Republicans Failed us in Catching Osama

[punked]

"We took our eye off the ball instead of moving in on him at Tora Bora, the previous administration decided to move its forces to Iraq. It was a mistake then. I think this report of the Foreign Relations committee just sort of reinforces that." Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin

http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Tora_Bora_Report.pdf

[bush_cheney2004]

I guess the Democrats also failed to "catch Osama"...even earlier. No matter....his capture would only continue the politcal charade without materially impacting the so called WoT.

Edited November 29, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

"Republicans Failed us in Catching Osama: A report released the other day shows us this."

Not sure if it's accurate to say "Republicans" per se, but it sounds as if it's a mistake Obama is trying to correct with his plans to withdraw troops from Iraq and add troops to Afghanistan.

Edited November 29, 2009 by American Woman

[Canadian Blue]

Really, was Bush the one who told those American troops not to move faster to catch Osama.

I'm not fan of George W Bush, in fact I think his Presidency was a complete failure. But you can't blame all of the problems in the world on him.

[punked]

Really, was Bush the one who told those American troops not to move faster to catch Osama.

I'm not fan of George W Bush, in fact I think his Presidency was a complete failure. But you can't blame all of the problems in the world on him.

When he pulls the troops who have Osama cornered to fight a war in Iraq like the report you didn't read says then it is his fault. He was the Commander and Chief.

[eyeball]

I'm reminded of Charlie Wilson's recollection of the seminal failure it made in Afghanistan during the Cold War; "These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world... and then we fucked up the end game."

My link

Hindsight may be 20/20 but there's still lots of people who squint and wonder what it is they're looking at.

[Guest American Woman]

When he pulls the troops who have Osama cornered to fight a war in Iraq like the report you didn't read says then it is his fault. He was the Commander and Chief.

While the buck does stop with Bush, the blame doesn't fall entirely on him as there were way too many other people being way too quiet as he was doing what he was doing. It's not as if there were a major objection raised by the other 'powers that be;' and they should have been loudly and forcibly objecting.

Edited November 29, 2009 by American Woman

[Canadian Blue]

All I'm saying is that to put all the blame on Bush would be incorrect. When it comes to an operation like that the errors come from many areas. In this case it seems the biggest offenders were Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks.

[punked]

All I'm saying is that to put all the blame on Bush would be incorrect. When it comes to an operation like that the errors come from many areas. In this case it seems the biggest offenders were Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks.

Both put in place by Bush, and who were his responsibilities.

[Guest American Woman]

Both put in place by Bush, and who were his responsibilities.

So you don't feel as if anyone else shouldered any responsibility; you absolve everyone else of any responsibility at all? You think, since they were brought up, that Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks, for example, don't bear any of the responsibility for what happened?

[Michael Hardner]

I put these allegations with all of the "second guessing" type allegations that are put up against presidents - Democratic and Republican. They're useless until a time when the full picture is known. This type of thing is just a drive-by for press release, i.e. political purposes.

[bush_cheney2004]

All I'm saying is that to put all the blame on Bush would be incorrect. When it comes to an operation like that the errors come from many areas. In this case it seems the biggest offenders were Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks.

True...but still misplaced. Capturing Osama was not that high on the Bush administration's priority list....same as Clinton's. Hell, if it was so important, why didn't Canadian or British forces "capture" him instead?

[bush_cheney2004]

So you don't feel as if anyone else shouldered any responsibility; you absolve everyone else of any responsibility at all? You think, since they were brought up, that Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks, for example, don't bear any of the responsibility for what happened?

What happened? Do you think that Afghanistan would be "pacified" by now if the Bush administration had chosen a different path (i.e. no Iraq invasion)?

[bush_cheney2004]

Both put in place by Bush, and who were his responsibilities.

Correct...and President Bush was re-elected to office after doing so.

Edited November 29, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

What happened? Do you think that Afghanistan would be "pacified" by now if the Bush administration had chosen a different path (i.e. no Iraq invasion)?

I feel as if bin Laden could likely have been captured, as Bush vowed would happen, and I feel as if things in Afghanistan would be better than they are now had the Bush administration stayed centered on Afghanistan.

[bush_cheney2004]

I feel as if bin Laden could likely have been captured, as Bush vowed would happen, and I feel as if things in Afghanistan would be better than they are now had the Bush administration stayed centered on Afghanistan.

Maybe....but there is no guarantee that would be the case. Witness members' descriptions of the "impregnable" Afghans, slayers of conquerors of the past! As I have stated before, I am not convinced that other NATO partners were any more invested than Bush, and that includes Canada based on their force levels, which the USA has always exceeded and provided the bulk of air power, transport, intel collection, ROVs, aid dollars spent, KIAs, etc., etc.

[punked]

What happened? Do you think that Afghanistan would be "pacified" by now if the Bush administration had chosen a different path (i.e. no Iraq invasion)?

I think we would have pulled out by now.

[bush_cheney2004]

I think we would have pulled out by now.

No way that was going to happen...."pulling out" the first time was the criticism consistently offered by other wankers.

[Canadian Blue]

I put these allegations with all of the "second guessing" type allegations that are put up against presidents - Democratic and Republican.

It doesn't help that the report was authored by John Kerry.

Attempting to put the entire blame on George W Bush for not capturing Osama Bin Laden is infantile. When an operation like that occurs the President doesn't have control over what every soldier in region is doing, attempting to do so would result in a clusterf*ck.

Do I think Donald Rumsfeld in particular was incompetent, without a doubt.

Correct...and President Bush was re-elected to office after doing so.

That was due more to John Kerry than anything George W Bush did in the previous four years. The Democrats had every advantage in 2004 and lost it all because of a shitty campaign.

[bush_cheney2004]

....That was due more to John Kerry than anything George W Bush did in the previous four years. The Democrats had every advantage in 2004 and lost it all because of a shitty campaign.

George Bush had several positives and negatives going into the campaign....domestically and for foreign policy. The Democrats ran a weak "flip-flopping" candidate and suffered from their own policies that required America to fail, were an afront to "family values" in red states, and managed to also lose seats in Congress.

[Canadian Blue]

The Democrats ran a weak "flip-flopping" candidate and suffered from their own policies that required America to fail

Required America to fail at what exactly?

[bush_cheney2004]

Required America to fail at what exactly?

Take your pick:

> continued economic recovery

> jobs, jobs, jobs

> occupation of Iraq

> prevention of another "9/11"

> Afghanistan

> DPRK nukes

[punked]

Take your pick:

> continued economic recovery

> jobs, jobs, jobs

> occupation of Iraq

> prevention of another "9/11"

> Afghanistan

> DPRK nukes

Pretty Bush's second term was a success in any of those fields.

[bush_cheney2004]

Pretty Bush's second term was a success in any of those fields.

More successful than John Kerry's term....not all presidents get to serve multiple terms.

There is a reason for that!

[Guest American Woman]

Maybe....but there is no guarantee that would be the case. Witness members' descriptions of the "impregnable" Afghans, slayers of conquerors of the past! As I have stated before, I am not convinced that other NATO partners were any more invested than Bush, and that includes Canada based on their force levels, which the USA has always exceeded and provided the bulk of air power, transport, intel collection, ROVs, aid dollars spent, KIAs, etc., etc.

While there is no guarantee we would have got bin Laden, it sounds as if it would have been quite likely; at the very least, the best shot we would have had.

As for whether or not other NATO partners were any more invested than Bush, Bush was the one saying he was going to get bin Laden dead or alive; smoke him out of the caves. That was his focus, according to what he told America/the world. He should have stayed focused; things could well be different in Afghanistan now if he had.