's painstakingly researched from dozens of other articles and books, referenced and linked to boot. It paints a pretty clear picture of how uncommitted Bush was to finding bin Laden, though he was only too glad to use him as a convenient boogeyman to stir up fear, manipulate the citizenry, and lie us into an illegal war. Then he forgot about him, until dusting him off again for his reelection campaign in 2004. After he was "reelected", he promptly shut down his CIA task force.

The original poster cited Rush as giving Bush credit. Has Bush given himself credit?
That would be so arrogant, inappropriate and ridiculous, I doubt even Skippy would be that stupid. Besides, he has minions like Cheney and Rove already out there doing his dirty work and "people" to tell him what to say and not say. Don't be so gullible and dense.

Bush, who refuses to speak ill of any sitting president and has stayed by-and-large out of politics since leaving the presidency?
He's smart enough (or he's been told) to stay out of the spotlight. He's just lucky that by the good graces of the current administration he and Cheney weren't investigated and brought up on charges for their illegal activities, and he damn well knows it.

Personally, I hardly believe Bush wasn't authorizing more than enough resources to continue following Osama leads.
And what are you basing that on "personally"? Did you see where I quoted that he dismantled his CIA bin Laden task force in 2005? Did you read what he himself said about his indifference to finding bin Laden? Do you even bother to look at and consider objective well-researched information when it's handed to you? Or like many gullible ill-informed Americans, do you only passively absorb info that reinforces what you want to believe?

I congratulate the decisions made by President Obama, especially his changing his mind to carpet bomb the compound with 2000 lb explosives since that risked many civilian lives and evidence. However, I think most of the heroics here go to the uniformed men who risked their lives to gather information and take Osama down.
The largest measure of credit goes to elite Navy SEAL team 6, and also our un-uniformed intelligence operatives for their impressive work. This is the only statement in your entire post that makes any sense.

The only thing better would have been to have him alive so that I could listen to whatever ridiculous defense he could muster for his actions.
He always wanted to die a martyr. Apparently he got his wish.

Quoted for truth. The man is VERY honorable. Everyone should strive to be that mature and honorable.
You're speaking of Dubyah Bush? "Mature"?? "Honorable"???!! LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

You guys sure have a funny definition of "honorable".
 
Last edited:

B_Doodleman

1st Like
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Posts
24
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
LA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
There are over a dozen intelligence agencies. Just because President Bush shuttered one doesn't mean he and Congress didn't supply the resources for others to continue their work. President Obama even said that he combined his CIA task force with another agency because he felt that as separate entities, they weren't doing well enough.

As for Tora Bora, other reports detail how it's simply possible that there was a mistake in ascertaining where Osama was in the mountains. President Bush wasn't their on ground calling the shots and information changes as it's passed around. Additionally, it's possible that locals may have found ways to evacuate him. He was only 6.2 miles away from Pakistan and numerous villages. Any number of escape routes was possible. Is it a shame? Yes? Avoidable? Most likely.

However, with Osama living for months and perhaps years in a compound only a hundred yards away from a military school in Pakistan, it seems far more plausible that he had numerous allies playing Americans for fools. The current CIA director already said we didn't tell Pakistan because we feared someone would tell Osama and he would escape again. Does it not seem possible that there could have been groups of Afghan allies who were given such intelligence and had enough influence and skills to fool us there while they evacuated Osama?

In regard to Bush saying he was no longer concerned about Osama, his entire message in that interview was that he was no longer concerned because he didn't feel that Osama was a central leader anymore based on the intelligence at the time. He goes on record for saying he regrets not getting Osama in his terms. However, I refuse to believe that whenever he was given briefings on possible leads for Osama, he didn't show benign interest and involvement in pushing for following those leads. How else, then, to explain how the CIA were given the go-ahead to follow and research the courier connection as described by this:

The Associated Press: Phone call by Kuwaiti courier led to bin Laden

Anyways, I think in the large majority of cases, it's ridiculous to immediately criticize military and intelligence operations that are heavily overseen by the POTUS. The Presidents receives information we couldn't even imagine and acts with what they believe is the correct course. They also have to create an argument that will gain funding and support from a relatively uninformed Congress.

