George W Bush Dead 9/11
- Thread starter DMA
- Start date
This could only have happened if Al Quaeda had known exactly where he was due to be an when. If he happened to be in one of the towers when hit unless the initial impact killed him he would surely have had the greatest possible chance of surviving.
Al Quaeda targetting a US President is of course possible, my guess would have been an attempt to actually hit Air Force ONe in Mid air
Al Quaeda targetting a US President is of course possible, my guess would have been an attempt to actually hit Air Force ONe in Mid air
DMA said:
Hmm. I don't know that it would have made all that much difference. Dick Cheney might even have been a better salesman for the neo-con agenda. But my guess, as an outsider, is that not much would have changed vis a vis Iraq or US domestic policy. Which is a bit dull for an AH board. Maybe someone a bit closer to the action in the US would have different ideas.
Hyperion
Banned
Depends on which tower he is in, and if he is above or below the area where the plane hits. If he's above the impact area, he's in trouble. If he is below it, he will be removed as fast as possible, and taken as far away as possible. If he is in the tower that isn't hit first, he would likely be removed anyway for safety sake.
NomadicSky
Banned
Mecca would be a sheet of glass Americans would really be out for blood.
Hell, even I would be and I don't like Bush.
Hell, even I would be and I don't like Bush.
The only agenda I see in America right now was started by William Jefferson Clinton and back then we called it nation building.
My brother who is a retired marine can tell you how it was under clinton.
During the first Gulf War his unit was given the best equipment and military hardware in the world.
In 1994 his unit then serving under Clinton was sent ashore in Hati with only one clip of Amo apiece for each man. When he goes hunting he carries at least 2 clips of Amo.
In 1999 his unit was again deployed this time to Kosevo and while his 6 year old daughter was going to our local school where the tile is falling out of the celling and the roof leaks. He was told to play traffic cop while the United States govenment spent millions building and repairing schools over there.
Around that same time our local community was having to raise money to repair the one here.
I myself do not agree with the war in Irag but I did vote for Bush and would again due to the fact that the Democratic party has yet to come up with a real plan to solve our nations under lying problems. I have repeatedly heard them scream and rant about what they are against but I have yet to hear them tell me what they stand for.
My brother who is a retired marine can tell you how it was under clinton.
During the first Gulf War his unit was given the best equipment and military hardware in the world.
In 1994 his unit then serving under Clinton was sent ashore in Hati with only one clip of Amo apiece for each man. When he goes hunting he carries at least 2 clips of Amo.
In 1999 his unit was again deployed this time to Kosevo and while his 6 year old daughter was going to our local school where the tile is falling out of the celling and the roof leaks. He was told to play traffic cop while the United States govenment spent millions building and repairing schools over there.
Around that same time our local community was having to raise money to repair the one here.
I myself do not agree with the war in Irag but I did vote for Bush and would again due to the fact that the Democratic party has yet to come up with a real plan to solve our nations under lying problems. I have repeatedly heard them scream and rant about what they are against but I have yet to hear them tell me what they stand for.
Amazing that the US had only one clip of ammo per soldier for several hundred soldiers, considering we had a million men under arms in the army, the navy, and the air force.shane said:
If I had been Clinton and learned that your brother's unit had only one clip of ammo apiece, I would have fired the army leadership instantly. For some things there is no excuse. You very publically fire the people responsible.
I mean, street gangs in New York have more ammo than that.
It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I do.
wkwillis said:
Rember the Dem. White House also told military men that they could not tour the White House in Uniform . Also I have under stood from people I knew who stade in after the Gulf war that lower rank enlisted men had to get welfare if they were married. For there were no pay raises from 1991 - 2000 .
Yeah, that's why both my sisters and both my brothers-in-law got out. Riffed in effect, if not in fact. The government seems to have thought that the armed forces were low paid workers and therefore since the other low paid workers weren't getting raises, they shouldn't either. The bottom 80% of America hasn't got an after inflation raise since 1975.Ward said:
But not enough ammo is the kind of thing that ends your career without a pension, or should.
