Obama finally brings change to the US

[kyzr]

Who was president when the worse attack on american soil happened?

Keep this question in mind....

So far it's still FDR(D).

I think a Japanese fleet of carriers, warplanes dropping bombs and strafing thousands of sailors and innocent civilians in the process destroying several Battleships, numerous aircraft, and destroying military and civilian facilities, is a bit worse then 18 terrorists flying jets into three different buildings.

Pearl Harbor had about 1,800 KIA, while 9/11 had almost 3,000. In constant dollars its probably close.

The scary part is that Obama still has 3-years to allow more terror attacks. IMHO this one plane isn't the biggest attack that AQ has planned for the US during Obama's term. Lets hope that Obama fires Janet and puts someone who knows what they're doing in-charge of Homeland Security.

 

[mudwhistle]

Keep this question in mind....

So far it's still FDR(D).

I think a Japanese fleet of carriers, warplanes dropping bombs and strafing thousands of sailors and innocent civilians in the process destroying several Battleships, numerous aircraft, and destroying military and civilian facilities, is a bit worse then 18 terrorists flying jets into three different buildings.

Pearl Harbor had about 1,800 KIA, while 9/11 had almost 3,000. In constant dollars its probably close.

The scary part is that Obama still has 3-years to allow more terror attacks. IMHO this one plane isn't the biggest attack that AQ has planned for the US during Obama's term. Lets hope that Obama fires Janet and puts someone who knows what they're doing in-charge of Homeland Security.

Give me a fucken break. I consider a massive Navy with the ability to destroy a city more of a threat then a bunch of idiots with box-cutters.

 

[kyzr]

Give me a fucken break. I consider a massive Navy with the ability to destroy a city more of a threat then a bunch of idiots with box-cutters.

The size of the attacking force has little to do with the "worst attack on American soil". IMHO its dead and dollars that determine severity. One crazy dictator can push a button and make a city disappear. So the best we can push for is to let the crazies know that they and theirs get lit up if they attack the US.

 

[Rinata]

This post is a nonstarter. The plot was in the works for over a year. It was going to happen because our intel was broken from the last administration. But, after 9-11-2001 there was a lot Bush did to stop future attacks on America....successfully I might add.
other than that....carry on, zona.

ok, here is how he dealt with 9/11....by going to war with Iraq!

Fact. The worst attack on United states soil happened on his watch. He dealt with it by going to war with a different country, yet somehow this made us safe? How safe were we on 9/11? Are you a comedian or something?

You are still not blaming him for the attack, yet it is well known he was warned, over and over. Just like he was told there were no WMD'S. You and your type always say, bad intel...go back now, read the intel. HE WAS TOLD IT WOULD HAPPEN.

Don't be a hack. Believe me, if we were attacked like that on last month, you would not have said it was bush's fault, it would have been all about Obama and you know it.

Gee, we are still suppose to be giving Obama slack, because he hasn't been in the job that long and so many things going on. Bush was in office for less than eight months and 9/11happened. The history I remember was we went to war in Afghanistan. Also the worst attack on US soil was still the Civil War. The War of 1812 I believe had more causalties as too. I firmly believe that Obama's attack on the US health care system will kill far more people than 9/11 did. I would estimate 20-30 times more each YEAR.

Oh, brother.

 

[CMike]

So far it's still FDR(D).

I think a Japanese fleet of carriers, warplanes dropping bombs and strafing thousands of sailors and innocent civilians in the process destroying several Battleships, numerous aircraft, and destroying military and civilian facilities, is a bit worse then 18 terrorists flying jets into three different buildings.

Pearl Harbor had about 1,800 KIA, while 9/11 had almost 3,000. In constant dollars its probably close.

The scary part is that Obama still has 3-years to allow more terror attacks. IMHO this one plane isn't the biggest attack that AQ has planned for the US during Obama's term. Lets hope that Obama fires Janet and puts someone who knows what they're doing in-charge of Homeland Security.

Give me a fucken break. I consider a massive Navy with the ability to destroy a city more of a threat then a bunch of idiots with box-cutters.

Those idiots of box cutters took down the WTC, murdered over 3,000 civilians, damaged the Pentagon, and caused an ecomonic demise in this country.

 

[CMike]

Also Pear Harbor killed mainly military people, 911 murdered civilians. There is a big difference.

 

[mudwhistle]

Pearl Harbor had about 1,800 KIA, while 9/11 had almost 3,000. In constant dollars its probably close.