We can all point fingers at who's to blame and who's to congratulate. If we really want to play the blame game, we can start with Clinton in 1998 when Osama was elevated to the Most Wanted List. We then move on to Bush who didn't do enough once elected to find him. After that, we can blame the Joint Chiefs, the numerous intelligence agencies, and Congressional committees for intelligence and armed forces for not doing enough on their part as well. But in the end, that's all rather silly.

But back to the original post, I have to reaffirm that I have serious doubts that President Bush will attempt to take any credit for the killing of Osama. He's has numerous former staff and military agents who will do that for him if they feel it's appropriate. Bush doesn't care what anyone thinks of him. If anyone's noticed, he's been having a grand ole time at SMU raising millions for that rising university. He knows what he did during his presidency and the person probably most intimate with those details is current President Obama.

Anyways, I'm not going to change your views Maxcok. We both have read articles and gathered what we could from them. All articles are biased and our own interpretations moreso. One thing we share in common is that 99.999999% of the stuff we read will be written by people who have never seen nor never will see the daily intelligency briefing a POTUS receives.
 

Q Vee

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Posts
1,006
Media
2
Likes
61
Points
183
Location
New England, USA
Gender
Male
I already told you that you're grounded son... now get back in your room!

Here let me link your favorite video for you, pansy: YouTube - Gorilla Beating Chest

Before I go off, will someone explain to me why this post has not been addressed as a violation of the rules? Am I the only one disturbed at this behavior? I want to understand the seeming absence of public moral outrage in case I am just not in the loop of the rebuke or whatever redress process is underway.


"These violations are subject to a sanction up to and including, permanent ban, depending on (cumulative) severity:
.....
Hate speech and general trolling - Content whose primary purpose is to incite or promote hatred towards an identifiable group: Wiki - Hate Speech Trolling covers a vast array of behavior but mainly revolves around members who consistently post in a manner which they know will upset others, members who insist on going off topic to serve their own agenda (which has nothing to do with the topic at hand)
...."
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
There are over a dozen intelligence agencies. Just because President Bush shuttered one doesn't mean he and Congress didn't supply the resources for others to continue their work. President Obama even said that he combined his CIA task force with another agency because he felt that as separate entities, they weren't doing well enough.

As for Tora Bora, other reports detail how it's simply possible that there was a mistake in ascertaining where Osama was in the mountains. President Bush wasn't their on ground calling the shots and information changes as it's passed around. Additionally, it's possible that locals may have found ways to evacuate him. He was only 6.2 miles away from Pakistan and numerous villages. Any number of escape routes was possible. Is it a shame? Yes? Avoidable? Most likely.

However, with Osama living for months and perhaps years in a compound only a hundred yards away from a military school in Pakistan, it seems far more plausible that he had numerous allies playing Americans for fools. The current CIA director already said we didn't tell Pakistan because we feared someone would tell Osama and he would escape again. Does it not seem possible that there could have been groups of Afghan allies who were given such intelligence and had enough influence and skills to fool us there while they evacuated Osama?

In regard to Bush saying he was no longer concerned about Osama, his entire message in that interview was that he was no longer concerned because he didn't feel that Osama was a central leader anymore based on the intelligence at the time. He goes on record for saying he regrets not getting Osama in his terms. However, I refuse to believe that whenever he was given briefings on possible leads for Osama, he didn't show benign interest and involvement in pushing for following those leads. How else, then, to explain how the CIA were given the go-ahead to follow and research the courier connection as described by this:

The Associated Press: Phone call by Kuwaiti courier led to bin Laden

Anyways, I think in the large majority of cases, it's ridiculous to immediately criticize military and intelligence operations that are heavily overseen by the POTUS. The Presidents receives information we couldn't even imagine and acts with what they believe is the correct course. They also have to create an argument that will gain funding and support from a relatively uninformed Congress.

