An article in Newsmax points out that Clinton himself put the kibosh on Secret Plans to Win The Terrorism War.

Newsmax's bias aside, the article brings up a troubling point that we have discussed in earlier posts:

...In fact, as Clinton revealed in the same speech six months ago, military planners had indeed determined bin Laden's whereabouts with enough certainty to develop a plan to take him out with a cruise missile attack.



But once again, the ex-president acknowledged, he pulled the plug on the operation - this time because he was afraid innocent Afghans would die in the same attack.

"The only place bin Laden ever went that we knew was occasionally he went to Khandahar, where he always spent the night in a compound that had 200 women and children," Clinton told the business group.

"So I could have, on any given night, ordered an attack that I knew would kill 200 women and children, that had less than a 50 percent chance of getting him," he explained.



In the controversy following the Israeli attack on the hideout of a known terrorist that also contained innocent people, I pointed out that had we found bin Laden pinpointed in a house with innocent people, we probably would have bombed him anyway. In the war environment AFTER September 11, I stand by that statement, but prior to September 11? Not that easy a call. Although I hate to say it, I'm not sure any other president would have done anything different than Clinton on this specific decision.

On the other hand, Clinton's veto of the "boots-on-the-ground" approach sounds a lot weaker, and was probably based more on fears of a Carter-type hostage rescue fiasco than any real concerns about borders.