Switch the presidential terms of Bush and Obama...

Hugh Freaking DillonHugh Freaking Dillon Posts: 14,010
edited November 2010 in A Moving Train
In light of all the recent Bush and Obama bashing going on around here from both sides, I thought it would be interesting to see how both sides would see the other's president reacting to their situations. In understanding them, I think it's important to put them in each other's shoes.

If Bush and Obama had their presidential terms at each other's times, how would the US (and the world) be different?

-how would Obama have reacted to 9/11? Would the US have attacked Iraq, and subsequently allowed the death of Saddam? If not, would the US have the same international standing in the world, positive or negative?

-how would Bush have dealt or not dealt with the financial crisis left by Obama in the wake of the war(s)?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,497
    A great question, I wish we could run a realistic simulator to see what would have really happened. It's easy to say what should or shouldn't be done when you don't have to actually make the choices.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • and I think it's an important question for anyone who has criticized either of them (myself included).
    A great question, I wish we could run a realistic simulator to see what would have really happened. It's easy to say what should or shouldn't be done when you don't have to actually make the choices.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    this all depends, was obama appointed to the presidency by the supreme court, and was his brother the governor of florida? because if those things did not happen bush would have never happened to this country in the first place..
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • oh, gimme, you are taking it a little further than I was going for. Just quick and dirty, if Obama was president during Bush's term, how do you think he would have reacted to 9/11? do you think he would have gone to war with Iraq? I know it's tough to speculate, but based on his current policies, what do you think? And what do you think Bush would have done with the economy had he inherited his own mess?
    this all depends, was obama appointed to the presidency by the supreme court, and was his brother the governor of florida? because if those things did not happen bush would have never happened to this country in the first place..
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • Assuming Bush's deciscions about invading Iraq came from (bad) intelligence about the WMDs, I believe Obama would have reacted the same, if he trusts his intelligence reporting, which I believe he does. Had Iraq not been such a terrible disaster, I believe Bush would have also invaded Iran. I also believe that better results in Iraq would have either Bush or Obama invading Iran.

    Since THE FED is above all to blame for the economy being in shambles, Bush's solutions to the economy would have been more bad Keynesian policies-- more "regulation" of businesses, more inflation, more regulators, AND NO REGULATION OF THE REGULATORS.

    Bush and Obama work for the same people, and that is not the American public.
  • BrianGBrianG Posts: 53
    No way would obama have gone to war in Iraq. He probably would have pulled a clinton when we would get attacked during his administration. He might have lobbed a few missiles into a pharmaceutical factory as clinton did. the clinton administration allowed continuing escalation of attacks against us to go largely without a response. Obama would have apologized for us being such a dastardly nation that invited such an attack upon us and tried to make friends with our enemies.

    As for Bush handling of the economy we have right now, well i can promise his focus would not have been to pass a healthcare bill which was not read by those who voted for it that has had the effect of causing business to significantly pull back any potential hiring due to the hostile attitude toward business that currently exists in the white house. I feel safe in saying he would have focused on the economy and creating an environment to get people back to work and he would not have ignored that to focus on his ideological agenda at the expense of the american people. but hey, we do have 99 weeks of unemployment coverage so that really encourages people to try hard to find a job i know.......why try to start a business on your own with all the red tape and regulation required especially when you can get paid to do nothing for two years.....

    ahh, but my biases all show through here.......the only good thing about this president is that Ed no longer feels the need to talk about how terrible the president is during the shows. stick to the music, which is why i fell in love with the band in the first place......so that has been a nice side effect of a failed presidency to date...

    cheers! here is to the upcoming 2011 tour and all the good times to be had which will make all the political bull sh.. fade into the distance.
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    edited November 2010
    .
    Post edited by Jeanwah on
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Paul David wrote:
    In light of all the recent Bush and Obama bashing going on around here from both sides, I thought it would be interesting to see how both sides would see the other's president reacting to their situations. In understanding them, I think it's important to put them in each other's shoes.

    If Bush and Obama had their presidential terms at each other's times, how would the US (and the world) be different?

    -how would Obama have reacted to 9/11? Would the US have attacked Iraq, and subsequently allowed the death of Saddam? If not, would the US have the same international standing in the world, positive or negative?

