Cheney Blames Reagan for 9/11

[Gemini Cricket]

Source

"The terrorists came to believe that they could strike America without paying any price. And so they continued to wage those attacks, making the world less safe and eventually striking the United States on 9/11," Cheney said.

The vice president highlighted seven occasions when he said he felt the United States did not hit back strongly enough. The first -- the 1983 bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 Americans -- resulted in U.S. troops being withdrawn from the city by the Reagan administration. Many of those killed came from Camp Lejeune, members of the 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.

The bold emphasis is my own.

Wow red on red action!

[wendybeth]

It doesn't help that his administration helped to arm the mujahadeen, and train Bin Ladin as well. I suppose the current admin is starting to realise how thin the Clinton excuse is becoming.

[PanTheMan]

Bush gave a very similar speech in San Diego while Hurricane Katrina was ripping through NOLA. He said the only two Presidents who have had the courage to Take on the fight against global terror, in the last 100 years, have been himself and his Father, whom he called one of the greatest leaders of our time. (Having been in office during the fall of the Berlin Wall, giving him credit for that)

It is NO secret the Reagans and Bushes did NOT get along. The 1980 Campaign between the 2 was quite ugly, And Nancy Reagan said the only only reason "Ronnie" chose GHW Bush was Reagan needed someone who was considered a "Southerner" to win the south from Carter. Bush actually ran on a pro-choice platform. Nancy said 'Ronnie' thought of GWH as a "Weasal"..

There was also quite the Blowout between Nancy and Barbara upon Bushes election in '88.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

It doesn't help that his administration helped to arm the mujahadeen, and train Bin Ladin as well.

...and in so doing WON the Cold War. No one can deny that the prolonged engagement in Afghanistan was at least one of the top three reasons the Soviet Union fell when it did. Sure, looking back with 20/20 vision it was a mistake to arm these guys(terrorists); but we were at that time fighting a different enemy(one with at least 8 ICBMs aimed right at Spokane) and they were helping us win that War.


Regarding Cheneys comments: He mentioned Seven mistakes only one was durring Reagan(and it was a mistake; we never should have cut and run) but in Reagans defense the Global dynamics were different then with a Soviet Union always willing to back any and all of our enemies.

[wendybeth]

Jeff- I have to say I felt a lot more comfortable knowing where those ICBM's were pointed than I do now- no one knows where the hell they are now.
Mutually Assured Destruction really only works when both sides are reluctant to die.

We knew what they were then, and we knew what we'd be facing. There are many, many documents, articles and scholarly treatises that warned of what was coming down the Islamic pike. At any rate, I just sleep so much better now knowing that badasses like Cheney and Dubya got our back.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Jeff- I have to say I felt a lot more comfortable knowing where those ICBM's were pointed than I do now- no one knows where the hell they are now.
Mutually Assured Destruction really only works when both sides are reluctant to die.

Very good point

[scaeagles]

First of all, the Reagan pull out of troops from Beirut was a huge mistake. All seven things mentioned are most certainly true.

International relations change all the time. And you can find some expert somewhere that warns of any or every thing possible based on our current course of action. The fact is at the time helping whomever against the Soviets was in the best interests of America. The mistake was abandoning them when the Soviets pulled out, not helping them, regardless of who "them" was at the time.

But what WB said is true about both sides having to be relucatant to die. This is EXACTLY why we have to hunt down terrorists wherever they are. Does this mean you would support an invasion of Syria, WB?

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

First of all, the Reagan pull out of troops from Beirut was a huge mistake. All seven things mentioned are most certainly true.

International relations change all the time. And you can find some expert somewhere that warns of any or every thing possible based on our current course of action. The fact is at the time helping whomever against the Soviets was in the best interests of America. The mistake was abandoning them when the Soviets pulled out, not helping them, regardless of who "them" was at the time.

But what WB said is true about both sides having to be relucatant to die. This is EXACTLY why we have to hunt down terrorists wherever they are. Does this mean you would support an invasion of Syria, WB?

I would support an invasion of Syria based on their past activities alone. They are far more dangerous than Iraq ever was. I'm not naive, Scaeagles. I realise what we are up against with the Islamic terrorists. I am just disgusted by the lies and behavior on our side- we need to be the good guys in this, and we are failing miserably.

[PanTheMan]

Cheney was not in Beruit. I was.

[sleepyjeff]

You mean Beirut?