Clinton’s anti-terrorist effort sabotaged

President Clinton a tough act to follow?

In 2000, George W. Bush had great political ambitions and high hopes for promoting his ‘compassionate’ conservative agenda as his great American ‘cure’ to political gridlock. Historically, gridlock has done democracy more good than bad because it prevents activist Presidents from cashing blank checks in the name of American domestic and foreign policy.

President Bush didn’t see it that way, he wanted to lead America in a way that Clinton never could. He wanted to promote his ‘centric’ policies and work with Democrats to help ‘heal’ America from the tragedies that ensued as a result of the Clinton’s tenure in office. President Bush and supporters ignored the great achievements by Clinton’s administration, e.g. best economy in several decades, job market, growth, prospering Business and growing middle class. Home ownership was at an all time high, the poor were given tools that would facilitate their ascension up the ladder.

It is a fact that President Bush inherited a thriving economy –now on the brink of a recession.– Bush inherited a surplus, clearing the federal deficit was unheard of through four previous administrations! America’s morale was high, our biggest partisan conflicts involved whether or not we should ‘help other nations thrive by combating terrorism, poverty, hunger, and other foreign aid. Contrary to what the current war-touting Republicans argue, they were weary of Clinton’s poorly conceived foreign policies.

‘September 11 changed everything’, it’s a really convenient ’slogan’, but it really didn’t, unless you call failed policy and a very bloody war in Iraq a revolutionary response to Osama Bin Laden’s terrorist attack.

The Republicans (Orin Hatch, Newt Gingrich, other highly respected individuals) who championed the ‘Iraqi liberation love-fest and the shifting the War on Terror ™ to Iraq, once argued that President Clinton was foolish for pursuing Osama Bin Laden when other more pressing matters existed! Republicans fought tooth and nail to ensure that the President’s “meddling” in Kosovo and his desire to chase down Osama Bin laden were examples of his poor foreign policy skills. For the record, the United States dropped bombs in strategic areas that minimized civilian casualties and resulted in a grand total of ZERO dead American soldiers. Anyone care to guess how many civilians have been killed as a result of this war?

Were President Bush lies a matter of American national security?

A lie made in court to keep an extra marital affair out of the public court of opinion (sexual indiscretions and extramarital drama should be private matters, but don’t tell that to pundits with political agendas.) is at least understandable. Morality is relative, sometimes people make mistakes and they take measures to correct those mistakes or they ‘hide’ them so that people don’t get hurt. (e.g. wife, kids, etc. — see. Sen Craig)

Did Bush intentionally invade Iraq with faulty data and encourage his administration to avoid the evidence, or lack thereof?

It is clear from reading accounts by Colonel Powell, that he presented evidence to our nation and world that he knew didn’t have a leg to stand on. He did it so decisively and effectively that it was no wonder that he resigned soon thereafter.

On the other hand, when Bush lied, there were consequences that should not be acceptable to Americans. Consider the following:

1) We engaged Iraq unilaterally, violated all sorts of international laws and went against the United States own foreign policies in engaging ‘an enemy’.2) We failed to capture Osama Bin Laden because the President lied, that is a big problem, particularly if he is able to mastermind yet another deadly terrorist attack.

3) We alienated the rest of the world and due to poor policy and military strategy, we’ve essentially pitted our nation against the entire nation of Islam. While we never directly came out and did so, our violations of international law, human rights, and torture images that were released to the public can be categorized as an Act of War.

4) We were the aggressors. According to international law, any sovereign nation that is invaded unilaterally without cause has the right to defend itself against the attack and go to war to do so. This is where the lie is a really big deal!

5) Iran is next on the target list, it seems and if any foreign State has been acted upon, prodded, and taunted it would be Iran. The U.S. has done everything to try and get Iran to commit some kind of act of aggression and we’re no doubt looking for any links to terrorism that we could use as a reason to invade Iran.

6) Iran is up, who is next.. Saudi Arabia, North Korea, heck we may as well take on the evil red communist China, after all they are threatening our ability to rule the world and capitalize on our super power label.

7) Yeah, lying Presidents are a dime a dozen, duh.. they are human, they screw up, everyone does. It seems to me, however, that there is an awful lot of ’screwup’ and ‘mistakes’ cited as reason for bad Presidential judgment and we’ve allowed that to be an acceptable answer.

When all else fails, we scare people. We use the very terrorism that we are claiming to combat (terrorists attempt to dictate foreign policy by murdering civilians –9/11) in order to force Americans into a submissive state. There is no difference between the fear we are putting in the hearts and minds of Americans and the fear that Al Qaida would like to put in our hearts. However, we as citizens of this great democracy with a storied past and zeal for freedom… are especially vulnerable to terrorists who use patriotism, our love for God, and our preconceived notions of ‘foreigners’ against us.

What do we have to show for following our President off the cliff?

Our President has been barraged and distracted with questions on Iraq, reasons for war, osama bin laden, international tension and failed strategies that have amounted to only 1 major benefit - a windfall of profit for subsidiaries of Halliburton and other private contractors that the President deemed worthy (e.g. Republican) of receiving major federal funding. I won’t even go into the Katrina emergency response failures in this article.

Forget about reconstructing Iraq or Iraqi liberty, that is all a dream concocted by Ivy league graduates with plenty of experience TALKING about political theory and global conflict. If you ask the unbiased observers, who do consider world peace and stability an important cause, you might be surprised by the response. If you turn to military strategists and internal federal agencies, if you ask world leaders, policy analysts, and former Bush administration officials, the assessment is much more bleak than the one painted by the White House. The only force carrying Bush’s War now is perpetuated by idiots that call themselves ‘the media’ and pundits that call themselves ‘experts’.

Fred Soto is an Attorney and Entrepreneur from the Silicon Valley.
Email this author | All posts by Fred Soto