    -how would Bush have dealt or not dealt with the financial crisis left by Obama in the wake of the war(s)?

    I think I would rather have Clinton in Obamas time slot only because things were great when we had slick Willy in office,I honestly couldn't say why or if he help create a good economy it just was though.

    hard call to make on the Bush time slot but Obama has done his thing carrying over into the Afghan war so who really knows how obama would have handled that issue but one things for sure ,,Obama will never be the same man he was before his presidency.

    also with all the craziness that is politics ya gotta wonder at what level is Bush still involved I mean as far as this war we can't seem to get out of.

    Godfather.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    bush like all former presidents is able to get a copy of the daily intelligence briefings, the same ones that the current president gets every day. so all former presidents are involved at some level if they receive those and if they choose to be. i am not sure if gw bush gets them, but his dad was the first one to choose to get them every day...i guess he never could leave CIA mode...even if gwb gets them every day, if they missed "bin laden determined to strike buildings in the united states", i doubt that there is anything else he would read further into either.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    bush like all former presidents is able to get a copy of the daily intelligence briefings, the same ones that the current president gets every day. so all former presidents are involved at some level if they receive those and if they choose to be. i am not sure if gw bush gets them, but his dad was the first one to choose to get them every day...i guess he never could leave CIA mode...even if gwb gets them every day, if they missed "bin laden determined to strike buildings in the united states", i doubt that there is anything else he would read further into either.

    the reason I ask is because of all the secrete society stuff like the skull and bones that a lot of the presidents were/are connected to also the free masons,I mean is it possible that Reagan was shot caller up till his mental collapse and is it possible that Bush is still in some way calling the shots at some level ? nothing surprises me anymore but it sure would be interesting to know things like this.

    Godfather.
  • I think Bush's admin has received a lot of flack for the "warnings" of the imminent threat before 9/11, but don't they get intelligence like that on a nearly hourly basis that all turn out to be false? how could they have known that was actually going to happen?
    bush like all former presidents is able to get a copy of the daily intelligence briefings, the same ones that the current president gets every day. so all former presidents are involved at some level if they receive those and if they choose to be. i am not sure if gw bush gets them, but his dad was the first one to choose to get them every day...i guess he never could leave CIA mode...even if gwb gets them every day, if they missed "bin laden determined to strike buildings in the united states", i doubt that there is anything else he would read further into either.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    they couldnt know it was actually going to happen and thats why they shouldve done more than they did because they couldnt categorically know it wouldnt.

    saying 'we didnt know' or 'we werent sure' after the fact shows no balls whatsoever. it shows a dangerous complacency when it comes to the safety of the people of the united states of america.
    Paul David wrote:
    I think Bush's admin has received a lot of flack for the "warnings" of the imminent threat
    before 9/11, but don't they get intelligence like that on a nearly hourly basis that all turn out to be false? how could they have known that was actually going to happen?
    bush like all former presidents is able to get a copy of the daily intelligence briefings, the same ones that the current president gets every day. so all former presidents are involved at some level if they receive those and if they choose to be. i am not sure if gw bush gets them, but his dad was the first one to choose to get them every day...i guess he never could leave CIA mode...even if gwb gets them every day, if they missed "bin laden determined to strike buildings in the united states", i doubt that there is anything else he would read further into either.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • but, realistically, with all what we know now of possible targets (a fed building in the US) and how difficult it would have been to screen at airports, not knowing who they'd be looking for, without causing public alarm or major human rights issues, it would have been like finding a needle in a haystack. I don't think anyone showed complacency at all.

    Believe me, I rarely give GWB the benefit of the doubt. I just really have no clue how this could have been prevented.
    they couldnt know it was actually going to happen and thats why they shouldve done more than they did because they couldnt categorically know it wouldnt.

    saying 'we didnt know' or 'we werent sure' after the fact shows no balls whatsoever. it shows a dangerous complacency when it comes to the safety of the people of the united states of america.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    how difficult to screen at airports?? i cant even take a nail file onto a plane nowadays. if they can screen for that after the fact considering it a potential danger, then screening for knives before, under threat (no matter how critical) of a hijack, shouldnt have been such a chore.
    Paul David wrote:
    but, realistically, with all what we know now of possible targets (a fed building in the US) and how difficult it would have been to screen at airports, not knowing who they'd be looking for, without causing public alarm or major human rights issues, it would have been like finding a needle in a haystack. I don't think anyone showed complacency at all.

