Terrorism 2.0: Can We Fight It With Obama In Charge?

Maybe Mumbia isn't Terrorism 2.0, perhaps it's 3.0 or some such derivation. We've gone from taking hostages at an Olympics, to Entebbe and hi-jackings, to large-scale bombings, 9/11 and now this. The torture is said to have been unspeakable.

David Altman at Ynet says we need to learn some lessons from it. But can we?

Today, we see the emergence of a dark, new, and different army, with new branches that include all the components of a military, yet still utilize the terror doctrine. The advantage of terrorist armies is first and foremost the fact they are not subjected to any law or international convention. They do not face any pressure and they are not accountable to anyone.

 They tie the hands of the responding force, which is the only side subjected to conventions pertaining to human rights, war captives, and the targeting of civilians.

We have a craven media that is said to have put people at risk with the same reckless abandon that the NY Times employed in exposing the latest counter-intelligence secret of the Bush administration. It's not yet clear if they'll do the same thing to Obama.

But will they need to? Based upon Obama's remarks regarding 9/11, he seems to think we can defeat terrorism by speading the wealth.

We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.

 – Barack Obama, Hyde Park Herald, Sept. 19, 2001.

I'm unsure as to whether or not they could pull off this kind of attack in America. But I do know they would like to and there are reasons for concern. Compounds linked to radical Islam have made the news and there's always Canada for training them. We know that's been done. And certainly there are enough mosques for the radical sort to establish themselves. Heck, one group is notorious for trampling the flag in NYC and taunting passersby.

All that is lacking is the will and we know they have that.

I can't predict whether we ever see an attack of this type in America one day. But I doubt our police forces will respond much better than they did in Mumbai. Hopefully our SWAT and quick deploying special ops types would fair a little better. Still, the damage to the American psyche would be great.

And if it did happen, particularly from a sort of homegrown terrorism, even in part, I will predict a fairly harsh response against the government and perhaps even moderate Muslims in our midst from many Americans.

That community seems to have problems calling for change.

NEW DELHI: Muslims protesting online against violence and fundamentalism find themselves cornered by radical elements in their community.

An online post says that the only way to avoid bigotry "is for the Muslims in India to police their own. All too often, it's an 'open secret' in our communities as to which elements among us support such things, and unless we clamp down on our own extremists, I think it's awfully hard to cry foul when the backlash begins."

If nothing else, watch for gun sales to continue to grow. 

Comments

[Scrapiron]

I predict this type attack will become common shortly after Jan 20, 2009. The terrorists will have nothing to fear from the U.S. as they didn't have anything to fear during the 90's. All they'll get is a phony threat to track them down and punish them. Maybe Hussein O will be able to find another blind man to put in prison while the real planners live across the street and laugh at him, again as they did in the 90's. With the liberals going after the police officers for so many years I doubt they will dare defend a hotel or shopping center. They fear they will end up sued and/or in prison.

[jharp]

After George Bush ignored the warnings and allowing the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history on his watch there is no where to go but up.

I find it hard to fathom that Obama could be as stupid and irresponsible as Bush and ignore any warnings.

[moldy]

"It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

- Barak Obama

"[Obama] seems to think we can defeat terrorism by speading the wealth."

- Dan Riehl

Dan, do you disagree with Obama's quote? Do you not think terrorism grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance? Or are you worried that you might have to foot the bill for a more peaceful war on terrorism?

[mark l.]

"Do you not think terrorism grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance?"

I should hope obama does not hold this belief, at least in regard to poverty as a cause. Perhaps bill ayers or bernadine dorhn can help obama understand why people blow things up and try to kill other people in the name of 'belief'.

jharp-

"I find it hard to fathom that Obama could be as stupid and irresponsible as Bush and ignore any warnings."

I would suspect that obama is now aware of the desire of islamic extremists to kill americans.

Are you guaranteeing his success in stopping them? good luck.

[Dan Riehl]

"Dan, do you disagree with Obama's quote?"

Think it through Moldy and you'll realize it is BS.

The Saudis control great wealth, yet they pay to spread radical Islam thought wahabbism. So, we should give the Saudi puppets our money on top of the Saudis?

The alternative is, dare I say, "regime change," as we undertook in Iraq. Oh, but Obama opposed that. So, what is left? Talking to religious radicals who want to destyroy Isreal, invoke sharia law on the West?

Yeah, right - because Obama has the power, I guess? What a joke.

