View Poll Results: Would a devastating al-Qaida attack on America during the current administration spel

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    6 27.27%
  • No

    13 59.09%
  • Other - explained in post

    3 13.64%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: 9/11 revisited

  1. #11
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    09-26-12 @ 12:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    I voted "No".

    Regardless of the warnings received from Extremists and Homeland Security, a terrorist attack of the scale of 9/11 would act in the same way 9/11 proper did. People would rally.

    I do not think even Michael Weiner, Limbaugh, nor any other 'Bamaer Bashers would live through the public repercussions of openly criticizing the Gov't at such a time.

    Terrorism is a tool that can be utilized by both "good" and "bad". Terrorism is magic with many masters.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  2. #12
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 06:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    There's no way a terror strike on US soil could not spell disaster for the current administration.

    Moral philosophies aside, the current administration has taken a stance on how detainees at Gitmo should be handled, and how confronting terrorist organizations in the world should be done. That stance has as its foundation a repudiation of the policies of the Bush administration.

    If that repudiation is followed in short order by a terrorist attack, I cannot see how the criticism of "at least Bush kept America safe" is to be avoided. The current administration acknowledges that the policies of the Bush administration produced actionable intelligence; the distance from that acknowledgment to the conclusion that those techniques allowed US intelligence and military personnel to thwart terror strikes aimed at the US is very short. Those policies have been set aside, and if a terror strike slips through, especially if an after-action analysis reveals that a detainee might have information that could have allowed the US to stop the attack before it started, question the wisdom of that choice is almost reflexive.

    Further, the argument of the current administration has been that the policies of the Bush administration have left America less rather than more safe. A terror strike during the current administration is a direct and substantial challenge to that argument.

    A terror strike on US soil at once knocks down every pillar supporting the current administration's foreign and homeland security policies. As the ones who put those pillars in place, the current administration will not easily dodge accountability for their seeming failure.

    The collapse of Neville Chamberlain's government in the early days of WWII, after he having famously proclaimed "peace for our time" right after Munich, is an instructive example of the political price paid for being wrong in matters martial.

  3. #13
    Professor
    Shadow Serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Last Seen
    07-18-14 @ 05:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    It would really depend when it happens and what are the policy changes the Obama Administration does. I'm afraid I am biased enough against Obama and his administration that I could not think clearly on it. Bush was not blamed over much since he had only been in office 9 months and while Al-Quieda was a known concern, not many in the intelegence community had an idea that 9/11 or somthing analagous could occur. Obama on the other hand, has the situation that yes we now know to a large extent what they are willing to do and their capablities. He would get simular cover if a terrorist strike happens in a unexpected way.

  4. #14
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    09-26-12 @ 12:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    There's no way a terror strike on US soil could not spell disaster for the current administration.

    Moral philosophies aside, the current administration has taken a stance on how detainees at Gitmo should be handled, and how confronting terrorist organizations in the world should be done. That stance has as its foundation a repudiation of the policies of the Bush administration.
    I do not agree that it is a repudiation of the Bush strategy, especially at the foundation.
    I believe that the Obama plan, on confronting detainees, is only aesthetically different. Obama tears down Guantanamo and will build another prison to "hold" the detainees while they are undergoing trials.
    In a court, I do not believe that the detainees will be as protected by international laws as the Obama administration says (nor do I think the administration will interfere). These terrorists will be tried by Americans and their fate will be determined by Americans.

    If that repudiation is followed in short order by a terrorist attack, I cannot see how the criticism of "at least Bush kept America safe" is to be avoided.
    I think if there is to be a massive terrorist attack the outcries of the dissenting voices of "at least Bush kept America safe" will beast the voices of the current administration using the terrorist attack to it's advantage (banding people together, waving American flags, finding a source to channel frustration). I think the phrase will quickly be dealt with by an all too familiar ideal of bi-partisanship.

    There will be blame put on intelligence agencies, as the Bush admin did.

    A terror strike on US soil at once knocks down every pillar supporting the current administration's foreign and homeland security policies. As the ones who put those pillars in place, the current administration will not easily dodge accountability for their seeming failure.
    i agree with this point. The aesthetic appeal of Obama's administration's foreign policy will erode like an Appalachian river-bank after a foot of solid rain.
    Though I do think the administration is crafty enough to dodge accountability. It is a grand characteristic of all administrations!
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  5. #15
    Advisor Polynikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-04-13 @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    522

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    We must always remember these words of James Madison:

    "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
    "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Jefferson

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: 9/11 revisited

    No. Of course not.

    Absolutely nothing bad that happens while The MESSIAH is president will be the Democrats fault.

    The media won't allow it to be that way.

    There's always Rush Limbaugh.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •