Because there were children he would have killed in the process.Why is the media trying to make this a negative story

but, who?

that included such heavy civilian casualties, and that includes the US press and world press.
In fact, the GOP and their media machine would have claimed Clinton committed war crimes to distract from impeachment.

What about those sanctions? How many civilians did they kill?

Be careful you do not become a monster yourself.

had Osama in his sights (well, not Clinton himself, but whoever does that kind of thing), but Clinton refused to give the go ahead. However, what I had heard or read at the time is that Clinton refused because of two or three civilians standing near Osama, not an entire town. The recording is less bad for Clinton than what I had originally heard.

Maybe the benefit is that Hillary seems to be heading toward announcing for President; and attacking her husband is the next best thing to attacking her.

That is another reason I hope she is not the nominee. I don't want to re-hash Bubba's two terms as well as her life and her years in the Senate and her years as Secretary of State--and her actions during his two terms.

I had all those arguments about life before Bush with Republicans between 2003, when I first started posting on message boards, and 2007, when I could no longer stomach posting with RWers.

The US held off on trying to kill the man who set in motion the deaths of 3000 Americans, the destruction of billion dollar skyscrapers, and two wars that cost us thousands more dead and trillions of dollars of damage to our economy, because it could have resulted in the deaths of several hundred civilians.

Israel is working on killing thousands of Gazans and destroying Gaza's capability to provide water, electricity, and healthcare to its entire population in order to try to stop rocket fire that has killed something like 3 dozen civilians in the thirteen years.


I think the point of the article is to refute the notion that the US *under Democratic control* would react as violently and with as much disregard for civilian deaths as Israel is doing.

But, still don't see how this old news is put out as news news (except for the released recording) by Politico who isn't favorable to Dems, generally.

Calling attention to Clinton not getting Bin Laden because he wasn't aggressive enough could also be trying to show signs of Democratic weakness to justify what Israel is doing to Gaza as a criticism to Democrats/Obama that they are trying to broker a cease fire when in fact (in some crazies minds) we should not intervene and support Israel's slaughter of innocents in Gaza.

I don't know...the article is curious... and I wondered whose PR machine was behind it.

Thanks for your view.. and your points may be the truth of it.

And no drone opponent had better complain. This is exactly what he should have done according to them.

And maybe it resulted in 911, which I'm sure the right wing is saying, but there's no way to be absolutely sure of that. It could have been planned by others even had bin Laden been already dead.

Oh wait, he didn't.
I guess bush didn't want innocents to die?
Oh wait, yes he did.

Damn. Can the CIA clear this up for us? Maybe a special 9/11 commission? Oh, wait....

Ok, I got it.... the free press in this country will put it all together and we'll know the truth???? Oh, wait. Damn.

If I didn't know better, it would like some huge conspiracy......