I wonder who the Clintons pissed off to have this audio surface. He's said the same things before to a Long Island business group, but what unfortunate timing for these statements. [video=youtube;EhakDgb3IQU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhakDgb3IQU[/video] http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...ton-explained-why-he-didnt-kill-bin-laden.php Now we use drones to carpet bomb Pakistan and Afghanistan. Civilian deaths are never reported. I also wonder why the US didn't just obliterate the compound where bin Laden was at when the SEALS killed him.
During the war fever to invade Afghanistan, the Taliban government acceded to Bush's demand to turn over bin Laden. Bush refused their offer, saying it was too late, and began the war about 10 days later.
I'm finding articles claiming supposed offers back to 7 months before the invasion, but here's the most solid article, from AP during the first week of the war. It was the headline in most U.S. papers on one day. Then the media kind of hid it forever after, so readers forgot, but some of us didn't. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20011014/aponline135016_000.htm This is from UK's The Independent (giving a now-broken link, but you can read part of the article). http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e0a_1304356019
OK, those are "offers" made after 9/11/01. Back to ignore for you. Your posts aren't at all trying to be out of honesty.
Sure. They would have turned over Bin Laden to Iran. A third country. Bush was right, just as FDR and Truman were right. Terms of surrender - complete surrender, no terms.
Wow this makes Bill Clinton look not so good. But it doesn't say anything about Hillary Clinton, luckily.
Don't believe that for a second. There's a reason why "the nature of which was not defined." The fact that she has stayed with him all this time tells you all you need to know about Billary.
