Gore on foreign policy: 8 years in the House 12 years in the Senate 8 years experience as a Vice President, almost exclusively handling foreign relations for another president with limited foreign experience, Clinton. While Vice President, Gore travelled extensively conducting negotiations and improving diplomatic relations. Saying the Gore doesn't have any foreign policy experience is just sour grapes -- you might disagree with his actions, but to deny they ever happened???

Bush on foreign policy: Bragged at a speech I attended that he only read the Sports section and never travelled outside the US. Some experience with Mexico while Governor of Texas.

Chalk up yet another blunder (of many) in Gore's presidential campaign that the issue of foreign policy experience was hardly discussed.

Gore's environmental record is awful. You won't find me championing his environmental history.

I'm not a Gore fan. When I say that I think he would have pursued a more diplomatic route, I think he would have done so because of his comfort level with it, not because he was somehow more noble and peaceful. As for the American public wanting blood -- well, it wouldn't have been hard to manipulate the media coverage to show how tough the Gore administration was being by going straight to the bad guy. The Bush administration did the same thing by perpetuating this image that every American wanted blood and Bush was tough by giving it to them.

Everyone was a bit shocked in the wake of 9/11. ANY kind of strong leadership from the White House would have been welcome. Many Americans approved of the bombing because they wanted us to do *something,* not necessarily because they wanted the wrong people to die.

As for the inaction during the Clinton adminstration, I definately agree. They could have moved a lot sooner, as could George Sr., because this issue has ben around for decades. But you can't extradite someone for a crime they haven't committed yet or one which you can't prove. The Clinton adminsitration, like George Sr's administration, did squat. The Clinton administration DID leave an anti-terrorism plan of action for the next administration, unfortunately they ignored it... apparently because they disagreed with anything on principle that the previous administration might have done, even if it coincided with their own politics. I kind of doubt it would have prevented 9/11, but it's frustrating just the same.

Newsflash: Some of us were quite aware of the Taliban and what they stood for before 9/11. The US government didn't give a damn about the women of Afghanistan until it became politically expedient to use that as justification for their actions. Right up until then the Taliban was their best buddies and it didn't matter that a woman could be beaten to death for no reason, or that a 12 year old girl who was raped would be killed for violating her family's honor while the perpetrator was just a victim of her uncleanliness.

So spare me the stories about how bad the Taliban is, and how wonderful we are for getting them out of power. Their brutality had nothing to do with why we pushed them out of power, and like fighting terrorism, we could have done something much sooner. Nor does the US have any laurels to rest on with the Northern Alliance. They may think TV and radio are okay, but women are still suffering from rapes, honor killings and lack of medical care at their hands. Once the Northern Alliance is firmly in power and the world is busy looking elsewhere -- at Iraq, for instance, the women of Afghanistan will be no better off than they were under the Taliban.

Then the Northern Alliance will be our best buddies and the US government will go back to not caring about it.