Skip to main content

View Diary: Ronald Reagan Caused 9/11 (206 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks (4.00)
    Just looking back at that period again was enough to make me drown in all the details and sideroads.  I think I cut 4/5ths of my initial draft to get it down to this.

    I thought of a third section to the path based on Reagan's move to put America back into the "military adventurism" business after we got our fingers burned in Viet Nam, but I shied away from telling the glories of the Grenada invasion.


    TwoTaboos -- Politics and Religion.

    by Mark Sumner on Thu May 05, 2005 at 10:02:03 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Bravo! (4.00)
      Beautiful diary.

      Other intersections along the main road to 9/11:

      Tepid commitment of marines to Beirut and subsequent withdrawl, following the barracks bombing, emboldens jihadists.

      Arms for hostages.

      Etc.

      St. Ronald of the clay feet

      •  USS Stark (4.00)
        Saddam grew a set of giant balls after he nearly destroyed an American warship without suffering any retailation

        That you can blame on Ronnie Raygun

        For those who are interested, Saddam's Airforce attacked the Destroyer, the USS Stark, in the Persian Gulf in 1987. 38 dead sailors (I think), and the ship was nearly lost, and Ronnie did NOTHING

        •  Some trees do not die in vain. (none)
          I recommend:

          James Bamford;  The Puzzle Palace, Body of Secrets, Pretext for War.

          Daniel Yergin, and James Bamberg, on the oil bidness.

          Suggestions?

        •  Oh course when (none)
          Al Queda attacked the WTC in 1993, we did nothing and then they attacked the Khoyber Towers in Saudi in 1996 we did nothing, and then they attacked the Cole in 2000 and we essentially did nothing.

          Certainly, none of those unresponded to attacks on America had nothing to do with 9/11

          •  Only 1/6 true, at best (4.00)

                [Note: this only includes actions taken pre-9/11 - SAR]

                WTC '93 - Clinton's response: Perpetrators hunted down, arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced to life without parole. Intelligence gained from arrestees used to foil Operation Bojinka and convict some perpetrators thereof; also used to foil Millenium plot.

                Khobar Towers '96 - Clinton's response: Investigation eventually determines Hezbollah to be responsible. Some arrests made; case passed off to Bush admin. Bush: Indictments handed down in Summer 2001.

                  [African embassy bombings '98: Clinton's response: Perpetrators arrested, tried, convicted.]

                Interim: Clinton response: Over one dozen A-Q attacks foiled, arrests and convictions made;Al-Qaeda cells rolled up in 20 countries.

                USS Cole October '00 - Clinton's response: Connections to A-Q found in Dec 2000, arrests made, hunt continues for others. Investigations passed off to Bush admin. Bush response: None.

                [Sources: pbs.org PBS "The Man Who Knew" - Timeline; "Broad Effort Launched After '98 Attacks" and "Struggles inside the Government Defined Campaign"  Washington Post, 12-19-01 and 12-20-01, respectively - (apologies for not having exact links)  - SAR]

            •  don't forget (none)
              When Clinton was going after al-Qa'ida the Republicans were telling us it was a "wag the dog" distraction from their trumped up impeachment charges. Then when they got back the White House they turned off the anti-terror campaign. That's why we got hit on September 11. If Gore had been president it wouldn't even have happened.

              SHUT UP AND COUNT THE &%$#! VOTES!

              by Danjuma on Fri May 06, 2005 at 09:51:16 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  What about the Stark ??? 1987 ??? (none)
              your link mentions the attack on the USS Cole, but I never said ANYTHING about the USS Cole

              I said THE USS STARK, it was a completly differnt ship. It wasn't attacked by Al Queda. It was attacked by Iraqi Airforce Jets

              And Ronnie Raygun didn't do anything about it, except maybe to sell Saddam some more chemical and biological weapons

    •  Happy to see that you made use (4.00)
      of the powerful symbol of Reagan removing the solar panels from the White House.

      It really is an archetypal act and a prfound symbol to use against GOP energy shortsightedness.

      Reagan's true legacy: "Mr. Carter, tear down those panels!"

      "The government is us...you and me!" -Theodore Roosevelt

      by Republic Not Empire on Fri May 06, 2005 at 04:08:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I never liked RR (4.00)
        but when he removed the solar panels it became oh so painfully clear why.  What a stupid jerkshit shortsighted thing to do. With that single act he demonstrated where our energy future was headed, straight to hell.

        Also think about this: all these monster houses booming up across the landscape could have had passive solar built in at little added cost and significant energy savings.  Instead we now have millions of energy pig homes hung around our necks.  Just another legacy of RR dissing solar power.

    •  Reagan's a traitor (4.00)
      All you have to do is look at computers and cell phones to see how far we could have come with alternative energy. If the same amount of r&d had been put into a/e as has been put into the other two over the last 25 years. Just think where we could be right now.
      •  it's not too late to start (none)
        buy solar panels yourself
        buy a hybrid
        upgrade your home for increased energy efficiency
        buy green tags
          don't wait for the government to help

        vote with your dollars...

        •  The time's almost right (none)
          Actually you might want to wait a few (2-4) years for solar panels.  Big improvements on the near horizon, all tied to nanoscale engineering.  Similar efficiencies but much cheaper, better looking, and environmentally friendly.  
    •  The Last Clear Chance Doctrine. (4.00)
       I blame W. Bush.

       In tort law there is the "Last Clear Chance" doctrine whereby, say, in an auto accident where the other driver is to blame (failure to use turn signal, running a red light, speeding, etc.) but the victim had "the last clear chance" (using a "reasonable person under the circumstances acting prudently -standard) to avoid the accident, then the defendant and admittedly negligent driver, has a valid defense and, in theory (though rarely if ever these days, in practice), the originally-negligent driver may even recover damages.

       I've no argument with your excellent analysis, nor the variations on it put forth by others above.  And it was OBL and Al Qaida, not W. Bush, who planned and carried out the horrors of 9.11.  However, Bush and his feckless and arrogant minions and sycophants were repeatedly warned, and warned, and warned (from Clarke in January 2001, to the Hart-Rudman Report on Terrorism in Spring '01, to the unusually great volume of Al Qaida "chatter" in July 2001, to the PDB of August 16...) that ACTION -- some general, some specific -- NEEDED TO BE TAKEN by Bush and the sonofabitch did NOTHING to even attempt the thwarting of the OBL plan that would be made manifest beginning a little after 8:00 a.m. on September 11, 2001.

       Bush had the Last Clear Chance to stop or disrupt or thwart OBL's plans, and Bush DID NOTHING.  NOTHING.

       Bastard.

      BenGoshi
      __________________

      . . . religion is not a syllogism, but a poem. H.L. Mencken

      by BenGoshi on Fri May 06, 2005 at 08:53:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site