Is September 10 America back?

Originally posted by bill718
With all due respect... the number of people killed makes A LOT of difference! It's one thing to monitor a growing threat abroad, it's quite another to allow terrorists to hijack airplanes and fly them into the Twin Towers while America's commander in chief reads a childrens book. You really think Clinton did nothing? What was Clinton supposed to do? Invade ...[text shortened]... perfect was superior. Bush's response to terrorism was still stupid. Deal with it!

Deal with this!!!

Originally posted by bill718
With all due respect... the number of people killed makes A LOT of difference! It's one thing to monitor a growing threat abroad, it's quite another to allow terrorists to hijack airplanes and fly them into the Twin Towers while America's commander in chief reads a childrens book. You really think Clinton did nothing? What was Clinton supposed to do? Invade ...[text shortened]... perfect was superior. Bush's response to terrorism was still stupid. Deal with it!

why aren't we safer?

did something happen and i missed it?

Originally posted by FMF
The Bush administration got a specific warning that al-Qaeda was going to fly passenger planes into skyscrapers. It was shelved. What's this got to do with the previous (pro-choice) president?

The Bush administration basically continued the policies of the Clinton administration regarding Bin Laden, so in fact blame has to go on both. It was as your initial post says a September 10th mentality.

There was intelligence about the use of aircraft in terrorism dating back to the capture of the 1993 WTC bombers, in Ramsi Yusef's laptop, as well as a plan to crash multiple aircraft over the Pacific.

The 9/11 commission placed a great deal of blame for "not connecting the dots" on the poor/non existent communications between domestic and foreign intelligence services (FB( and CIA). That was known as the Gurrelick Wall.

The key thing to remember is the actions that Bush and his administration took after 9/11, and the fairly obvious fact that in 7 years there have been no more attacks either on US soil, or on our embassies or assets other than in a war zone.

I would say that a great many Americans now have a September 10th mentality, but they ought to remember that the jihad movement is faith based and will not tire out and go away. It is patient, and will be persistent.

Originally posted by bill718
With all due respect... the number of people killed makes A LOT of difference! It's one thing to monitor a growing threat abroad, it's quite another to allow terrorists to hijack airplanes and fly them into the Twin Towers while America's commander in chief reads a childrens book. You really think Clinton did nothing? What was Clinton supposed to do? Invade ...[text shortened]... perfect was superior. Bush's response to terrorism was still stupid. Deal with it!

You claim, "Clintons response to terrorism, while not perfect was superior. Bush's response to terrorism was still stupid"

Clinton's response was to treat terrorists somewhat like carjackers. Try them in our courts for years and then sentence them to long prison terms while lawyers worked to get them freed, and their associates continued their plans. An intercept of Bin Laden, stated that it was Clinton's bailing out of Mogadishu, that convinced him that the US was a paper tiger, and would not seriously respond to any attack.

There was no serious response to the terror attacks during the Clinton years. None.

Bush's response was serious, direct, firm, and prompt, both foreign and domestic, and during it all he had to contend with whining liberals who wanted to go back to the do nothing policies of Clinton.

To be fair to Clinton, Bush Senior, and even Ronald Reagan didn't take the jihadist threat seriously. W did.

You ask, "Are we any safer?" You say No, but for almost 8 years no US assets have been hit either at home or abroad. Is the threat still there? Certainly is, but we aren't naively meeting bombs with resolutions, and diplomatic double talk. Someday you may change your tune and thank the marines, instead of demeaning them. Force and violence usually needs to be met by greater force and greater violence. People who have a religious dedication to killing and maiming you, aren't likely to respond to your making nice to them.