Then look into the homegrown radical network in Britain and find out how many are in the medical and engineering fields, or the offspring of successful first generation Muslims living in the West. What would Obama offer them, welfare for those punks, too, when they are already far from poor?

Obama's statement that there is no religion at the root of all terror may be correct in historical terms. But in contemporary terms - there is one fundamentalist streak within a major religion that is linked to all recent terror events. Covering that up with a bunch of PC BS isn't a plan, it's wishful thinking doomed to get you killed.

And Obama combination of soft-headed, poilitical correct, liberal dribble will likely lead to just that if he dopesn't clue up from seeing the CIA and NSA reports.

Hopefully some of his appointments and "non-change" change on national defense signals he might get it before we do, again.

[moldy]

"I should hope obama does not hold this belief, at least in regard to poverty as a cause."

Posted by: mark l.

Specifically, the combination of poverty, ignorance, helplessness and despair. I think it is an excellent breeding ground for terrorism. Why do you disagree?

[moldy]

Hi Dan,

All good points. And no name calling! A very good reply.

The Saudi's have money and there is oil in the middle east. I agree that a solution to the poverty in the region could come from within. How to get that wealth spread around is a serious problem and one that probably can't be solved with sound bytes alone. So I will admit that regime change in a few countries might be the only realistic way. As you mentioned in a previous post, maybe in 20 years we will look at the Iraq war as the start of positive change. I'm not so sure that the "shock and awe" approach to regime change yields the expected results. Time will tell though ...

Other good points in your reply - too late for me though. If the thread hasn't dissolved into a left-right hate fest, I will finish my comments tomorrow ..

Thanks,
Moldy

[xerocky]

Did anyone see the Simpsons last night? At long last, I'm done with that show. They're way off base, and I'll reference Dan Riehl's last reply as to why exactly.

Nobody is saying that all Muslims this or all Muslims that. But to simply not understand where exactly the terror is comming from is ostrich logic. And I dare say that Obama's victory has only emboldened these people. The attack on Mumbia is notable for nothing if not it's brazeness. But outside of how it was done, it's nothing new, not by a long shot. One in a very long long steady streem of attacks from exactly one group of people. Do we really need to know if they have "links" to Al Quedia to know who they are and what they're about?

[Brad]

Fundamental Islam is the driving factor behind jihad terrorism. It is not about poverty, desperation. Would the Taliban execute women adulterers and gays because of their economic plight? The West, with its promiscuity, drugs, atheism, and moral decline, protection of criminals, child molesters, homosexuals (anything the ACLU promotes) is the enemy to these fundamental 7th century purists. The media propagates this decadence across the planet to these desperate poor Muslims, who eagerly view the filth on their widescreen flat panels through a satellite dish.

I find it interesting that people like Obama seem to turn a blind eye to the edicts of Islam, Quoran. The mandate to kill Jews, convert or kill all infidels seems to be ignored by most liberals. The fact that one cannot leave Islam voluntarily should be a concern to all non-Muslims. You CANNOT convert to another religion if you are Muslim, or you will be marked for death, abandoned by your family, friends, community if you choose to simply run away. What does that have to do with poverty or desperation? This is really about Saudis wanting to maintain some morality, purity among the Muslim people. By providing the tools to families, that purity can be maintained. Fathers are given the authority to control the women in the family, everybody must practice Islam, study Quoran, etc. Immoral behavior is severely punished, and the goal to out-reproduce infidels is accomplished by polygamy, with many men having up to 4 wives, with many children each. If I had 4 wives and 30 children I would be poor too.

[JustOneMan]

"Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

I hope he has better success solving these problems than he did as a community organizer or a member of Rev Wrights church....

[templar knight]

Are you the Brad from Seattle?

[mark l.]

"Specifically, the combination of poverty, ignorance, helplessness and despair. I think it is an excellent breeding ground for terrorism. Why do you disagree?"

can you name a poor 'leader'?

Sorry, but the people who rally, organize, and direct violence against others are universally well off.

ubl has millions from his saudi family.

"Ayman al-Zawahiri was born to a prominent upper middle class family in Maadi, Egypt, a suburb of Cairo, and was reportedly a studious youth. His father, Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri, was a pharmacologist and a professor coming from a large family of doctors and scholars, while his mother, Umayma Azzam, came from a wealthy, politically active clan."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri

dorhn and ayers were both from well off families.

all your ills that you believe are the source of terrorism-

"poverty, ignorance, helplessness and despair" are merely a good source of foot soldiers but they are not the cause of the individual choices to lead and finance terror. Megalomania is the source of terrorism.

