|
Cheney/Bush Blame Reagan, Carter, and Clinton For Terrorism ... Hmmm Who's Missing?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| occrider |
| quote: |
Weak Responses Led To 9/11, Cheney Asserts
Inadequate Retaliation Seen in 7 Cases
By Sam Coates
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 4, 2005; Page A18
CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C., Oct. 3 -- The Bush administration will aggressively pursue terrorism in Iraq and on "every other front," Vice President Cheney said Monday, asserting that the United States is now paying the price for two decades of weak responses to terrorist attacks.
Addressing Marines who have just returned from Iraq, Cheney said the failure of both Republican and Democratic administrations to retaliate decisively after terrorism incidents during the 1980s and 1990s led directly to the atrocities of Sept. 11, 2001.
"The terrorists came to believe that they could strike America without paying any price. And so they continued to wage those attacks, making the world less safe and eventually striking the United States on 9/11," Cheney said.
The vice president highlighted seven occasions when he said he felt the United States did not hit back strongly enough. The first -- the 1983 bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 Americans -- resulted in U.S. troops being withdrawn from the city by the Reagan administration. Many of those killed came from Camp Lejeune, members of the 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.
Cheney said the American response was also inadequate after the killing of U.S. soldiers in Mogadishu, Somalia, in 1993; the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York the same year; the car bombing at the Saudi National Guard Training Center in Riyadh in 1995; the killings at Khobar Towers, which housed U.S. military personnel in Saudi Arabia, in 1996; the destruction of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998; and the suicide bombing of the USS Cole in 2000.
"Time and time again, for the remainder of the 20th century, the terrorists hit America and America did not hit back hard enough," he said, rallying the crowd. "As President Bush has said, the only way the terrorists can win is if we lose our nerve and abandon our mission."
Cheney was addressing 4,500 Marines from the 3rd Battalion of the 25th Marines, many of whom were just back from a seven-month deployment in Iraq. The battalion lost 48 Marines in Iraq, including 14 killed in back-to-back attacks in one week this summer. More than 150 from the battalion were wounded. "Sounds like you're glad to be home," Cheney told them.
He said troops had faced "difficult and perilous" challenges in recent months, but raised the possibility of further deployments by saying there was more hard work ahead. "It is tough and it is dangerous to fight enemies who dwell in the shadows, who target the innocent and plot destruction on a massive scale," the vice president said.
He told the troops that while progress in Iraq had been "superb," an early withdrawal would turn it into a staging area for greater attacks against the United States and its allies. He also said that the U.S. mission would not end with Iraq. "In the broader Middle East and beyond, America will continue to encourage free markets, democracy and tolerance," Cheney said. He said that eventually, "a terrible threat will be removed from the lives of our children and our grandchildren."
Cheney's speech was part of a renewed focus by the Bush administration on Iraq ahead of next week's referendum on a draft constitution. Bush is preparing to give a speech on terrorism Thursday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5100301782.html
|
| quote: |
As freedom advances across a troubled part of the world, it is once again opposed by fanatical adherence of a murderous ideology. And once again, the stakes are high. Now, as then, our enemies have made their fight a test of American credibility and resolve. Now, as then, they are trying to intimidate free people and break our will. And now, as then, they will fail. (Applause.)
They will fail because the terrorists of our century are making the same mistake that the followers of other totalitarian ideologies made in the last century. They believe that democracies are inherently weak and corrupt and can be brought to their knees. They looked at our response after the hostage crisis in Iran, the bombings of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole. They concluded that free societies lack the courage and character to defend themselves against a determined enemy. Hear the words of Osama bin Laden that explain why he believed he could get away with the attacks of September the 11th, 2001: "We've seen in the last decade the decline of the American government and the weakness of the American soldier, who is ready to wage cold wars and unprepared to fight long wars... After a few blows they ran in defeat... [They forgot] about being a world leader..." End quote.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20050830-1.html
|
I always knew that stupid Reagan was to blame and not ineptitude and bloated beurocracy between our federal intelligence agencies. The white house of accountability setting things straight once again ...
Huh? What President who didn't use decisive force to overthrow "arch-terrorist" Saddam Hussein when he had the chance? Surely the american soldier wasn't unprepared to fight "long wars" and run in defeat after a "few blows" under that presidancy!!! |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| If "weak responses" are the cause of terrorist attacks, how could there ever be a first one? |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
I always knew that stupid Reagan was to blame and not ineptitude and bloated beurocracy between our federal intelligence agencies. The white house of accountability setting things straight once again ...
