Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: raildogg
I thought when 9/11 happened people should have gotten the idea that terrorists are really serious about murdering as many Americans as they can. 3,000 people died that day, New York's economy laid in ruins for much time, its finally coming back up thankfully.
But the point is that people to this day think terrorists cant do us any harm. I see it everyday, from people I meet to the people on these forums. They continue to underestimate the viciousness and the pure evil of these terrorist thugs who plan each day to murder as many Americans as they can.
I'm telling you if we ignore terrorists, which thankfully we are not thanks to Bush, there will be a much worse attack on USA.
Perhaps I've missed it, but I haven't noticed anyone suggesting terrorists cannot do us any harm. On the contrary, I think most people on both sides of the aisle realize that the potential for terrorist attacks is real. The subject of debate is the appropriate response to this risk.
In my opinion, Bush's response to 9/11 was spectacularly incompetent. Some Presidents might have over-reacted, taking draconian actions far out of proportion to the risk. Other Presidents might have been too ineffectual, offering little to improve America's safety. Bush managed to do both.
Bush over-reacted in many highly-visible ways. He shamelessly exploited the tragedy of 9/11 to further his ideological agenda, diverting us into a reckless war that has inflamed the Muslim world, and that will, almost certainly, increase the risk of terrorism for a generation. He's made a mockery of our Constitution, our commitment to basic human rights, and our role as the leader of the free world.
While one might argue that 3,000 deaths warrants such an over-reaction, that is an emotional response, not a reasoned one. IIRC, over 40,000 people die each year in automobile accidents, yet we do not abandon due process to prevent auto fatalities. We do not trample our civil liberties to prevent auto fatilities. We do not invade other countries on trumped-up evidence to prevent auto fatalities.
Conversely, Bush has neglected less dramatic actions that would be far more effective in reducing the risk of terrorism. While we make a great show of harassing air passengers -- to prevent an attack that almost certainly can never happen again -- we do almost nothing to screen air cargo. We fret about a potential nuclear attack, yet we have yet to get serious about securing our ports, the most likely entry point for a nuclear device. Bush is all show and no substance.
9/11 happened because we were sleeping while the terrorists were planning the attacks. Our intelligence services failed us, but the sad thing is that noone was held accountable for it.
I agree. No doubt our intelligence services must bear some of the responsibility for this failure. The Bush adminsitration must shoulder the lion's share, however. They ignored multiple warnings that terrorism was a threat, and did essentially nothing before 9/11 to prevent an attack. Perhaps it would not have made a difference anyway, but there's no excuse for not trying.
Facebook
Twitter