The scary part is that Obama still has 3-years to allow more terror attacks. IMHO this one plane isn't the biggest attack that AQ has planned for the US during Obama's term. Lets hope that Obama fires Janet and puts someone who knows what they're doing in-charge of Homeland Security.

Give me a fucken break. I consider a massive Navy with the ability to destroy a city more of a threat then a bunch of idiots with box-cutters.

Those idiots of box cutters took down the WTC, murdered over 3,000 civilians, damaged the Pentagon, and caused an ecomonic demise in this country.

So what you're saying is we should have declared war?

Obviously you think 9/11 was worse then Pearl Harbor. So by that measure anyone who posed a threat to us anywhere became the enemy and thus had some payback coming. If they supported the terrorists that committed this terrible act then they were our enemies.

Right??????

 

[CMike]

Give me a fucken break. I consider a massive Navy with the ability to destroy a city more of a threat then a bunch of idiots with box-cutters.

Those idiots of box cutters took down the WTC, murdered over 3,000 civilians, damaged the Pentagon, and caused an ecomonic demise in this country.

So what you're saying is we should have declared war?

We did go to war? Remember? Fight against terrorism? Afghanistan? Iraq? That was all part of the war.

The idea was not to wait for the terrorists to attack the US, but to find them where they are and getting support and crushing them there.

Obviously you think 9/11 was worse then Pearl Harbor. So by that measure anyone who posed a threat to us anywhere became the enemy and thus had some payback coming. If they supported the terrorists that committed this terrible act then they were our enemies.

Right??????

Wrong. 911 was the worst attack in american history. 3,000 american civilians killed in our mainland. It was the worst by far.

Pres. Bush declared a war against terrorism. Iraq and Afghanistan were long time supporters of terrorism. Heck Hussein tried to assassinate an american president.

What gives terrorists it's ability to execute operations are its state sponsors. The people who give them safe haven, arms, intelligence, logistical support, etc.

And for some strange reason in Iraq, the US kept capturing and killing Al Qaida leaders.

 

[Claudette]

Those idiots of box cutters took down the WTC, murdered over 3,000 civilians, damaged the Pentagon, and caused an ecomonic demise in this country.

So what you're saying is we should have declared war?

We did go to war? Remember? Fight against terrorism? Afghanistan? Iraq? That was all part of the war.

The idea was not to wait for the terrorists to attack the US, but to find them where they are and getting support and crushing them there.

Obviously you think 9/11 was worse then Pearl Harbor. So by that measure anyone who posed a threat to us anywhere became the enemy and thus had some payback coming. If they supported the terrorists that committed this terrible act then they were our enemies.

Right??????

Wrong. 911 was the worst attack in american history. 3,000 american civilians killed in our mainland. It was the worst by far.

Pres. Bush declared a war against terrorism. Iraq and Afghanistan were long time supporters of terrorism. Heck Hussein tried to assassinate an american president.

What gives terrorists it's ability to execute operations are its state sponsors. The people who give them safe haven, arms, intelligence, logistical support, etc.

And for some strange reason in Iraq, the US kept capturing and killing Al Qaida leaders.

You are so right. 9-11 was the worst attack of Americans on American soil while not at war. Bush did declare war on terroism. Not Congress. Pres Bush.

We will continue to deal with terrorism as long as other countries harbor and protect the terrorists.

You can say what you want about Bush but he and his administration kept this country safe for 7 years. What they did behind the scenes to make that happen is something I don't give a shit about as long as it happened. .

AS for him being able to prevent 9-11?? I dont' think any president could have done that. They had warnings but America is a big place. Where do you start looking for a terrorist attack?? Could just as easily been in Los Angeles, Philedelphia, Detroit or any other big city across this big, big country.

I just hope and pray that Obama has the same set of balls that Bush had iwhen it comes to protecting this country.

 

[logical4u]

Yeap, same good ole Janet that called us Veterans who were at the TEA Parties possible terrorists.

Janet's approach was not an effective way to win over those who did not share her perspective. In fact, making such incendiary remarks could probably be classified as political stupidity. Whether you agree/disagree with Janet, one must admit that her choice of words was not befitting the office she held. Janet's approach was contrary to what Obama promised with regard to bi-partisanship and, therefore, it was only appropriate that she step down.

Has the President or any of his staff done anything that could be "bi-partisan"? This is the most devisive man to ever hold the office.

 

[CMike]

So what you're saying is we should have declared war?

We did go to war? Remember? Fight against terrorism? Afghanistan? Iraq? That was all part of the war.

