Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
To be consistent, anyone who credits Bush II for a lack of terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 would have to blame him for 9/11 while giving Carter, Reagan and Clinton credit for a lack of terrorist attacks in America during their tenure (the first attack on the WTC happened 33 days after Clinton took office so this reasoning would have to fairly put that attack on Bush I).
Of course I don't think Bush gets credit. I think they just haven't decided to hit us and have wanted to spread the pain to Europe (Spain and London transit attacks). If they had wanted to hit us, they could have.
|
You may be trying to be facetious, but if not, you're full of shit here.
Clinton was in office when the WTC was bombed the first time. It happened on his watch. And if you want to play the "it wasn't his fault because he was only in office for a short bit of time" game, then Clinton is to blame for 9/11, as there has been reports that Sudan offered Clinton Bin Laden and Bill decided there wasn't a reason to have him.
There have been no terrorist attacks in the US since Sept. 11, 2001. GW Bush has been in the White House during this period. He gets credit.