gaijin
Banned
Money
Correct me if I am wrong, but the US army is the best funded army in the history of the world. They have more resources than any other armed forces in the world. This is true now and this was true under Clinton as well. To claim that Clinton is responsible for sending soldiers to war with only one clip of ammo is nonsense. The people responsible are the army leadership. If I am not mistaking the US Armed forces kept buying and developing new weapons trhoughout the 1990's. If you have enough money to buy new toys you should have enough money to buy ammo for soldiers in combat situations. If you dont have enough money for ammo, the army should reshuffle its budget and make a few million dollars available for ammo. The idea that the US army under Clinton was so cash strapped they couldnt afford ammo is just rediculous. Much more likely is that the logistical support in those situations was FUBAR. After all most armies/militias/rebelgroups have plenty of guns and ammo. If the US cant afford those maybe they should buy a few less expensive toys. Imagine all the ammo you can buy for the prise of one DDG.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the US army is the best funded army in the history of the world. They have more resources than any other armed forces in the world. This is true now and this was true under Clinton as well. To claim that Clinton is responsible for sending soldiers to war with only one clip of ammo is nonsense. The people responsible are the army leadership. If I am not mistaking the US Armed forces kept buying and developing new weapons trhoughout the 1990's. If you have enough money to buy new toys you should have enough money to buy ammo for soldiers in combat situations. If you dont have enough money for ammo, the army should reshuffle its budget and make a few million dollars available for ammo. The idea that the US army under Clinton was so cash strapped they couldnt afford ammo is just rediculous. Much more likely is that the logistical support in those situations was FUBAR. After all most armies/militias/rebelgroups have plenty of guns and ammo. If the US cant afford those maybe they should buy a few less expensive toys. Imagine all the ammo you can buy for the prise of one DDG.
actually, procurement in the US Defense Dept. has been a problem for a long time. Many people have been saying that the US needs to get it under control, spend more money on 'beans and bullets' instead of R&D. Plus, the way the armed forces buy things (mainly with a few companies who don't really compete against each other) they get overcharged for everything.
gaijin, so when the President and Congress pass the budget, the military should be able to say 'Screw this, we'll spend the money as we see fit'?
Nor should we forget serious reductions in training operations and maintaining the equipment. The percentage of aircraft available for use on short notice was becoming a bit of a disgrace too. And behind Clinton's claims to have cut the government, what he really did was to gut military manpower and then increase government employees by a number slightly below the number of troops lost.
Maintanence went into the toilet especially because the Clinton Adminstration noticed that virtually all military units down to the lowest level had more than the required number of personnel for such purposes. For instance, the lowest level(squad) might have 10-12 instead of the 8 required. So that was ended and the numbers restored at the absolute minimum number needed to do all the work. Should one person retire, go off for training of some kind, or break a leg in a skiing accident, it was guaranteed that one or more pieces of major equipment would simply go without the necessary work being done.
Nor should we forget serious reductions in training operations and maintaining the equipment. The percentage of aircraft available for use on short notice was becoming a bit of a disgrace too. And behind Clinton's claims to have cut the government, what he really did was to gut military manpower and then increase government employees by a number slightly below the number of troops lost.
Maintanence went into the toilet especially because the Clinton Adminstration noticed that virtually all military units down to the lowest level had more than the required number of personnel for such purposes. For instance, the lowest level(squad) might have 10-12 instead of the 8 required. So that was ended and the numbers restored at the absolute minimum number needed to do all the work. Should one person retire, go off for training of some kind, or break a leg in a skiing accident, it was guaranteed that one or more pieces of major equipment would simply go without the necessary work being done.
gaijin
Banned
budget
First of all the budget very likely doesnt state exactly how many bullets each unit will get. It is much more likely it will state total numbers of ammo to be bought and leave the distribution to the logistical department of the army. Even if the budget would be so rigid, I would expect the military to give less ammo to units in non combat area''s like fi Germany and extra to frontline troops. I thought that in war one had to be flexible. If you are not flexible enough to get ammo to your soldiers you should be fired. The idea that the troops had not enough ammo because Clinton ordered them so is just plain stupid. Much more likely is that the army didnt allocate enough resources to non sexy items like ammo and so on. Same thing happening in Iraq now. Lots of moeny for fancy shiny new airtplanes, ships etc, but not enough for boring old bodyarmour.
First of all the budget very likely doesnt state exactly how many bullets each unit will get. It is much more likely it will state total numbers of ammo to be bought and leave the distribution to the logistical department of the army. Even if the budget would be so rigid, I would expect the military to give less ammo to units in non combat area''s like fi Germany and extra to frontline troops. I thought that in war one had to be flexible. If you are not flexible enough to get ammo to your soldiers you should be fired. The idea that the troops had not enough ammo because Clinton ordered them so is just plain stupid. Much more likely is that the army didnt allocate enough resources to non sexy items like ammo and so on. Same thing happening in Iraq now. Lots of moeny for fancy shiny new airtplanes, ships etc, but not enough for boring old bodyarmour.
gaijin, no, Clinton and Congress are to blame. Once they decide on all the sexy items which make their business and labor union allies very happy, the military must live with it and spend accordingly. Not to mention pork barrel items which give little or nothing to the military.
Since Clinton also increased the cost of day to day operations through the former Yugoslavia and other places, the military was left even worse off.
I did a study of the defense budget a few years back and I can personally assure you that more than 15% could have been erased without touching on military effectiveness. Of course, there would have been a few problems, like having to kill Senators Byrd and Rockefeller of West Virginia along with all the members of the House from that state...
Since Clinton also increased the cost of day to day operations through the former Yugoslavia and other places, the military was left even worse off.