    Believe me, I rarely give GWB the benefit of the doubt. I just really have no clue how this could have been prevented.
    they couldnt know it was actually going to happen and thats why they shouldve done more than they did because they couldnt categorically know it wouldnt.

    saying 'we didnt know' or 'we werent sure' after the fact shows no balls whatsoever. it shows a dangerous complacency when it comes to the safety of the people of the united states of america.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • how difficult to screen at airports?? i cant even take a nail file onto a plane nowadays. if they can screen for that after the fact considering it a potential danger, then screening for knives before, under threat (no matter how critical) of a hijack, shouldnt have been such a chore.

    Here's the thing though... to get tot the level of screening at airports we are at now, it cost A LOT of money and took a lot of created bureaucracy...

    If the Bush administration and Congress got that briefing in August of 2001 that Al Qaeda was determined to attack the US, they'd have to figure out that it was going to be by commercial airliner, and even then there would be no realistic way to ramp up airport security that quickly, and no way that congress would have acted quickly enough to fund it. Remember, before 9/11, airport security was made up of private security companies that bid on and were awarded contracts at each airport.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • BinauralJamBinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    how difficult to screen at airports?? i cant even take a nail file onto a plane nowadays. if they can screen for that after the fact considering it a potential danger, then screening for knives before, under threat (no matter how critical) of a hijack, shouldnt have been such a chore.


    Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.
  • Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.

    I'd say the content of your post is disconserting, not the nationality of the security.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • it's not.............NOW. they didn't have a clue what they were even looking for, or where. Can you imagine the job it would have been to make sure all airport security all over the country were up to speed on new measures that they didn't know how to implement?

    keep in mind the mindset of your average north american prior to 9/11. NONE OF US, citizen, government official, military, ever thought something like that would happen. So part of it was ignorant arrogance on all our parts.
    how difficult to screen at airports?? i cant even take a nail file onto a plane nowadays. if they can screen for that after the fact considering it a potential danger, then screening for knives before, under threat (no matter how critical) of a hijack, shouldnt have been such a chore.
    Paul David wrote:
    but, realistically, with all what we know now of possible targets (a fed building in the US) and how difficult it would have been to screen at airports, not knowing who they'd be looking for, without causing public alarm or major human rights issues, it would have been like finding a needle in a haystack. I don't think anyone showed complacency at all.

    Believe me, I rarely give GWB the benefit of the doubt. I just really have no clue how this could have been prevented.
    they couldnt know it was actually going to happen and thats why they shouldve done more than they did because they couldnt categorically know it wouldnt.

    saying 'we didnt know' or 'we werent sure' after the fact shows no balls whatsoever. it shows a dangerous complacency when it comes to the safety of the people of the united states of america.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.
    why is that funny and why would it be disconcerting?
  • g under pg under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200


    Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.

    The last person you would need to worry about is the nationality of the airport security. They more than any others would and should be checked out as whether they would bring harm to any of us.

    What should be disconcerning to you while at the airport is whether or not you are carrying anything on the plane you shouldn't. They will do their jobs just fine as long as you are doing yours.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • BinauralJamBinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.
    there is only one race, the human one...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • BinauralJamBinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.
    there is only one race, the human one...


    Thats a nice sentiment, but I don't agree.
  • g under p wrote:


    Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.

    The last person you would need to worry about is the nationality of the airport security. They more than any others would and should be checked out as whether they would bring harm to any of us.
    What should be disconcerning to you while at the airport is whether or not you are carrying anything on the plane you shouldn't. They will do their jobs just fine as long as you are doing yours.

    Peace
    i have a huge problem with that comment.

    why more than any others should they be checked out as to whether they would bring any harm to us? they are Americans. just like you. they should be treated exactly the same as anyone else. not worse, not better, the same.
  • Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.

    fucks sake. what's wrong with some of you people. educate your fucking selves.

    All terrorists are Muslims except the 94% that aren't.

    CNN recently published an article entitled Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated; according to a study released by Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “the terrorist threat posed by radicalized Muslim-Americans has been exaggerated.”

