06-27-2008, 04:19 PM | #21 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
|
Quote:
1. Did you think in the immediate post-9/11 era (say, 12 months) that we would be hit again? Be honest. 2. Do you think the propensity/probability of being hit by a terrorist attack is higher or lower (or the same) in the '00s than it was in the '90s? In the 80's? 3. Do you think presidents have any influence on the security of the country, or are major terrorist attacks rare "just because" (like major earthquakes in Utah)?
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young Last edited by Tex; 06-27-2008 at 04:21 PM. |
|
06-27-2008, 04:31 PM | #22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
2. I have no basis for this, but as it has already been mentioned, terrorism has been around a long time. I would guess it would be about the same, if not tougher, given the heightened awareness 9/11 brought to the world. The next time you get on an airplane and you notice 8 Arab men on your flight, you are going to be much more vigilant. 3. I definitely think Presidents (and their cabinets) have an influence on national security. Remember, my point was not to say W did nothing. I think he has done a nice job domestically with national security. I dont blame him for 9/11 at all. But to be consistent, I dont see why he has done anything special, above and beyond what Clinton did. Do you give equal credit to Clinton for keeping us safe? Finally, if you go down the road that we are in a post 9/11 regime now and domestic security is tougher than ever (therefore giving credit to W), are you fully prepared to be consistent and heap praise on Obama starting next year....for ever month that passes without another terrorist attack? Attacks on US soil are extremely rare. It doesnt matter who was POTUS during 9/11.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-27-2008, 06:29 PM | #23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Quote:
How about this, I'll agree that Bronco is responsible for BYU's re-emergence if you will agree that he is responsible for the shabby program he inherited. Alternatively lets agree that he is responsible for neither.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
|
06-27-2008, 06:54 PM | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
In my post, I was trying to illustrate the illogic in assigning Bush much credit or blame for either the occurence of subsequent non-occurence. Any attempt to do so is simply partisanship wrangling. The lack of attacks on our soil is not the result of W's policies. It is because domestic attacks are an extreme anomaly. Also, attempts to fault Bush for allowing 9/11 to happen (the "ignoring the intellgence" arguments) is equally silly. Who would have known such a plot was going to occur? It certainly is not Bush's fault. The US receives and assesses terror and security threats every day. This was true before 9/11 and continues to be true today. My confusion goes to why the lack of attacks post 9/11 would be any more creditworthy than the lack of attacks during Clinton's terms? Or during Carter's terms? Or anyone else? If we want to get literal, then sure....I have no problem giving W "credit" for no terrorist attacks since 9/11. It will get awfully tiring giving credit to everyone in the future for continued non-attacks, though. Nobody is answering my Obama question. Will Obama be given huge A marks when, at the end of January 2009, we have experienced no terrorist attacks? I doubt it. But I could be wrong. Hopefully, tex will be praising his name this time next year when we have no more terrorist attacks.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-27-2008, 06:58 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Quote:
These threats were hardly on Clinton's radar screen and the same is true for Bush as he entered office. They came home on 9/11. I think we were all caught with our pants down that day. But once that occurred, I think there is a very specific and in depth analysis to be done regarding the issue of what did we do to prevent further attacks (again, we have done a massive amount in this area) and whether those steps worked. People have gotten very frustrated with how the war is going and with Bush personally which is of course reflected in his approval ratings. Conservatives included. But I think that as time passes it will be easier for people to acknowledge that among his accomplishments was preventing further attacks, whatever his failures may be. The idea that he he and Clinton did essentially the same things is completely without factual support.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
|
06-27-2008, 06:58 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Quote:
EDIT: I think I can get on board with what you are saying if you will agree with me that FDR inherited a safe country, not under attack, from Hoover and that neither should be credited above the other for keeping our country safe from attack. The fact is that we get invaded every hundred years or so. We were just due on December 7, 1941.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo Last edited by UtahDan; 06-27-2008 at 07:05 PM. |
|
06-27-2008, 07:00 PM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
Quote:
|
|
06-27-2008, 07:03 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
Makes no sense to me, but if it makes you feel better about W's presidency, have it.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-27-2008, 07:05 PM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
Quote:
My opinion will be because they percieve Obama as weak that they will attack. It was probably their judgement of Bush and Clinton on his watch was asleep so they were able to prepare well. |
|
06-27-2008, 07:07 PM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
I dont disagree that he did those things. And those are great things. The core of our disagreement seems to be whether those things prevented any real attacks from occurring. You say there is no factual basis for arguing this point. I can only think of 3 examples of foreign attacks on domestic soil. It is a pretty safe bet that we won't see another one for a long time, regardless of whether Tom Ridge heads up Homeland Security. I can build a huge fence around my property. The fence is undeniably a measure of security. But just because I built a fence doesnt mean that someone was going to attack me.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|