Huh? What President who didn't use decisive force to overthrow "arch-terrorist" Saddam Hussein when he had the chance? Surely the american soldier wasn't unprepared to fight "long wars" and run in defeat after a "few blows" under that presidancy!!! |
But wasn't it Cheney himself who wanted to cut defense spending back then?
| quote: | Despite the Bush administration's praise for Reagan's strong defense policies, it was Cheney who was a vocal critic of them at the time:
CHENEY IN 1984: According to the 12/16/84 Washington Post, Cheney said if Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town." Cheney urged Reagan to cut defense spending, saying "the president has to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible" and said that absent a raid of Social Security or a tax increase, "you've got to hit defense."
CHENEY FOLLOWS THROUGH ON CRITICISM: Six years after his criticism, it was Cheney who bragged to Congress about shifting the direction of U.S. defense policy from the Reagan years. On 2/1/90, he told Congress "since I became Secretary, we've been through a fairly major process of reducing the defense budget." He bragged that during the first year of his tenure, he "cut almost $65 billion out of the five-year defense program" and that subsequent proposals would "take another $167 billion out." He trumpeted the fact that "we're recommending base closures," "we're talking about force structure cuts" and "we've got a military construction freeze." |
http://www.davidsirota.com/2004/06/...-of-reagan.html |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
If "weak responses" are the cause of terrorist attacks, how could there ever be a first one? |
Perhaps it was god that made the first one, as a test of faith or something?
Or perhaps the terrorists knew that the responses were going to be weak, and hence made a preempetive strike? |
|
|
| MrSquirrel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
But wasn't it Cheney himself who wanted to cut defense spending back then?
|
The funniest thing about Cheney's comment abotu cutting force structure, is that the 2000 Bush campaign constantly stated that the US military was unprepared to go to war and needed to be strengthened. Even though the cuts in the military that caused this "unpreparedness" were the brainchild of the people running. In reality the only portion of the military that was not ready was the 10th Mountain Division of the US Army, which during the 1990s was deployed more often than any other unit by a large margin because it was the only ground unit in the entire US military capable of a quick response, thus why they were sent in.
MrS |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrSquirrel
The funniest thing about Cheney's comment abotu cutting force structure, is that the 2000 Bush campaign constantly stated that the US military was unprepared to go to war and needed to be strengthened. Even though the cuts in the military that caused this "unpreparedness" were the brainchild of the people running. In reality the only portion of the military that was not ready was the 10th Mountain Division of the US Army, which during the 1990s was deployed more often than any other unit by a large margin because it was the only ground unit in the entire US military capable of a quick response, thus why they were sent in.
MrS |
One of the many reasons our gov't needed this "War on Terror" was because there had to be a way to justify huge defense spending increases. The defense industry has been seeing some tough times ever since the Cold War ended. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
 |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| I agree in a sense that 80's and 90's foreign policies were weak and not too important for those Presidents. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
I agree in a sense that 80's and 90's foreign policies were weak and not too important for those Presidents. |
Yeah, in those days we were too busy overthrowing elected governments in Central America to take notice of the terrorists we were creating around the world. :eek:
How many people did our CIA trained death squads kill back then, like 200,000? :nervous: |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
Yeah, in those days we were too busy overthrowing elected governments in Central America to take notice of the terrorists we were creating around the world. :eek:
How many people did our CIA trained death squads kill back then, like 200,000? :nervous: |
your point?
You forgot to mention the fact that Regan destroyed the USSR. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
your point?
You forgot to mention the fact that Regan destroyed the USSR. |
I guess it depends on who you ask on that one. People in the intelligence community often say that the Soviet Union simply imploded from within, the CIA backed Mujahedeen 'freedom fighters' say that they were the cause of the Soviet's downfall, and then yes, most Republican ideologues will tell you that it was Reagan's doing.
I don't think the facts are conclusive, but some people will foam at the mouth in a vitriolic frenzy in order to support their claim that it was Reagan. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
That's what I meant and you caught on. Point being, alot of people think that Clinton was too concerned with domestic policys and it's his fault that 9/11 happaned. Others say it started in the 80's throughout the Reagan years.
I said I agree with some of what Mr.Cheney said because it's true. Certain times the US forces usually just got out of the way instead of answering with forces. And when you have an enemy whose goal is to scare you like that then it just proves to them that they've won that round. |
|
|
|
|
