I did see this one coming :nonono:

If all else fails, blame the previous administration

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=512&e=1&u=/ap/20040212/ap_on_go_co/intelligence_debate_5

Sincerely, Dubya

...today's intelligence analysts "did the best they could with what they had". ?????

Blame him for Kosovo and the stain on "what's-her-name"'s dress but not this

Clinton did drastically cut our military and especially our intelligence; I mean if our intelligence was up to par like in our Cold War days, we could have gone right in and captured or killed Saddam, like the CIA had done in the past with Central and South American leaders; I mean come one, our CIA used to be able to sell weapons in Iran to fund Contras. Ahhhhh the good old days of dirty espionage. With Clinton when we tried to bomb Belgrade we hit the Chinese embassy because the military was using old intelligence . And I'm not going to rant about our intelligence failures in the Sudan regarding Osama bin Laden (or OBL like Foxnews likes to call him).

Actually, you are all off a bit. The gentleman in the oval office in 1967 signed into law a bill the [unwittingly] bound the CIA once and for all from being able to do it's 'Dirty' work that it had been able to do in the past.

It was all downhill after that. Reagan tried to bring it back some but the noodles and the damage done. Democrats just plain jizzed it all for all of us. Blame them!!

Originally posted by feline...the stain on "what's-her-name"'s dress but not this

You got funnies!

Originally posted by Sir CHUNKS Actually, you are all off a bit. The gentleman in the oval office in 1967 signed into law a bill the [unwittingly] bound the CIA once and for all from being able to do it's 'Dirty' work that it had been able to do in the past.It was all downhill after that. Reagan tried to bring it back some but the noodles and the damage done. Democrats just plain jizzed it all for all of us. Blame them!!

After 1967 they still did plenty of dirty work, just ask Allende, and so on.

Originally posted by Tristan Jayol > Originally posted by Sir CHUNKS Actually, you are all off a bit. The gentleman in the oval office in 1967 signed into law a bill the [unwittingly] bound the CIA once and for all from being able to do it's 'Dirty' work that it had been able to do in the past.It was all downhill after that. Reagan tried to bring it back some but the noodles and the damage done. Democrats just plain jizzed it all for all of us. Blame them!!

After 1967 they still did plenty of dirty work, just ask Allende, and so on.

Ok, maybe I shoulda clarified by saying that after that their dirty work ops took a slow decline until there was basically the nothing of today.

But it was he in 67 truly responsible...

maybe it was a slow decline, but after the Cold War (papa Bush era) and clinton in office cutting military funding, our intelligence tanked

And then we taught the rest of the world how to do it...thus, enabling our supposed 'Friends' to take over where we had to leave off, that is until they decide they want to be the bad guys and circumvent our remaining resources for their bombing pleasure.

Oi!!

Originally posted by Spotnick So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton?

Well, depends on the context Spotty, but I guess you can say that!!

Damn, I'm still laughing!!

Originally posted by Spotnick So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton?

Bush is lacking intelligence because of the cocaine he ingested

Originally posted by Spotnick So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton?

Texas.

Originally posted by Spotnick So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton?

CV's anyone????

GWB earned his undergraduate degree from Yale and his MBA from Harvard.

Originally posted by Michael McDermott > Originally posted by Spotnick> So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton? > > >

CV's anyone????

GWB earned his undergraduate degree from Yale and his MBA from Harvard.

yet he still didn't know there were black people in brazil until his official visit. tragic.

Originally posted by Tristan Jayol > Originally posted by Spotnick> So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton? > > >

Bush is lacking intelligence because of the cocaine he ingested

Allegedly.....

Sincerely, Dubya

I'm not denying Clinton cut back on some things, but you have to remember this was post-Cold War, post-fall of Communism, everyone thought it was safe to walk down the street at night and so a laziness set in. Psychologically, we weren't ready to consider the possibility of little-ass terrorist groups when we'd just got done beating down the Evil Empire of Soviet Russia. So yes, there were some cuts in military and intellegence that may have contributed to our lack of knowledge concerning al Qaeda, but it wasn't part of some "grand conspiracy" to slash the intelligence and military. The threat that we'd been building up for (nuclear combat toe-to-toe with the Russkies) never materialized, so the rationale behind a big military started to look less attractive than it had just a few years previous.

Technically, Clinton was "your boy", in terms of Republicans wanting to cut spending. He did it, he was the big-time conservative (at least in terms of cutting back on programs), he just happened to do it on stuff you liked. Bush, by comparison, is a big-government liberal (and I'm saying that with as straight a face as I can); hell, he's creating new branches of the federal gov't and spending like there's no tomorrow.

So before the Repubs start flinging their arrows at the surefire-polarizing Clinton Era for the blame in intelligence being not so, don't forget the context in which those cuts were made. Trust me, it made sense at the time. Only in the shadow of 9/11 did we realize we were living in a dream world of "peace and prosperity", and sometimes I wish we could go back to that naivety

Originally posted by Taboo # 7 > Originally posted by Tristan Jayol > Originally posted by Spotnick> So the reason why George Bush is lacking intelligence is because of Bill Clinton? > > >

Bush is lacking intelligence because of the cocaine he ingested

Allegedly.....

Sincerely, Dubya

I'm not denying Clinton cut back on some things, but you have to remember this was post-Cold War, post-fall of Communism, everyone thought it was safe to walk down the street at night and so a laziness set in. Psychologically, we weren't ready to consider the possibility of little-ass terrorist groups when we'd just got done beating down the Evil Empire of Soviet Russia. So yes, there were some cuts in military and intellegence that may have contributed to our lack of knowledge concerning al Qaeda, but it wasn't part of some "grand conspiracy" to slash the intelligence and military. The threat that we'd been building up for (nuclear combat toe-to-toe with the Russkies) never materialized, so the rationale behind a big military started to look less attractive than it had just a few years previous.

Technically, Clinton was "your boy", in terms of Republicans wanting to cut spending. He did it, he was the big-time conservative (at least in terms of cutting back on programs), he just happened to do it on stuff you liked. Bush, by comparison, is a big-government liberal (and I'm saying that with as straight a face as I can); hell, he's creating new branches of the federal gov't and spending like there's no tomorrow.

So before the Repubs start flinging their arrows at the surefire-polarizing Clinton Era for the blame in intelligence being not so, don't forget the context in which those cuts were made. Trust me, it made sense at the time. Only in the shadow of 9/11 did we realize we were living in a dream world of "peace and prosperity", and sometimes I wish we could go back to that naivety

Actually, the failures of our modern intelligence organs can be traced directly, in a straight line, to former Democrat senator from Idaho Frank Church. His committee's insistence on constitutionally needless limits on surveillance and covert action have done us untold harm.