We can all point fingers at who's to blame and who's to congratulate. If we really want to play the blame game, we can start with Clinton in 1998 when Osama was elevated to the Most Wanted List. We then move on to Bush who didn't do enough once elected to find him. After that, we can blame the Joint Chiefs, the numerous intelligence agencies, and Congressional committees for intelligence and armed forces for not doing enough on their part as well. But in the end, that's all rather silly.

But back to the original post, I have to reaffirm that I have serious doubts that President Bush will attempt to take any credit for the killing of Osama. He's has numerous former staff and military agents who will do that for him if they feel it's appropriate. Bush doesn't care what anyone thinks of him. If anyone's noticed, he's been having a grand ole time at SMU raising millions for that rising university. He knows what he did during his presidency and the person probably most intimate with those details is current President Obama.

Anyways, I'm not going to change your views Maxcok. We both have read articles and gathered what we could from them. All articles are biased and our own interpretations moreso. One thing we share in common is that 99.999999% of the stuff we read will be written by people who have never seen nor never will see the daily intelligency briefing a POTUS receives.
Don't try to feed us that false equivalency bullshit that "all articles are biased". There is reporting based on factual evidence, there's editorial opinion, and then there's made up crap on "Faux News" and in the blogoshere. If you can't discern the differences, your opinions aren't worth squat.

I was right, you only pay attention to information that supports what you want to believe, and if there's no factual evidence to support it, you just make shit up. You just proved it. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Your entire post is nothing but your own wild speculation and wishful thinking. Got any reputable independent sources to back it up? Naw, didn't think so.

I asked you a question. Did you read the article I posted -- that was exhaustively researched, referenced and linked to dozens of other articles and books from highly respected media sources and authors? If so, did you objectively consider the overwhelming factual information presented? Of course not, because that would challenge what you want to believe, regardless of whether it's true.

Of course not, because then you would know the intelligence offered by the outgoing Clinton administration, and George Tenet and Richard Clarke in particular, was summarily disregarded, dismissed, and ignored by the Bush administration, even though they were told an attack by bin Laden on the US was eminent. These are facts like so many facts that are likewise summarily disregarded, dismissed, and ignored in your post.

Why anyone would be bending over backwards to defend Bush Jr. at this point after his incompetent disastrous presidency, after all the illegal shit he pulled, after he singlehandedly destroyed our international standing, after the hell he's put America, Americans, and the whole world through, which we're still suffering from in the aftermath -- it completely boggles my mind. It's blatant ideological blindness in the face of reality and in the face of overwhelming facts and evidence to the contrary. Your blind hero worship of arguably the worst, most dishonest, and undoubtedly the most destructive US president of the past century is sickening and pathetic.
 
Last edited:

B_Doodleman

1st Like
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Posts
24
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
LA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Okay Maxcok, because everything you say about life and other members of this board must be right, you may respectfully have the last word.

Now, does anyone want to actively contribute with why or why not they believe former President Bush would take credit for the death of Osama?
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Okay Maxcok, because everything you say about life and other members of this board must be right, you may respectfully have the last word.

Now, does anyone want to actively contribute with why or why not they believe former President Bush would take credit for the death of Osama?

Well first off, what maxcok said is indeed correct. There is reporting based on factual evidence, there's editorial opinion, and then there's made up crap. It's imperative to know the difference regardless of what your political bias is.

As for your second part, it's not President Bush who is trying to take credit for the death of Osama Bin Laden... it's political strategists from the right who are trying to imply that the current administration wouldn't have been able to do a thing if it wasn't for their "hard work" the Bush Administration did from 2001-2008. They've also suggested that if it wasn't for using torture that the current administration wouldn't have been able to get the intelligence they needed to kill Osama Bin Laden. All of this is being done for political leverage in the upcoming election, of course.