    Yet, Americans continue to live in mortal fear of radical Islam, a fear propagated and inflamed by right wing Islamophobes. If one follows the cable news networks, it seems as if all terrorists are Muslims. It has even become axiomatic in some circles to chant: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terrorists are Muslims.” Muslims and their “leftist dhimmi allies” respond feebly, mentioning Waco as the one counter example, unwittingly affirming the belief that “nearly all terrorists are Muslims.”

    But perception is not reality. The data simply does not support such a hasty conclusion. On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom).
    http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/ ... 2_2005.htm

    According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

    Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their “leftist dhimmi allies” cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the “Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times” narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and “proves” the preconceived narrative. It is to such an extent that the average American cannot remember any Jewish or Latino terrorist; why should he when he has never even heard of the Jewish Defense League or the Ejercito Popular Boricua Macheteros? Surely what he does not know does not exist!

    The Islamophobes claim that Islam is intrinsically a terrorist religion. The proof? Well, just about every terrorist attack is Islamic, they retort. Unfortunately for them, that’s not quite true. More like six percent. Using their defunct logic, these right wingers ought now to conclude that nearly all acts of terrorism are committed by Latinos (or Jews). Let them dare say it…they couldn’t; it would be political and social suicide to say such a thing. Most Americans would shut down such talk as bigoted; yet, similar statements continue to be said of Islam, without any repercussions.

    The Islamophobes live in a fantasy world where everyone is supposedly too “politically correct” to criticize Islam and Muslims. Yet, the reality is the exact opposite: you can get away with saying anything against the crescent. Can you imagine the reaction if I said that Latinos should be profiled because after all they are the ones who commit the most terrorism in the country? (For the record: I don’t believe in such profiling, because I am–unlike the right wing nutters–a believer in American ideals.)

    Nobody is saying that Islamic terrorism is not a matter of concern, but it’s grossly exaggerated.

    piechart1.jpg

    Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database
  • Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.
    there is only one race, the human one...


    Thats a nice sentiment, but I don't agree.
    they are americans. just like you. you are no better than them. they are no better than you.

    the racist comments in this thread are disgusting.

    Thousands of innocent lives were lost on September 11, 2001, and our hearts and prayers go out to their families and loved ones. For several hundred of the victims of 9/11, grief and sorrow has been compounded by constant suspicion, bias, hatred, and attacks on the faith they hold dear.

    Imagine being the family of Salman Hamdani. The 23-year-old New York City police cadet was a part-time ambulance driver, incoming medical student, and devout Muslim. When he disappeared on September 11, law enforcement officials came to his family, seeking him for questioning in relation to the terrorist attacks. They allegedly believed he was somehow involved. His whereabouts were undetermined for over six months, until his remains were finally identified. He was found near the North Tower, with his EMT medical bag beside him, presumably doing everything he could to help those in need. His family could finally rest, knowing that he died the hero they always knew him to be.

    Or imagine being Baraheen Ashrafi, nine months pregnant with her second child. Her husband, Mohammad Chowdhury, was a waiter at Windows of the World restaurant, on the top floors of Tower One. The morning of September 11, they prayed salaat-l-fajr (the pre-dawn prayer) together, and he went off to work. She never saw him again. Their son, Farqad, was born 48 hours after the attacks -- one of the first 9/11 orphans to be born. In an interview with CTV Canada, she relates that in the months to follow, she mourned for her husband and endured the hostility of some ignorant people around her. "When they saw me ... I'm wearing a scarf. There is a hate look."

    Or consider Rahma Salie, a passenger on American Airlines #11 that crashed into the North Tower. Rahma, a Muslim of Sri Lankan origin, was traveling with her husband Michael (a convert to Islam) to attend a friend's wedding in California. Rahma was 7 months pregnant with their first child. According to the Independent UK (October 11, 2001), Rahma's name was initially put on an FBI watch list, because her "Muslim-sounding" name was on the passenger manifest, and her travel patterns were similar to those of the hijackers (she was a computer consultant living in Boston). Although her name was eventually removed from the list, several of her family members were barred from taking flights to her memorial service. Her mother, Haleema, said, "I would like everyone to know that she was a Muslim, she is a Muslim and we are victims too, of this tragic incident.”
  • g under pg under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
    g under p wrote:


    Last time i got on a plane was two years ago, of out Lagaudia, which i believe was one of the airports the hijackers came from, what struck me as funny was ALL of the security guards and i do mean ALL of them were Middle Eastern. I don't know what they were back in 2001, but disconcerning to say the least.

