We could argue round and round on this. Credible evidence shows that Clinton probably did not do enough to battle terrorist groups which may have led to 9/11 and other attempts. On the other hand, Bush and the administration made a terrible error in going into Iraq IMO, one with far reaching consequences. Hopefully history will see a more democratic Iraq.
One thing we must admit is that we see a very small amount of info/intell reports that each administration must consider. I know there was a lot behind the scenes that we didn't see. To Bush's credit, multiple terrorist plots were foiled since 9/11 and the administration did reorganize gov agencies to better deal with terrorism. That does not justify Iraq but is still positive.
IMO Bush and Chenney made a mistake in not being more open to the American people. Too many things were behind closed doors, which likely lead to more criticizm.
You say that very well.
People want to continue to focus on the decision to go to Iraq. That's done, over with, can't go back.
A stable and democratic Iraq can only be a plus for the US. But liberal Bush haters don't want to talk about that.
Bush's poll numbers have gone up within the last few weeks due in part to his numerous outgoing interviews. Where most of the questions give him the opportunity to defend himself and his decisions.
That's something he should have doing along.
Staying distant from the public during wartime was a big mistake for him.
Another good point you made was about the intelligence reports we don't know about.
Last summer I finished George Tenet's book 'At the Center of the Storm.' I highly recommend it.
There are SO MANY things going on in this world related to national security that our minds can't grasp.
I would bet a million bucks that Obama has changed some of his policy promises since his Nat. Security briefings began.
I can hear Barry now at his first intelligence meeting:
"HOLY S**T!!!"