[mark l.]

as far as spreading the wealth...

Afghanistan has a gdp per capita of 1000 dollars.
Iraq has a gdp per capita of 3700 dollars.

we just have to spread 2700 dollars a year per capita in Afghanistan, to bring them up to speed with Iraq.

AG population is 32 million. multiply it by 2.7k, and it would mean that in order to address poverty, yearly, would require an investment of 86 billion a year.

Average world per capita?
10,000 dollars. The poorest continent, by far is Africa...

should we spread the wealth among the middleeastern countries that have 3 times the indiviudal wealth of most african countries, or should we try and help the countries that are actually poorer?

[mark l.]

"Specifically, the combination of poverty, ignorance, helplessness and despair. I think it is an excellent breeding ground for terrorism. Why do you disagree?"

beyond the above cited terrorists/organizers...

the 9/11 hijackers were all(?) college educated.

I find it very hard to formulate how college educated individuals can be associated with poverty, helplessness, and despair. these were indivivulas who were on a completely different path than those you have ascribed to terrorism.

A prediction? the 10 terrorists in India will almost universally be well edcuated, or from well-educated families. These weren't poor Pakistanis who were facing the despair or helplessness of their social system, they will be from the upper echelon of Paki society.

[Karen]

That quote by Obama is ridiculous. I disagree that this is about poverty and that "spreading the wealth" will end the problem.

I refuse to be told by ANYONE that I must be sympathetic towards these horrific excuses for human beings. If Obama feels money is the answer, then perhaps he should hold a fundraiser with his millions of friends who think likewise, raise lots of cash from sources all over the world and send it on over to the terrorists we're all supposed to feel empathy for while they are slitting our throats and slicing our heads off.

[jharp]

"I refuse to be told by ANYONE that I must be sympathetic towards these horrific excuses for human beings."

And who is telling you that you must be sympathetic? I have not heard that from anyone.

I think part of the cause of terrorism is us invading their countries, killing hundreds of thousands of them, imprisoning and torturing them, and supporting puppet master governments.

[jharp]

WASHINGTON (AFP) – US President George W. Bush said in an interview set for broadcast Monday that he came to office "unprepared for war" and that his "biggest regret" was the US intelligence failure on Iraq.
_____________________________________________________________________________

Yet he has repeatedly claimed the invasion was necessary even knowing there weren't any WMD's, no Iraq connection to 911, and no Iraq connection to al Qaeda.

I wonder why the "intelligence failure" is his biggest regret. He has many times said it wouldn't have changed anything.

Let's hear it, Bush apologists.

Bush is a liar. And he's having trouble keeping his lies straight. He'll be lucky to stay out of jail.

[Philip McDaniel]

jharp: And who is telling you that you must be sympathetic? I have not heard that from anyone.

“We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness… Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.” Obama

In other words, he is saying be sympathetic to the plight that drives them to violence; so Obama is the one saying it, jharp, but then you know that, you are just setting the stage for your next rant:

jharp: I think part of the cause of terrorism is us invading their countries, killing hundreds of thousands of them, imprisoning and torturing them, and supporting puppet master governments.

A typical jharpian leap of logic based on no evidence. And, if we extend this to discuss terrorism in general with these claims then we have to examine the violence exhibited by the Tibetan Buddhists when the Chinese attacked and took over their country. Hmm, can’t say I remember any.

In any case, rant on Narcissus.

[jharp]

"“We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness… Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.” Obama"

"In other words, he is saying be sympathetic to the plight that drives them to violence; so Obama is the one saying it"

No, he is not saying we must be sympathetic to the terrorists. Those are your words, not Obamas.

He is saying, quoting your "in other words", that it'd be a good idea to understand the source of such madness. I agree with him. It's simply common sense to understand the cause of a problem in order to address the problem.

It has nothing to do with sympathizing with them. Turn off ElRushbo, Hannity, and Fox. And then think.

[SacTownMan]

Hey Harpo nothing like getting off topic with yet another BDS rant!

Amazing that one guy can be responsible for ALL of the problems in the world, With such a distorted, simple minded view of the world you show the real promise of having your moonbat leaders in charge

And now to try and get you back on the subject of Dan's post,

"I think part of the cause of terrorism is us invading their countries, killing hundreds of thousands of them, imprisoning and torturing them, and supporting puppet master governments."

