Bush Administration Prevents Another Terror Attack on U.S. Soil
- Thread starter Fremmer
- Start date
Back to the thread, I kinda think what dyoun06 was saying, is that there is a lot less civility in this country.
Do we really need to call the President names or attack his intelligence. (the man did go to Havard after all, and although he was a legacy, he did pass the courses, and when he went his Father was not the VP, or the head of the CIA yet)
Disagree all you want, I encourage it and will join in sometimes, I might even disagree with you, but why does that call for rudeness and bile spewing forth.
When you call names you show your intellect to be questioned, and thus you point is weakened.
That is for all you fat heads out there who disagree with me. (hope everyone gets the sarcasm here)
Do we really need to call the President names or attack his intelligence. (the man did go to Havard after all, and although he was a legacy, he did pass the courses, and when he went his Father was not the VP, or the head of the CIA yet)
Disagree all you want, I encourage it and will join in sometimes, I might even disagree with you, but why does that call for rudeness and bile spewing forth.
When you call names you show your intellect to be questioned, and thus you point is weakened.
That is for all you fat heads out there who disagree with me. (hope everyone gets the sarcasm here)
targetshootr
New member
Bile spewing has been out of the bottle at least since the last president was vilified for much less wicked things than what we've seen the last six years. So now that the bar has been lowered to new depths, put me down as all for it.
Actually I think it has been going on a lot longer than that, I personally believe it started during the sixties, with the Vietnam war
I am not talking about political cartoons and satires, but just an undercurrent of meaness. Personally I think it has something to do with the lack of true manners in this country.
I am not talking about political cartoons and satires, but just an undercurrent of meaness. Personally I think it has something to do with the lack of true manners in this country.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Yes, it does get some sleeve off the streets and there is no denyingit makes for very good television.
My biggest concern is when the govt starts worrying more about "making good television" than they do making actual progress.
Well I lost my cool, and at my age that is hard on the arteries. Sometimes I am guilty of using sarcasm when talking about Bush, but that is because I am hurt by the fact that I supported him fully when he came to office. I feel betrayed. In a non-sarcastic way I feel Bush is simply not smart. Most common well read people would have seen the pitfalls of going into a religious war. He certainly should have know the war was not over just because our formal military beat Saddam's military. (Aircraft carrier thing).
I am 99% sure that no matter which party comes to power here in the next election that our troops will leave Iraq in short order. What then will be the legacy of the thousands of American dead and injured? I hope there is a silver lining to the Iraq war. I want an American Soldier that lost his legs in that war to be able to look back and have reason to feel justified he had to suffer his injury. Bottom line. I am not timid to criticize any person that puts our military in harms way without good verifiable reasons.
For what it's worth. I was at a passing presidential motorcade (Louisville,Ky) . When President Bush's car came by I saluted....the office & flag on his car.
I am 99% sure that no matter which party comes to power here in the next election that our troops will leave Iraq in short order. What then will be the legacy of the thousands of American dead and injured? I hope there is a silver lining to the Iraq war. I want an American Soldier that lost his legs in that war to be able to look back and have reason to feel justified he had to suffer his injury. Bottom line. I am not timid to criticize any person that puts our military in harms way without good verifiable reasons.
For what it's worth. I was at a passing presidential motorcade (Louisville,Ky) . When President Bush's car came by I saluted....the office & flag on his car.
I don't understand why the President does not receive credit for a job well done when the DHS arrests terrorists before the terrorists can attack the U.S. This was a success. The statement that this case is fake or just a publicity stunt is utter speculation, unsupported by any information and/or evidence. Under that standard, everything will be just a stunt unless the President waits to arrest terrorists until after they have successfully attacked the United States. Is that what you would prefer?
The President is the head of the Executive Department, and that includes the DHS and the other federal law enforcement agencies; he should receive credit for preventing this attack.
The President is the head of the Executive Department, and that includes the DHS and the other federal law enforcement agencies; he should receive credit for preventing this attack.
targetshootr
New member
It's hard to give him credit for anything good since he blames all the bad stuff on everyone else. And in some cases he even flaunts his screw ups.
