Quote:
Originally Posted by dmek25
bill clinton knew what the definition of politics was. sometimes you have to swallow some losses in one place to accomplish something later on down the road. and saying bin laden was offered to clinton is great hindsight. and maybe regan should have took better care of who he sold illegal arms to? with clinton in office, the middle east was about as stable as its probably ever going to be. and this president seems to think strongarming our opposition will get them to lay down and obey. i guess he is starting to see otherwise.
|
Youve got to be kidding me right? because he chose to ignore the situation during his tenure and the media never portrayed it by no means made the middle east stable. After failing to deal with the actions of Bush sr. Iraq was hung out to dry by the clinton administration. The guy was a good politician he just chose not to intervene in pretty much anything whatsoever, IE rwanda... People hate us just because we are a world power, everyone wants it both ways, to use rwanda as example, everyone got pissed at us that we didnt go in, however had we decided to go in and intervene everyone wouldve been telling us to stick to our own business, theres going to be naysayers for whatever argument there is and thats a fact. You can look at all of this in history too, funny how it repeats itself, if we have a policy of neutrality and isolationism people think we need to get involved, IE WW1, but if we have a policy of intervention and playing "world police" people hate us too, IE, vietnam (just an example dont ream me for that). Everyone has 20/20 hindsight, the hard part is trying to estimate the future. Im not bashing clinton or any administration im simply trying to get across the point that you can never make everyone happy.