    The last person you would need to worry about is the nationality of the airport security. They more than any others would and should be checked out as whether they would bring harm to any of us.
    What should be disconcerning to you while at the airport is whether or not you are carrying anything on the plane you shouldn't. They will do their jobs just fine as long as you are doing yours.

    Peace
    i have a huge problem with that comment.

    why more than any others should they be checked out as to whether they would bring any harm to us? they are Americans. just like you. they should be treated exactly the same as anyone else. not worse, not better, the same.
    .
    Yes you are correct, I pondered for a moment what I was about to say before posting but went ahead anyway. I appologize for the statement.....I must remember my license plates...STYHUMN

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Because i'm worried there gona let there cousin through, ya know with a bomb. There are a few other races in N.Y., perhaps mix it up.
    there is only one race, the human one...


    Thats a nice sentiment, but I don't agree.
    i wasn't asking if you agreed. scientifically we are ALL human beings. we have the same 46 chromosomes, the only difference is the genetic variation for the amount of melanin in an individual being. muslim is not a race, it is a faith, same as christian and hindu, and every other form of religion. what faith one person adheres to does not make them anything other than a human being that follows a particular set of beliefs.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    we dont know what were looking for so we look for nothing???

    the mindset of your average american is a moot point when it comes to national security. but when the people supposedly protecting you are hamstrung by the attitude of who would dare attack the US on her own soil if thats the case then that is a major problem. i know i know its easy to say all this after the fact. you can say they didnt know specifics all you like and so werent sure how to act. but the point was they were warned and they chose not to do enough to counter that threat. were they looking for something so obvious it was gonna jump up and bite them on the arse???

    i just think someone dropped the ball on this. i always have and i always will.
    Paul David wrote:
    it's not.............NOW. they didn't have a clue what they were even looking for, or where. Can you imagine the job it would have been to make sure all airport security all over the country were up to speed on new measures that they didn't know how to implement?

    keep in mind the mindset of your average north american prior to 9/11. NONE OF US, citizen, government official, military, ever thought something like that would happen. So part of it was ignorant arrogance on all our parts.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    we dont know what were looking for so we look for nothing???

    the mindset of your average american is a moot point when it comes to national security. but when the people supposedly protecting you are hamstrung by the attitude of who would dare attack the US on her own soil if thats the case then that is a major problem. i know i know its easy to say all this after the fact. you can say they didnt know specifics all you like and so werent sure how to act. but the point was they were warned and they chose not to do enough to counter that threat. were they looking for something so obvious it was gonna jump up and bite them on the arse???

    i just think someone dropped the ball on this. i always have and i always will.
    Paul David wrote:
    it's not.............NOW. they didn't have a clue what they were even looking for, or where. Can you imagine the job it would have been to make sure all airport security all over the country were up to speed on new measures that they didn't know how to implement?

    keep in mind the mindset of your average north american prior to 9/11. NONE OF US, citizen, government official, military, ever thought something like that would happen. So part of it was ignorant arrogance on all our parts.

    9/11 plot was basically a needle in a stack of needles. I wish somebody could have done something it was sad, truly one of the saddest days I can remember, but the measures taken before 9/11 happened in order to stop something like it would have been seen as fascist. Basically everything in the patriot act plus some.
    More importantly there is no way to stop people from attacking you, except, obviously, not doing the things they claim as the reason for attacking you. If you are going to continue those things, in this case being involved in the middle east region as well as our continued support for Israel, then you need to be prepared for everything. If that isn't how your citizens want to live, and I know that I would not want to give up civil liberties to the government in the name of protection from "evil doers", then there will be consequences. Every action has a reaction. If the Government truly wanted to protect us we would treat everyone in the middle east the same...Peace would be very attainable through not picking a side, but simply saying that war isn't an option and slapping any warring faction hard...Israel, Palestine, Iran, Syria...just treat everyone with respect and stand up for peace. I am afraid it is too late now, we have created a lot of enemies and they have VERY long memories.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
Sign In or Register to comment.