I brought up the nobel prize because I needed to quote the president on something. It is one thing for me to assert that the man feels a certain way, but it is more credible if I quote him. Anyway, not important.
You are correct, there have been a higher frequency in the number of attacks over time since Obama has taken office. A good approach would be to look at what has changed since he took on the office to see if we can find a causal link.
We have (domestic, per your last post):
1. Ft Hood. It is debatable whether that dude was an extremist or simply crazy. I am going with single crazy dude since he was not part of an islamic organization, but it is clear he acted alone.
2. Austin. This was the single act of a crazy person. There is no bigger conspiracy.
3. Christmas attack. This was actual bonafied Islamic terrorism. It was in the air though. So this is in the same category as the shoe bomb.
4. Alabama, another crazy dude.
Major policy antiterrorism changes.
1. Intent to close down Gitmo.
2. Surge in Afghanistan
3. Seeking prosecution in civilian court
4. Draw down in Iraq.
Again, I don't think there is much you can do against lone crazy people. I think you agree, as you said we have a lot of soft targets.
If you look at the list. The only real islamic terrorism is the one that happened on Christmas. I will admit, Obama was a little slow to get on the ball on this one and no the holidays aren't a good excuse. But this attack came out of yemen so I do not see a link between this and Obama's policy changes since he took over from Bush.
In fact, he is taking steps to combat it, a lot of the extra money he sent towards the pentagon is for special forces and drone operations in yemen.