So, again, their plan to bomb the pipeline in New Jersey wouldn't have resulted in an explosion at the tanks at JFK, showing the USA's speculation that the damage would have been unthinkable to be fear mongering.
But that isn't the point, it just shows the incompetence of the bad guys. I'll drop this point as it isn't even worth winning
He should receive credit for helping facilitate communication between the agencies involved (FBI, US Customs, etc). There's a difference.
But that isn't the point, it just shows the incompetence of the bad guys. I'll drop this point as it isn't even worth winning
He should receive credit for helping facilitate communication between the agencies involved (FBI, US Customs, etc). There's a difference.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
So does Bush receive the blame for not stopping the 9/11 crew as we now know that was botched?
You can't have it two ways.
As far as being a legacy - Bush came from a priviledged family - his grandpa was a senator and establishment. KIds like that don't fail at Harvard.
It's clear that he is not up to the job and botched Iraq. Almost every independent expert (including conservatives) has reached that conclusion. I heard a presentation on how they have found Islamic terrorists on the Mexican border. And Bush is still whining about guest workers for his business buddies.
This is such a yawn. Of course, the dems don't like him - however, the most damaging criticism comes from conservatives with principles and not some kind of authoritarian, hail the leader personality.
You can't have it two ways.
As far as being a legacy - Bush came from a priviledged family - his grandpa was a senator and establishment. KIds like that don't fail at Harvard.
It's clear that he is not up to the job and botched Iraq. Almost every independent expert (including conservatives) has reached that conclusion. I heard a presentation on how they have found Islamic terrorists on the Mexican border. And Bush is still whining about guest workers for his business buddies.
This is such a yawn. Of course, the dems don't like him - however, the most damaging criticism comes from conservatives with principles and not some kind of authoritarian, hail the leader personality.
There is one simple issue: whether a terrorist attack was prevented. It was. The Administration did a good job.
The other events (such as Iraq, 9/11, etc.) are very important, but they don't change the fact that the President has instituted significant changes in homeland security which have successfully protected our country. These changes allowed the DHS to aggressively investigate and prevent an attack before it occurred.
The other events (such as Iraq, 9/11, etc.) are very important, but they don't change the fact that the President has instituted significant changes in homeland security which have successfully protected our country. These changes allowed the DHS to aggressively investigate and prevent an attack before it occurred.
Joliet Jake
Moderator
Bleve
Mike, that's very impressive but is not relative to this. Jet fuel is basically diesel or kerosene. It does not need to be contained in a pressurized state or container so there would be NO POSSIBILITY of a BLEVE. The pipeline experts have all but refuted this plan. There would be no "unthinkable devastation". No explosions except maybe the initial "explosion", IF thet could even get the explosives in the first place or even gain access to the area where the storage tanks are kept in a guarded, fenced area. Even if they somehow attached some of their "Walmart brand" explosives to one of the storage tanks it would probably only blow a hole in the side of it and any fuel would just escape into a pit area that is required to contain any leaks or ruptures without even igniting.
This "plan" is total hogwash and sounds like coached "beertalk" but if you want to believe it that is your right to be afraid.
Mike Irwin said:
Mike, that's very impressive but is not relative to this. Jet fuel is basically diesel or kerosene. It does not need to be contained in a pressurized state or container so there would be NO POSSIBILITY of a BLEVE. The pipeline experts have all but refuted this plan. There would be no "unthinkable devastation". No explosions except maybe the initial "explosion", IF thet could even get the explosives in the first place or even gain access to the area where the storage tanks are kept in a guarded, fenced area. Even if they somehow attached some of their "Walmart brand" explosives to one of the storage tanks it would probably only blow a hole in the side of it and any fuel would just escape into a pit area that is required to contain any leaks or ruptures without even igniting.
This "plan" is total hogwash and sounds like coached "beertalk" but if you want to believe it that is your right to be afraid.