Nice moonbat justification for the worldwide Caliphate that these nut jobs want, you know the same Caliphate that had the muslims in control of Spain and much of the middle east during the sixth and seventh centuries.

You do understand that the goal for these camel jockies is that they want nothing more than to impose their Shira law and dominion over all of us. These jihadi terrorists are not some poor saps from a straw hut. Many of the terrorist leaders are the product of middle class or rich families.

http://intelwire.egoplex.com/caliphate-10-20-2005.pdf

You owe it to yourself to read up on the reasoning used by these wacko's that want to control or kill you and your family.

In their minds we are a bunch of low-life scum that will either submit to their muslim religion and be controlled or killed!

Time for America and the rest of the civilized world to wake up to the real threat from these nutjob Ragheads!

[jharp]

"A typical jharpian leap of logic based on no evidence."

Oh no. You are wrong again Philip. There are mountains of evidence.

It is just your head is so far up Limbo's ass that you cannot hear. For starters give this a read. And there is plenty more.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD20Aa03.html

Though I will give the wingnuts credit for finally abandoning George Bush's idiotic claim that the reason they hate us is because of our freedom.

[jharp]

"You do understand that the goal for these camel jockies is that they want nothing more than to impose their Shira law and dominion over all of us. These jihadi terrorists are not some poor saps from a straw hut. Many of the terrorist leaders are the product of middle class or rich families.

You owe it to yourself to read up on the reasoning used by these wacko's that want to control or kill you and your family.

In their minds we are a bunch of low-life scum that will either submit to their muslim religion and be controlled or killed!"

I get it. We invade and kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's and force them to adopt our form of government.

Yet it is them who want to conquer us and impose their law on us. You are a moron.

And Iraq was secular pre invasion you dumbass.

[ET]

It is way past time to disregard jharp and his idiotic comments. His rage at George Bush has always been irrational, but now it is inflamed by the fact that his liberal agenda has been hijacked by the obamessiah. Obie, rightly concerned with his chance to be a truly great president, has abandoned the moronic positions he took to lull the typical liberal into a trance during the election(change...hope..change...hope). Now president-elect, he is getting back to reality. That means no taxes on the rich, continued US presence in Iraq and increased interventions elsewhere as required to protect American interests. You know, just like the last president. Oh, and no socialized medicine or cap-and-trade bs either.

See, America is a center right country and everyone knows that, even obama. Oh, except jharp, that is.

[joeb]

jharp: I would like to remind you it was Clinton and Janet Reno that brought you that terrible foul up at Waco. And that led to the Oklahoma City bombings. jharp were you old enought at the time to remember the tanks attacking the Branch Dividian complex while flying Americans flags? Did it seem odd to you that they were attacking Americans?
So I would hold off any thoughts of the new in coming administration doing any better fighting terrorism than the current one until after Jan.20,2009 and we see how they do when they have to "ride the tiger". That is what Harry Truman said that being President was like. Riding a tiger.
Blame who you like for 9-11 the fact is there has been no major terrorist attack on American soil since 9-11-2001. And Bush and Cheney and those in charge for the last 7 years should get the credit for that.
Can Obama do as well? It remains to be seen.

[jharp]

"Can Obama do as well?"

Yes, he will do better. Much better. I'd bet my house that Obama will not be as ignorant and incompetent and not have anything close to the scale of the 911 attacks happen on his watch.

And I'll bet even more that if he gets a briefing that warns "Osama bin Laden determined to attack within the U.S." possibly using planes that he won't ignore it like Bush did.

[jharp]

ET

"Oh, and no socialized medicine"

This board is a festival of ignorance. Please share with me Obama's proposing socialized medicine.

Or are that damn dumb that you don't even know what it is?

[jharp]

ET,

"Now president-elect, he is getting back to reality. ...continued US presence in Iraq and increased interventions elsewhere as required to protect American interests."

Seriously, put the crack pipe down. Your claims are nothing but nonsense. 100% utter nonsense. Obama is quite clearly sticking to his promises on Iraq.

Where do you hear this bullshit?

[Worst President Ever]

Center-right? Hardly - take a look at the record: The last two election cycles have been disastrous for the Republicans. They've now lost the Senate, the House and the White House. Even more telling, Democrats are within a Senate seat or two of having veto-proof majorities in both houses.

