Spoon's Rant

No Threat??

The White House released their PDB (Presidental Daily Briefing) under a lot of pressure from the public and the 9/11 commission.. I'm not sure what to think of it.. Does it appear that the administration knew?? Yes.. But then so did the Clinton administration.. I don't really like how Clinton is saying that he did everything that he could -- when in fact, history is beginning to prove that differently.. Granted, I don't like how the Bush administration is trying to push all of this back on Clinton..

Bottom line?? Both administrations are guilty.. Intelligence failed -- and for that matter, intelligence CONTINUES to fail.....

Why do I say that?? With the attack in Spain - and the response afterwards - clearly we don't have a good grasp of intelligence.. If there were indications that a train attack was imminent -- then why is there all of a sudden a rush to protect all of the public transportation avenues.. That's like saying we need to plug the damn after it broke...... We're a little slow on the uptake it seems....

But how many attacks have been averted?? I imagine we'll never know.. Clearly some attacks have been averted as raids continue to happen here and abroad..

What I still don't get is how Bush can say "we're safer now.." Huh?? Maybe I missed something.. As the warfare in Iraq has turned to kidnapping - and thankfully no murder (yet) - and the attack in Madrid, the uprising in Fallujah, the Palestinian/Israeli conflict still going on, and the most recent news nugget about how "North Korea says standoff with US at 'brink of nuclear war'".. Okay - that makes Me so un-tingly..

So, we have kidnappings, uprisings, and the threat of nuclear war from another country.. We still don't have Bin Laden or his staff.. We haven't raided the Al Qaeda camps in Africa or in Southeast Asia.. We don't have a peace accord with North Korea.. And I'm supposed to believe that we're safer now....

Safer now -- as in safer now than before?? Before when?? Before the PDB of August 2001?? Safer than before he took office??

It seems to me that you can't cut it both ways.. If the Bush administration wants to blame the Clinton administration for letting 9/11 happen -- then I don't see how they can say that the world is a safer place now than it was before..

Everyone focuses at how Clinton didn't do anything to stop the attack on the USS Cole or the embassy attack.. If the argument is that Clinton didn't do anything in the last 4 years of his administration - I'd like to remind the conservatives that the last 4 years of his administration was spent justifying his sexual relations with Monica Lewinski.. So maybe instead of spending all of that time defending himself, maybe he could've been going after the terrorists??

Yeah - I don't feel an ounce of sympathy for Bush.. I don't feel an ounce of sympathy for the republicans who feel that they are always right - regardless - and liberals are always wrong.. Well, guess what.. We don't live in a safer time.. We aren't safer thanks to Bush.. We're on the brink of nuclear war - and they want to assure Me that "everything is okay - nevermind anything else going on..." If we're really safe - why are we still trying to develop the now infamous weapons defense program called "Star Wars" where we shoot down missiles from outer space??

Consider this:

In January 2001, 9 full months before 9/11, President Bush outlines the "National Defense University" outlining his vision for a national security policy.. He "advocates an ambitious missile defense" and moving beyond the ABM treaty.. In June 2001, 3 months before 9/11, a FOURTH intercept test successfully intercepts a mock warhead..

All of this happened before September 11th, 2001..

Back when the world was "safer.."

This clearly indicates a policy shift from the Clinton administration.. In fact, in September 2000, a year before 9/11, Clinton decided not to go through with the NMD program citing "the status of technology and concerns among the US allies and opposition from Russia and China." He deferred ultimate deployment decision to the next administration.. Today Putin Calls for Demilitarization of Space.. Today, not a year ago, not four years ago, today.. Why?? Obvious.. Don't point your missiles at me, and I won't point mine at you.. Space could be the potential stomping ground for the next cold war.. Putin warns that Russia must be ready to counter other countries who move against demilitarizing space.. Hmmm -- you can call that an escalation I think..

If the world was "safe" - then why did we need to implement a missile defense system?? A little history:

May 1972, US and (then) Soviet Union sign ABM treating banning nationwide missile defense systems..

March 23, 1983, then President Reagan announces that the US will expand research and development of a missile defense system..

February 15, 1995: the new Republicans (headed by Newt Gingrich) narrowly missed requiring the deployment of a nationwide missile defense "as soon as practical.."

July 1998: Commission chaired by Donald Rumsfeld (yes, the same one) "finds that the threat of a ballistic missile attack could emerge sooner than predicted in the 1995 intelligence estimate. Many experts criticize the commission, however, for emphasizing what could happen rather than what was likely to happen.."

August 31, 1998 - North Korea launches a Taepo Dong 1 missile over Japan.....

I think this clearly indicates that every administration since Reagan knew there were dangers out there..

Scared yet??

(source: US Ballistic Missile Defense Timeline: 1945-2001)