The idea was not to wait for the terrorists to attack the US, but to find them where they are and getting support and crushing them there.

Obviously you think 9/11 was worse then Pearl Harbor. So by that measure anyone who posed a threat to us anywhere became the enemy and thus had some payback coming. If they supported the terrorists that committed this terrible act then they were our enemies.

Right??????

Wrong. 911 was the worst attack in american history. 3,000 american civilians killed in our mainland. It was the worst by far.

Pres. Bush declared a war against terrorism. Iraq and Afghanistan were long time supporters of terrorism. Heck Hussein tried to assassinate an american president.

What gives terrorists it's ability to execute operations are its state sponsors. The people who give them safe haven, arms, intelligence, logistical support, etc.

And for some strange reason in Iraq, the US kept capturing and killing Al Qaida leaders.

You are so right. 9-11 was the worst attack of Americans on American soil while not at war. Bush did declare war on terroism. Not Congress. Pres Bush.

We will continue to deal with terrorism as long as other countries harbor and protect the terrorists.

You can say what you want about Bush but he and his administration kept this country safe for 7 years. What they did behind the scenes to make that happen is something I don't give a shit about as long as it happened. .

AS for him being able to prevent 9-11?? I dont' think any president could have done that. They had warnings but America is a big place. Where do you start looking for a terrorist attack?? Could just as easily been in Los Angeles, Philedelphia, Detroit or any other big city across this big, big country.

I just hope and pray that Obama has the same set of balls that Bush had iwhen it comes to protecting this country.

Spot on.

 

[CMike]

What Pres. Bush did was take the fight to the terrorists and their state sponsors, instead of just waiting for the terrorists to hit us again.

 

[Zona]

What Pres. Bush did was take the fight to the terrorists and their state sponsors, instead of just waiting for the terrorists to hit us again.

In Iraq....while looking for WMD's...directly after 9/11.

He was wrong on EVERY account.

 

[CMike]

He was right on target.

Don't worry Obama is dismantelling it and so we have had 3 terrorist attacks within America .

Bush had it right. Obama is a moron who is making it a law enforcement issue again rather than a war.

The proof is in the results.

 

[Claudette]

What Pres. Bush did was take the fight to the terrorists and their state sponsors, instead of just waiting for the terrorists to hit us again.

In Iraq....while looking for WMD's...directly after 9/11.

He was wrong on EVERY account.

No. He wasn't wrong on every count. Was he perfect? Not hardly but when it comes to protecting this country he was right and I thank God for that fact every day.

 

[Claudette]

He was right on target.

Don't worry Obama is dismantelling it and so we have had 3 terrorist attacks within America .

Bush had it right. Obama is a moron who is making it a law enforcement issue again rather than a war.

The proof is in the results.

Thats my big fear. That OL"BO will dismantle everything Bush and his administration did to keep this country safe. Terrorism is not a law enforcement issue. Its war. Obama better get his head out of his ass and realize that. These terrorists aren't afraid of him and will certainly try for more attaacks here in the US. He ain't no Bush when it comes to protecting this country and boy does it show.

 

[CMike]

What Obama should do is find where these terrorist fuckers are in Yemen, and send american forces to kill them. If the government cooperates great, if not that's too bad for them

But noooooo. That's not the liberal way. That would only upset the terrorists, according the intellectually challenged liberals. The liberal way is to wait until a terrorist attack is successful, and then prosecute the person doing it.

They are clueless, that they need to stop the attack before it happens, and kill those that plan the attacks, before the plans are successful.

Of course, Obama is too busy jet setting in Hawaii, to even make a public statement on camera.

This country is screwed.

At least Pres. Bush learned from 911 and changed the policy from prosecuting terrorists after the terrorist act, to going where the terrorist are hiding and killing them there.

Not only is Obama is a schmuck, he is clueless, and dangerous to this country.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What Pres. Bush did was take the fight to the terrorists and their state sponsors, instead of just waiting for the terrorists to hit us again.

In Iraq....while looking for WMD's...directly after 9/11.

He was wrong on EVERY account.

Wrong again Zona. 18 months is not directly after anything. Do play again.

 

[CMike]

The connection between the terrorist that attacked the recuriting station, and the new terrorist attacks is both were in Yemen.

Maybe Yemen should be a new target for the US.

 

[CMike]

It's time for US forces to make a visit to Yemen.

Terrorism Havens: Yemen - Council on Foreign Relations

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BR0KU20091228