It's been one of the usual tactics of some GOP members to imply that it's only Republicans can keep our nation safe and that Democrats as a whole are weak on national security. They played that card well in 2004 to deny John Kerry the presidency, a known war veteran who was successfully smeared publicly by the Swift Vets. In fact, the idea of Osama Bin Laden lurking in the shadows has been a major piece of political propagating by the Bush/Cheney Administration and many GOP members. However, now they don't have that to use since the killing of Bin Laden happened under a Democratic president. So it only makes sense if they're still playing political games to put out as many soundbites as they can in order to make it sound as if they were essential to the cause. Heck, even some pundits like Sarah Palin can't even mention Obama's name when talking about the subject - Sarah Palin: Bush got Osama | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

That's just the nature of the beast that is Politics.
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Okay Maxcok, because everything you say about life and other members of this board must be right, you may respectfully have the last word.
That's funny. You pretend to give me the "last word", when in acuality you take the "last word" yourself with a silly sarcastic snipe that has nothing to do with the topic. Then you dismiss me, kinda like Bush dismissing all the intelligence from the Clinton administration. How utterly transparent and disingenuous you are.

Just because I objectively deal in facts and I'm vastly better informed than you on this issue doesn't mean everything I say about life and members of this board is right. What a juvenile thing to say. Try to come up with some better insults.

So I guess this means you're not going to respond to any of my questions or challenges, and you can't provide any reputable independent sources to back up your wild speculations and wishful thinking. Gotcha.

Your puerile deflective response is that of someone who has nothing in his debate arsenal.

Now, does anyone want to actively contribute with why or why not they believe former President Bush would take credit for the death of Osama?
You either don't understand the premise of this topic, or you're deliberately putting your own spin on it.
But I see VB has sorted it out for you already, so I'll just leave it at that.
 
Last edited:

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
322
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Dianne Feinstein? Lol, she's credible? The only reason she made this statement was because the press was asking this question. It'll all come out in time. let's be patient.

If you doubt the Chair if the Senate Intelligence Committee and the veracity of her comments in this matter, it's because blind partisan loyalty holds you in some sort of ignorant thrall. She knows her shit because it's her fucking job to know it. I mean: really!

How paranoid must you really be to doubt someone of that stature and experience? You really are completely off your rocker, darling (said with a feigning deference to the mentally incompetent more than as any suggestion of affection or lust).

I already told you that you're grounded son... now get back in your room!

Here let me link your favorite video for you, pansy: YouTube - Gorilla Beating Chest

We've already had a member here banned for using that pejorative against gay men. I'm not even gonna touch the racial implications...

You either should apologize immediately for using such unfortunate imagery and verbiage or else quickly suffer the consequences: your choice.
 
5

554279

Guest
Just because I objectively deal in facts and I'm vastly better informed than you on this issue doesn't mean everything I say about life and members of this board is right. What a juvenile thing to say. Try to come up with some better insults...

Max as usual your comments are very well researched and analytical. I agree overall with nearly all of your assessment, with the exception of Bush, Rice, Clarke, Tenet, etc all having the 'drop" so to speak on the impending doom of 911. I think that lining up all of the threats and indicators prior to 911, were kind of like saying "Max, posted a really great comment on LPSG". Shit there are probably hundreds or thousands of them to review. "Which one, I think all have potential greatness".

I honestly doubt if we could have prevented 911 based on the conditions and mindset at the time of the attacks. Unfortunately in my opinion had it been stopped it would have happened at another time and another place within one-two years elsewhere.

Having intel and connecting all of the dots in advance is challenging. Everyone always connects the dots after the strike has already taken place and says "oh yeah I knew there was something wrong with that picture".

In this case starting at the top and going all the way down to the point of execution nearly all of the right conclusions were drawn and decisions executed in a timely manner.

I am not sure if Obama, Bush or anyone (sitting in the Presidents seat) could have prevented 911.

I do know for sure that Obama made the right call at the right time and should be applauded for his actions.

Then of course there is the old adage that "success is everyone's child, but failure is an orphan".

Had those two choppers crashed and burned Obama would have went down like Carter at Desert One 30 years ago in Iran.