I did a study of the defense budget a few years back and I can personally assure you that more than 15% could have been erased without touching on military effectiveness. Of course, there would have been a few problems, like having to kill Senators Byrd and Rockefeller of West Virginia along with all the members of the House from that state...
gaijin said:
Well do I remember that first term of the Clinton whitehouse. Les Aspin was the Secretary of Defense during the first two years of Clinton's term. If I'm not mistaken the decision to limit the ammo had nothing to do with Logistics and everything to do with politics. In general Aspin took the rap for the lack of political support that the Clinton Administration gave to the military and resigned in '94 following the debacle in Mogudishu. But even so, much of the above is my perspective in retrospect. For a better perspective read the comments from soldiers who were active duty during that time to get their views... mine are only arm-chair generalship... which ain' worth much
Back to the original post...I think a more probable (or more interesting one to me) is what if flight 93 had been successfully crashed into the Capitol building (that is where people speculate that it was headed for) and had killed the majority of our congress critters, rather than being forced out of the sky by our American heroes into a Pennsylvania field.
Xen
Banned
Clinton deserves the blame only to the point that he was President and the buck stops there. Of course that isnt the policy of the Bush administration so, its really kind of one of the pot kettle things. Alot of conservative blames Clinton for all the ills in our society, ranging from segregation, slavery, I think some even tried to blame him for the Civil War. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and Dubya is getting blamed for everything, I think when he farted it somehow caused Katrina to form.
However as Grim Reaper pointed out, Congress has alot to do with how the budget is spent, so blaming Clinton should be limited to as I pointed out above, and blaming Democrats is ludicrous since it was almost always a Republican dominated Congress. I remember Gingrich all too well.
But it was also under the Clinton years we had the development of the two sleek new aircraft. A competition of sorts that was probably expensive as hell, when two companies introduced to the US Air Force the F-23 and the F-22. As we know the F-22 won and is currently being produced to replace the aging F-15.
Blame Clinton, blame congress, blame the pentagon, blame the logistics coordinator, blame them all and it would be fair, but to just blame Clinton....
However as Grim Reaper pointed out, Congress has alot to do with how the budget is spent, so blaming Clinton should be limited to as I pointed out above, and blaming Democrats is ludicrous since it was almost always a Republican dominated Congress. I remember Gingrich all too well.
But it was also under the Clinton years we had the development of the two sleek new aircraft. A competition of sorts that was probably expensive as hell, when two companies introduced to the US Air Force the F-23 and the F-22. As we know the F-22 won and is currently being produced to replace the aging F-15.
Blame Clinton, blame congress, blame the pentagon, blame the logistics coordinator, blame them all and it would be fair, but to just blame Clinton....
Flocculencio
Donor
NomadicSky said:
Oh for cryin' out loud...
I thought we had got over all the "Mecca would be a sheet of glass" posts.
Why, pray tell, would even a completely enraged US government be so foolish as to do the one thing that would definitely make it a pariah nation for the next fifty years?
I'm not saying that they can't do it- I'm just saying that I don't think that any government is going to pander to the initial feelings of rage that it's electorate would feel. I give American sense more credit than many people seem to do.
If they nuke Mecca, the price of oil in the US just climbs sky high. There is going to be no alliance of the willing here- just disgust from other nations at America responding to an atrocity with an abomination.
Not even the Brits would be on board with you guys after this. If Blair tried to get his country behind the US after a nuking of Mecca there would be millions of people in the streets of London protesting it. More importantly he could kiss goodbye to his electability and would probably fall to a power struggle within New Labour as his own backbenchers desert him in droves.
And if the US wants to try to invade ALL the members of OPEC they're welcome to try. We've seen how hard it is to hold ONE country down.
You know, the price of nukes keeps dropping.
When the vengeance bombs start taking out American cities, what are you going to do? Attack all our enemies because it must have been one of them?
But which one? Do you know how many countries have dictatorships that we installed? And how many enemies for us those dictatorships caused?
When the vengeance bombs start taking out American cities, what are you going to do? Attack all our enemies because it must have been one of them?
But which one? Do you know how many countries have dictatorships that we installed? And how many enemies for us those dictatorships caused?
Xen, actually the F22 versus F23 competition was a rare example of competition for military procurement. And when it was learned that the government would NOT pay for all the costs run up, my, how fast the cost estimates collapsed. Not to mention not allowing the Air Farce generals to lock in all manner of details and criteria and then force someone to make the plane fit them.
Of course, once our congresscritters drove off the competition and made sure this would not happen again, then finished spreading the plane components to as many districts as possible we soon had...well, we seem to have a plane we can't afford to actually buy.
Of course, once our congresscritters drove off the competition and made sure this would not happen again, then finished spreading the plane components to as many districts as possible we soon had...well, we seem to have a plane we can't afford to actually buy.