(no subject)
Jun. 3rd, 2002 09:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
asherisSomething I'm considering sending to the local paper. It started out in one direction and ended up taking a bit of a U-turn, so not all the parts quite seem to fit. Decided to sit on it for a while, see if the needed corrections show themselves after a break.
To the editor:
A Monday letter writer claimed: "President Bill Clinton's inaction with Al-Qaida probably led to the Sept. 11 bloodbath."
As a matter of fact, the Clinton administration DID try to act against the Taliban. At the time certain "Congressional leaders" (who shall remain nameless) derided this as nothing more than an attempt to remove attention from the Lewinski scandal. I guess we know what those "leaders" considered more important- or is that titillating?
It's frightening to see how many people are deliberately ignoring far more likely actions that "probably led to the Sept. 11 bloodbath", such as:
For over a decade, the Reagan and Bush (Sr.) administrations supplied bin Laden and his ilk with money, weapons, and training. They actively supported what later evolved into al Qaida.
Yet no "blame" falls here?
Those same administrations were also instrumental in ousting the democratically elected Afghani government, and encouraging the Taliban to take over. How many tens of thousands of people have died, in Afghanistan alone, because of those actions?
The Reagan and Bush (Sr.) administrations supported renegade, terrorist groups in various spots around the world, and tinkered with several foreign governments. We know this.
What other monsters were created during the '80's? How many are being ignored because they weren't connected with the Clinton administration, the current favorite political scapegoat?
Too many Americans forget our own actions, then wonder why we aren't universally loved.
As we used to say, "well, DUH!"
To the editor:
A Monday letter writer claimed: "President Bill Clinton's inaction with Al-Qaida probably led to the Sept. 11 bloodbath."
As a matter of fact, the Clinton administration DID try to act against the Taliban. At the time certain "Congressional leaders" (who shall remain nameless) derided this as nothing more than an attempt to remove attention from the Lewinski scandal. I guess we know what those "leaders" considered more important- or is that titillating?
It's frightening to see how many people are deliberately ignoring far more likely actions that "probably led to the Sept. 11 bloodbath", such as:
For over a decade, the Reagan and Bush (Sr.) administrations supplied bin Laden and his ilk with money, weapons, and training. They actively supported what later evolved into al Qaida.
Yet no "blame" falls here?
Those same administrations were also instrumental in ousting the democratically elected Afghani government, and encouraging the Taliban to take over. How many tens of thousands of people have died, in Afghanistan alone, because of those actions?
The Reagan and Bush (Sr.) administrations supported renegade, terrorist groups in various spots around the world, and tinkered with several foreign governments. We know this.
What other monsters were created during the '80's? How many are being ignored because they weren't connected with the Clinton administration, the current favorite political scapegoat?
Too many Americans forget our own actions, then wonder why we aren't universally loved.
As we used to say, "well, DUH!"