Unless you want to argue that Dems are a center-right party, and not liberal, you're argument doesn't hold a lot of water.

[SacTownMan]

"I'd bet my house that Obama will not be as ignorant and incompetent and not have anything close to the scale of the 911 attacks happen on his watch."

Hey Harpo is that a single wide or a double wide trailer?

[jharp]

Hey Harpo is that a single wide or a double wide trailer?

Posted by: SacTownMan | Monday, December 01, 2008 at 04:40 PM

It's a much nicer home than a data entry clerk can afford.

[Zeigenbach Tapper]

Aw man I come over here once and lo and behold that insufferable sanctimonious twat jharp has defected to here. Having been kicked out of Patterico for being a self-righteous douchebag of the worst order, here's harpy the wanker proving that his sexless life actually has no meaning unless he's being a dick on a conservative comment section. Seriously harpy, get a friggin' life you pompous loser. Go outside and get laid once in your life.

[Zeigenbach Tapper]

hey all, enjoy the presence of your intellectual superior jharp while he lasts. You see, dickless harpy basically worked himself up a boner throwing his allegedly superior knowledge and wit around Patterico for awhile, and eventually got tossed due to the fact, well, as you can plainly see, that he's just plain and simply a major league cock.

[joeb]

The Washington Post in all their articles on the Mumbai killings refers to the attackers as "gunmen" or "attackers" but never as terrorists? I wonder why?
jharp your bets are worth about as much as those at a online Poker site.

[ET]

--Obama is quite clearly sticking to his promises on Iraq.

ummm, right. He was for immediate withdrawal over a 16 month period, now he is not. He still won't acknowledge that the surge worked...won the war, in fact. Now he keeps gates as secdef...

Who's smoking crack?

--It's a much nicer home than a data entry clerk can afford.

Now harpo, we have clearly established on this site that you are a failure at the business you have been running for over 25 years, since you have yet to clear $250k per year and are counting on obama's welfare program. Now that won't be coming to you either!

What is it like to disappoint your children day after day, year after year?..what do they say about your failings behind your back? hmmm...

[jharp]

Posted by: Zeigenbach Tapper | Monday, December 01, 2008 at 04:54 PM

And I see you haven't gotten any smarter. It's very flattering to me to see the insults.

Typical wingnut. When you've got nothing, it is time to insult and ignore the substance of the posts.

Thank you kindly.

[ET]

--Center-right? Hardly

wpe, look at obie's appointments. He will govern from the center, since that is where the VAST majority of Americans are...plus everyone knows that liberal policies are disastrous.

We tried to warn you kool-aid drinkers that obie was lying to get your vote...now we see it happening. you and harpie were duped. stupid is as stupid does.

[PA]

"Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

Which of course is why Haiti is a nation of terrorists, right?

[JustOneMan]

Headlines...Obama Names Cabinet Members and Stocks fall sharply!!!!

[Worst President Ever]

You tried to warn us - that's hilarious. I guess that warning was when you and others on this board tried to paint Obama as a socialist, terrorist, friend of radicals, unAmerican, most Liberal Senator, holder of fringe views, etc.

Now you've come around to calling him a centrist.

[Zeigenbach Tapper]

Ah dickwad harpie still throwing around his claim that he's a successful home-based investor and businessman. Just taking it to new locations. Different website, same loser. harpie sends reconnaissance team to desperately search for his genitals that got hacked off at Patterico. What...a...loser.

[JustOneMan]

Excuse me has anyone seen my hope and change????? Somehow I lost it between election day and today.....

[SacTownMan]

"You tried to warn us - that's hilarious. I guess that warning was when you and others on this board tried to paint Obama as a socialist, terrorist, friend of radicals, unAmerican, most Liberal Senator, holder of fringe views, etc.

Now you've come around to calling him a centrist."

You know Jimmy, unlike your name sake, Barry understands that if he is going to be successful he needs to surround himself with moderate Democrats with experience and semi-rational points of view. There don't seem to be a lot of Daily Koz trolls in his cabinet picks yet.

And yes he is an admitted coke head that hung around with domestic terrorists. His track record also shows him to be a major bleeding heart liberal that liked to read Saul Alinsky. You have to give him credit for seeing the suck-up association with the far left crowd was a career ender.

Regardless of his past he will get a clean slate with me come Jan 20th. As POTUS he will need all of our support to ensure that we stay safe from those nutjobs that mean us harm. Unlike most of you trolls I still have great respect for the office of POTUS.

