Democrats working with Al Quaida for Oct. Surprise

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please stop the semantic games.

blamed is a loaded word in and of itself...but "blamed for failing to stop" is almost like the old lawyer gotcha about wife beating....

quote:

NEWSMAX.COM-By a margin of 2 to 1, Americans blame ex-president Clinton over President Bush for failing to stop last September's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, a new Fox News/Opinion Dynamics survey reveals.

This is not what keith meant and you know it tweeker! These discussions just spin and cycle.
 
that depends on what the meaning of "blame" is.


i'm just saying there were conservatives who laid the blame squarely at bubba's feet.
 
I can't see an "October Surprise" terrorist attack having the same effect that it did in Spain. I doubt that the U.S. would turn tail and run like little girls (see Spain). If the American people would back down, they are done as a nation.
 
What bothers me is not that an attack here would be good or bad for Bush, it's that I am sure that Kerry would blame Bush, rather than blame Al Qaeda.

That really kicks me off.

Keith.
 
quote:

I can't see an "October Surprise" terrorist attack having the same effect that it did in Spain. I doubt that the U.S. would turn tail and run like little girls (see Spain). If the American people would back down, they are done as a nation.

No, and it would assure 4 more years of Bush having the unthrottled reins on our military and "borrow and spend" politics.

The Dems have no one to put in office this round. They're waiting to put Hillary in the oval office next term. The Rubs will almost assure that if the bill for their "borrow and spend" habits comes due in Bush's second term. Ronnie's spending habits cost Bush Sr. his second term and I think the cycle of "spend to pay" has quicked since then. The "trick" that the Rubs need to pull off is to allow a Dem victory after Bush conpletes his second ....and have the full weight of their damage (borrow and spend) fall during the Dems term in office.
 
I'm not so sure guys. I believe a terrorist attack would have exactly the same effect it did in Spain. People would panic and vote for Kerry under the pretense that Bush couldn't possibly stop terrorists and kerry could. I have lost a lot of faith in this country.....not the military; but the civilian population. The country has lost much of its guts. We will never be as strong and united as we were back in WW2......in my humble opinion, this country's FINEST hour!
The Liberty Ships, the Victory Gardens, Rosie the rivetter, metal collection for the war effort, the vision and determination.....these are things this country will never see again. Many of us these days are only worried about getting the biggest SUV to impress the Jonhs and the endless pursuit of the top regarless how many people you run over.
frown.gif

Heck, these days you don't even get what you paid for and when we come accross someone who is honest (ie, Auto RX, Lube Control) we are shocked at such behavior.

Have a good day!
 
quote:

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

quote:

I can't see an "October Surprise" terrorist attack having the same effect that it did in Spain. I doubt that the U.S. would turn tail and run like little girls (see Spain). If the American people would back down, they are done as a nation.

No, and it would assure 4 more years of Bush having the unthrottled reins on our military and "borrow and spend" politics.

The Dems have no one to put in office this round. They're waiting to put Hillary in the oval office next term. The Rubs will almost assure that if the bill for their "borrow and spend" habits comes due in Bush's second term. Ronnie's spending habits cost Bush Sr. his second term and I think the cycle of "spend to pay" has quicked since then. The "trick" that the Rubs need to pull off is to allow a Dem victory after Bush conpletes his second ....and have the full weight of their damage (borrow and spend) fall during the Dems term in office.


Gary, I agree that there are going to being economic repercussions, not only from the the military spending, but from the Government current and capital account deficits as well as the enormous consumer debt that exists. IMHO, this will come home to roost in Bush's 2nd term. Imediate steps should be taken, but we know that isn't going to happen in an election year. Don't get me wrong, I would rather see Pee Wee Herman in office than J. Kerry. Bush didn't make this financial climate, it is purely a cyclical issue. Sept. 11 had a horrific long term effect on the econmy and the Iraq war, while expensive, is prudent in the long run. The coming economic hardship will get pinned on Bush, but its been a generation in the making. IMHO!
 
quote:

Sept. 11 had a horrific long term effect on the econmy and the Iraq war, while expensive, is prudent in the long run. The coming economic hardship will get pinned on Bush, but its been a generation in the making. IMHO!

Yes, I agree. We've been heading for the economic cliff for a while. It's hard for fight politics as usual when, so far, most of our daily lives haven't skipped a beat. We fought two wars in that country and in neither case did we have one hiccup here stateside.

The war in Iraq did accomplish a good thing. I'm uncertain of the long term results. It's always a mixed bag. It gave notice to any nations that turn a blind eye (probably via internal corruption) to terrorist operations within their borders that this administration wasn't shy about HOW ANGRY we would get for those who tresspassed upon us, so to speak. On the otherhand it proved that we can support a ruthless dictator when it serves us ....and just as easily topple him when it suits us as well. Our image as a nation is not all that clean in the middle east. We tend to view things through our fast paced happy life glasses ..while the middle east has been a $hithole at the hands of many "unhealthy" influences for many generations lives there, many of them are from resident Arabs ..and others are from outside (the US, Britan, the former Soviet Union). For a good long time, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has "masked" much of this by being a focus of the region's population's pathetic position as world citizens while the majority of the free and modern world is so dependant upon it.

quote:

These Islamic terrorists are not as smart as some people give them credit for. They badly misjudged America in the 9-11 attacks-they thought this country would be broken by the attacks.

..or did they? Haven't we been "hurt" to a great degree beyond what the attack destoyed? Haven't we had a radical change in our society because of it? Didn't fear of terrorism fill our minds even though we're more likely to die of high colesterol? Aren't we going to assure that the regions inhabitants get included into the modern world (as in employment, security, etc.) to eliminate the conditions that allow such radical actions?

How do you think that the Soviets ever kept pace with us on ICBM production? By fighting tooth and nail to resist any restrictions ...so that we fought tooth and nail to keep the number lower ..which is just happened to be what the Soviets could afford to produce. They played us like a fiddle.

Now, and I'm not suggesting that this is the intent of these attacks, suppose that you wanted to relieve the despair of these people ..and due to various reasons (internal corruption, outside manipulation, etc.) this was NEVER going to happen. By attacking the USA Bin Laden has forced us to provide what the region has lacked ...progress.

Are any of you old enough to have seen the movie, "The Mouse that Roared"???

Don't assume that just because we are fighting back and winning ..that this wasn't in the plan anyway. The terrorists escalated their attacks until we reacted. I truly doubt that they underestimated our response. The only thing that is uncertain is if the ultimate outcome of our "reation" serves to further their goals (one way or the other) or defeat them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom