President Bill Clinton should be cut a lot of slack when it comes to 9/11. Sure the attack was planned under his watch, and sure President Clinton cowardly avoided taking custody of Osama bin Laden when Sudan offered him on a platter.
The truth of the matter is that prior to the 9/11 Jihad attack, there was no way in the world the American people would have stood for the large scale war that was necessary in order to fight this new kind of Jihad army.
Think about it this way, even after the Jihadis have murdered thousands upon thousands of people all around the world, including here in America on 9/11, the American Left still think it’s all America’s fault and that we deserved it, and therefore we have no legitimate right to fight back. Just image how much resistance there would have been toward going into Afghanistan prior to 9/11.
Add to the whack-o Left the fact that the Right would have accused Clinton of simply trying to distract attention away from his perjury case, and it should be obvious that Clinton didn’t have much political capital in reserve to convince the country that a preemptive war was necessary to avoid a large scale attack against an American city.
All of that slack aside, where the Clinton-Democrats truly failed the nation and the world is evidenced in the way they responded to the Jihad attacks which had taken place prior to 9/11. Think Cole, Kobar Towers, Kenya, WTC ’93, (Oklahoma City?), etc….
Even after Osama bin Laden openly telegraphed his fatwa of Jihad against all Americans (specifically civilians included) the official American response to each act of war was designed to deny the Jihadis the status of being capable of waging war against the great and powerful United States.
The more the Clinton Administration refused to deal with the Jihad as a full blown war against the United States, the more 9/11 became necessary for the Islamists. The Jihadis needed to perpetrate an attack so grand in scale that there would be no way what-so-ever for the US to deny that there was a war going on, and it was being waged by people long underestimated by the average American.
Perhaps if the Clinton Administration had bothered to treat Jihads as real warriors who deserved to be defeated in battle, rather than common criminals who should to be convicted in court, 9/11 could have been avoided.
Coincidentally, while the United States was on a strong war footing during the Bush Administration, rejecting the criminal paradigm of the previous administration, we were not attacked again.
Coincidentally again, now that we are back to a strategy of denying the Jihadis of warrior status, treating them like criminals who simply need to be found guilty in a court of law, there is an apparent uptick in attempted/successful attacks against Americans on American soil.
Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s reaction to the Ft. Hood Jihad massacre. The official response has thus far been to refuse to admit that Hassan committed an act of Jihad when he gunned down dozens of Americans.
Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s decision to bring the 9/11 Jihadis to NYC to face trial in a common criminal court, rather than a military court.
Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s reaction to the failed Christmas Jihad of 2009.
There is a reason why Obama hasn’t given a public statement. It’s strategy.
Here’s the theory: a two-bit mook is sent by Al Qaeda to do a dastardly deed. He winds up neutering himself. Literally.
Authorities respond appropriately; the President (as this president is want to to) presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his Secretary of Homeland Security.
But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. [MORE…]
Yeah, it is strategy. It’s a strategy that should feel familiar. It’s the failed strategy the Democrats led with for 8 years under President Clinton.
The “two-bit mook” comment is quite revealing of America’s dangerous and ignorant return to the failed strategy of underestimating our extremely capable enemy.
Just as Osama openly declared war against America, and arrogant Americans reacted with near indifference, this wing of jihadis who planned the Christmas massacre have recorded a video, openly declaring their war against us. [via Gateway Pundit]
[youtube G7RElWMRdRk nolink]
Will we react arrogantly again, assuming that this is just another crazy camel herder making crazy threats again? Or will we react with the full force of our American military?
Judging by the apparent Democrat 9/10 strategy, we can guess what the reaction of the Obama administration will be. They will send the FBI to Yemen, and complain about the lack of help we are getting on the ground in that Islamist country. Just like the way President Clinton responded to the Kobar towers Jihad bombing in Saudi Arabia.
Change….back to 9/10. You can believe in that!
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.