STFU dick cheney....

Ironically, it was George W. Bush’s father who initiated many of the changes that Clinton would implement. In the early 1990s, Bush conducted an examination of the Intelligence Community and instigated a steady series of budgetary cuts from its historic high of $30 billion in 1991, to $28 billion by 1993.10 Bush also began the reallo*cation of resources “away from old Cold War concerns toward new economic tar*gets, as the world marketplace became an ever more important battlefield for America.”11 During the Cold War, up to 60% of CIA resources were targeted on the USSR. By 1993, that figure had dropped to 13%.12 CIA analysts would continue to investigate weapons proliferation and traditional espionage activities, but they would now develop an enhanced role in the area of economic espionage.


Clinton realised that the CIA could assist his policy of Engagement and Enlargement, by aiding American companies in the global market. During the Cold War, economic intelligence accounted for 10% of CIA activity, under Clinton that figure would rise to 40%. The CIA had always engaged in economic intelligence gathering, but now this would help justify their budget and assist the President in his efforts to forge domestic renewal. Seizing the initiative, the CIA identified 72 cases of unfair competition in the first 17 months of the Clinton Administration. It also revealed that between 1986 and 1992, it “had identified 250 cases of aggressive lobbying by foreign governments on behalf of their domestic industries that were competing against U.S. firms for business overseas.”13 This convinced officials that the CIA should be tasked with commercial espionage, and revealed the extent of economic espionage before Clinton’s election.


What Clinton did was to make past practices official, if sometimes undeclared, policy. This was done in part through a 1995 National Security Strategy statement that noted “collection and analysis can help level the economic playing field by identifying threats to U.S. companies from foreign intelligence services.”14 The CIA claimed to have uncovered bribes affecting $30 billion in foreign contracts from 1992 to 199515, givingcredence toSecretary of State Christopher’s declaration that “Our national security is inseparable from our economic security.” The weight of America’s national security apparatus was brought to bear in maintaining economic security, as under Clinton, economic intelligence gathering became policy. Economic intelligence became one of the few growth areas at the CIA in the 1990s, proving the Agency could adapt to ever changing circumstances.

Click to expand...

Yet it must be remembered that Al Qaeda was not a constant threat throughout Clinton’s term in office and became a major threat only in later years, ironically, when Clinton was in a weakened political position. Internationally, his pleas for Saudi Arabia to deal with bin Laden had been rejected and at home, a Republican dominated Congress was moving to impeach him. Many who have lamented Clinton’s inability to eliminate bin Laden, lambasted his efforts to strike at the Al Qaeda leadership as attempts to divert attention from his own domestic political concerns. “He was criticized for those cruise missile attacks,” Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has stated. “He was accused of doing things that had nothing to do with foreign policy as he was trying to respond.”24 Also, many who now champion President George W. Bush’s attacks on bin Laden as “the evil one,”25 previously attacked Clinton for concentrating too heavily on bin Laden in the fight against terrorism. Those who assert that Clinton should or could have been more assertive in office are guilty of forgetting or conveniently ignoring their response at the time.

Click to expand...

It is true that Clinton oversaw decreases in the intelligence budget and that Tenet has described the budget situation when he became CIA director in 1997, four years into Clinton's presidency, as a disaster. But Tenet has never placed blame on Clinton in the way Giuliani describes (which makes some sense since Clinton made him director).


Likewise, Giuliani neglects to provide some important context: The CIA budget cuts began under the first President Bush, and were reversed, under Tenet's leadership, late in the Clinton presidency and before the 9/11 attacks.

Click to expand...

The CIA budget cuts began under the first President Bush, and were reversed, under Tenet's leadership, late in the Clinton presidency and before the 9/11 attacks.

Click to expand...

Upon taking power in 1993, Risen reports, the Clinton administration "began slashing the intelligence budget in search of a peace dividend, and Bill Clinton showed almost no interest in intelligence matters."
The agency cutbacks combined with presidential disinterest took their toll almost immediately. (** Oops...cutbacks Han !!!!!)

Click to expand...

After Clinton CIA Director John Deutch cashiered several senior officers over a scandal in Guatamala, the situation got even worse.
"Morale [at the CIA] plunged to new lows, and the agency became paralyzed by an aversion to high-risk espionage operations for fear they would lead to political flaps. Less willing to take big risks, the CIA was less able to recruit spies in dangerous places such as Iraq."

Click to expand...

The Clinton era of risk aversion also hobbled CIA efforts to get Osama bin Laden. In early 1998, Risen says, the agency was prepared to launch a special operation to kidnap the al Qaeda chief in Afghanistan.
"To be sure the operation was high risk, and there was a strong possibility that it would be so messy that bin Laden would be killed rather than captured. [CIA Director George] Tenet and the CIA's lawyers worried deeply about that issue; they believed the covert action finding on al Qaeda that President Clinton had signed authorized only bin Laden's capture, not his death."
Frustrated by restrictions that made dealing with the big challenges too difficult, the agency turned its energy to lesser problems. (** eye left the ball)

Click to expand...

hanimmal said:

So here is my attempt at the obscure. What exactly is 'safe' and can we ever truly be it, especially without stepping very hard on everyones rights.

How much money that it costs to be 'safe' could be used in other areas that improve everything to such a degree that it far outweighs the 'safety' gained by those measures in the first place.

Click to expand...

hanimmal said:

So here is my attempt at the obscure. What exactly is 'safe' and can we ever truly be it, especially without stepping very hard on everyones rights.

How much money that it costs to be 'safe' could be used in other areas that improve everything to such a degree that it far outweighs the 'safety' gained by those measures in the first place.

Click to expand...

CrackerJax said:

You cannot enjoy anything life has to offer if you aren't safe FIRST. China is well on their way to matching us in the Pacific and are on pace to exceed our own submarine fleet. This Chinese Navy has no intention of staying home. Japan is CLAMORING for the new F-22 and are feeling the heat from China and North Korea (the two are allies by the way...some forget this). Now the F-22 has already been built which means all of the front money, design, research, tooling, has all been paid for. So what do we do? Why we scrap the finest fighter ever designed for a slower, more ponderous fighter, with a lower altitude capability. This is backward thinking. This is political thinking.

How much military do we need? That's always in flux, but what is not in flux is that we should always have the cutting edge in every conflict we send our sons and daughters into. From an entire division to that single lone pilot.

Eastern Europe is being shown the exit door by Obama by him signaling a halt to our highly successful missile defense system.... DEFENSE system. Not OFFENSE, but DEFENSE.... Eastern Europe won't ever forget this.

How much? As long as there are dictators and despots and the UN pushes resolutions instead of solutions.... there will be conflict and war. In the end I'd rather have more than I need, than finding out I didn't have enough.

Remember when everyone went crazy because our troops weren't getting the latest body armor? It was a BIG DEAL....... These same ppl later on are all for cutting the military. And around and around it goes....military cuts, CIA trials ...... and then a plane slams into NYC.

Click to expand...