Originally posted by videoholic
You do realize that the entire Kerry campaign is based on "what if" right?
OK, just making sure.
Nope. There\'s a difference between Kerry saying "Bush did this, and it failed and he should have done that..." (which is hindsight) and you saying "If Gore had been in office, he would have done this..." (which is pure speculation.) It\'s all based on your particular perspective, which may not match reality.
And not really a "what if", but a "remember when": Do you remember the several times Osama\'s group hit us while Clinton was in power? We didn\'t do diddly. So to say we would have gone into Afghanistan with a larger showing of force is foolish. I would certainly hope that any president would have the tiny balls it took to go into Afghanistan, so that\'s a no brainer.
So are you saying that if someone else had been the president instead of Clinton, that person would have responded to the first WTC attack more aggressively than firing cruise missles at Afghanistan and Sudan? No way. There would have been NO support for a general invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq prior to the 9/11/01 attacks. I agree that the Taliban should have been overthrown long ago, but the general public didn\'t know or care about them prior to 9/11. The threat of "terrorist bad guys out there somewhere" would not have been sufficient justification for such a huge commitment of force. Right or wrong, that\'s just the way it was back then.
Of course any president during G.W. Bush\'s term would have attacked Afghanistan. What a more intelligent president would NOT have done is proceed with an unnecessary and ill-advised invasion of Iraq.