I am sure going to miss the whole Barry, Xerxes stuff but rest assured that conservatives in this country will treat him with much more respect than the left has done with President Bush.

I'm sure that after a couple of high level National Security briefings he sees the world with a different POV now. Once he is sworn in he is OUR president and will have my respect and support as POTUS. But I also plan to watch him closely and provide respectfull desent when warranted.

Now after all of these past months in which I have never referred to him by his "real" name I will have to start calling him President Ob...!

Sorry but it will still have to wait until Jan 20th before I can bring myself to say it!

[ET]

--Now you've come around to calling him a centrist.

I haven't changed...Obama has!

Unlike you rabid liberal partisans, who blame first and never ask the right questions, I am prepared to give Obie a chance. And so far, he is moving to the center. He did indeed espouse socialist views during the election, and he did associate with radicals when he was trying to get his street cred in chicago. He is a shameless politician, no doubt. But if he is half as smart as you say he is, he will continue to jettison dumbass liberal policies in favor of more reasonable solutions.

The 16 month timeline is gone, now that the republicans won the iraq war (thanks George!). Radical tax reform? Gone! Single payer healthcare? Nope! Real change we can believe in? Not so much.

You were a fool to believe it in the first place. period.

[mark l.]

"Bush is a liar. And he's having trouble keeping his lies straight. He'll be lucky to stay out of jail."
how'd that turn out for clinton?

by your standard of who is a liar, obama would already have told a few whoppers, and he isn't even in office yet.

"I'd bet my house that Obama will not be as ignorant and incompetent and not have anything close to the scale of the 911 attacks happen on his watch."

this sounds like a guarantee that we will not be struck by al-queda.

hmmm...obama should be well briefed about the sarin gas attack in tokyo, the attack in mumbai-where 10 gunmen can come ashore and kill civilians indiscriminately-along with any other terror alert and its specific contents. So jharp is guaranteeing america's safety from any predicted form of attack.

jharp-it is impossible to DEFEND against an enemy who can randomly target 300 million americans. Your faith in obama's ability is uncharacteristically stupid. forgive me if I don't hold him to the standard you have established.

[mark l.]

"I'd bet my house that Obama will not be as ignorant and incompetent and not have anything close to the scale of the 911 attacks happen on his watch."

where does fdr and pearl harbor fit into your def of ignorant and incompetent? and it was on the scale of 9/11...

[mark l.]

one small point about bush and 9/11...

the no-brainer was to produce a scapegoat. there were a ton to choose from, but george tenet really comes to mind. Bush did NOT scapegoat anyone, and as a result, he is the focus of loons like jharp, who fail to consider that there were many failures in a long chain of events. says a lot about w's character.

but if that is the litmus test, then any failures that occur under obama are equally his fault. somehow, I doubt he will be as willing to accept blame, and we are looking at four years of watching obama appointees falling on their swords.

jan 20, 2009- the soldiers who die leave their blood on obama's hands. the civilians killed by our forces are equally his fault. good luck with afghanistan.

[jharp]

mark l,

The stupidity displayed by your last 3 posts are only exceeded by your posts about the polling results in early November. As far wrong as one can get.

Get yourself to school son.

[mark l.]

"The stupidity displayed by your last 3 posts are only exceeded by your posts about the polling results in early November."

so you agree that both bush and fdr have something in common, related to being responsible to 'surprise attacks' on america.

obama said he was on the senate banking committee...I'd rather believe he was just lying, as opposed to being that stupid.

[jharp]

"so you agree that both bush and fdr have something in common, related to being responsible to 'surprise attacks' on america."

No I don't agree you stupid jackass. The 911 attacks we were warned about.

I was specifically referring to the August 6th warning given to Bush, "Osama bin Laden determined to attack the U.S." with planes and Bush ignoring the warning and going to Crawford to clear brush.

And as a result 3,000 Americans were killed.

Don't recall FDR getting a similar warning.

[Worst President Ever]

First, if you'd paid attention to Obama and gone through his record you would have understood he's moderately left of center. He's not going to try to ram legislation down people's throat, he's going to try to build coalitions and govern through consensus.

Second, you need a new crystal ball. The 16 month Out of Iraq commitment is still on. We're still spending 10+ billion a month and have 120,000+ troops there. Obama never talked about radical tax reform. And he's still going to try to do health care. He's also going to do a major public works program of some sort to try to stimulate the economy.