As far as I know, there has been no major terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11, so I would say it has been successful.
2006-07-23 15:12:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mike G 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
i'd say maximum human beings and maximum Democrat and Republican politicians were scared into accepting each and every draconian intrusion on Civil Liberties, interior the call of nationwide safe practices and the under no circumstances ending "war on Terrorism." The AMUF, the Patriot Act, the FISA regulation, the NDAA, indefinite detentions without charges, warrantless wiretapping and the Boston Police State seizure of the streets have all been huge-spread with little resistance. And it receives worse: because the ny cases' Charlie Savage stated, the FBI plan might want to entail a "sweeping overhaul of surveillance rules that can make it a lot less confusing to wiretap those who communicate utilising the internet quite than by using classic telephone amenities." And only the day previous the Pentagon asserted: "Federal protection rigidity commanders have the authority, in marvelous emergency circumstances the position earlier authorization by using the President isn't attainable and duly constituted community authorities are unable to regulate the challenge, to have interplay quickly in events that are had to quell large-scale, unpredicted civil disturbances."
2016-11-25 20:37:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, the war is not successful at all. Al Qaeda is still out there and we don't know how many man they have, where they are, and what they are doing. We know absolutely nothing about them. This is a war that is going no where. If we want to win the war, we need to know our enemy well, but we are not. Yes, we found some terrorists who is planning another attack, but we did not get that information in time as well. They have abort the operation before we even caught them. And now they are in custody, we know no more than we did.
2006-07-23 15:20:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by 2feEThigh 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It will be funny to see how many people try to pin this one on Bill Clinton. Instead of admitting Bush is a moron they'll say "it was Clinton"
Bush and Reagan gave Bin Laden arms, weapons, and money. Bush ignored the presidential daily brief which said "Bin Laden Determined to attack U.S".
But it was some how Clinton's fault. The real truth is Al-Qaeda takes years to execute its attacks, expect another attempt in a couple years.
Al-Qaeda hasn't made much of an attempt, however they will in 2-4 more years. That's why you haven't seen Al-Qaeda do much lately.
Bush and the boys in the mean time have over-hyped every so called terrorist plot so far. Most of the people they have busted were as much a threat as Howie Mandel on crack.
If you want to see how the Bush administration is trying to over-hype their terrorist catches click on this funny has hell video.http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/270606sevenretards.htm
2006-07-23 15:29:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No since now terrorist attacks on the U.S. seem more justified in the eyes of the islamic masses, no matter how many countries you invade or how many terrorist organizations you dismantle you wont get rid of terrorism because terrorist are made and not born , desperation, and hate will make ordinary people turn to easy answers (i.e. blowing themselfs up), if its not osama and islam its something else there are thousands of of potential leaders to take up the cause so capturing osama will esentially do nothing and its better to attack the disease than the symptoms.
2006-07-23 15:21:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by hawkeyes 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sure they have spent approximately $1065 per person in America. That was the goal right rip off America and laugh all the way to the World Bank.
$300B plus
So pay up next April 15th
2006-07-23 15:22:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by 43 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I guess "I" gotta be the one to say it....911...911...911
America ain't takin' that shi*
Take Afghanistan, then Iraq, Then we are in position to hit Iran, the true architects of this whole Bin Laden bullshi*
We sit in the middle now and "wait" for the terrorists to come to us...it's like shooting fish in a barrell, as long as they are chasing us "infidels" over there...then they ain't blowin' your a** up over here...GET IT !!?? bill Clinton had a chance to stop this several times but apparently Monica "blew" it off.
Under Bill Clinton, the first bombing of the twin towers
the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen
Bin Laden was captured after the bombing of an aspirin factory in nigeria, Bill was asked what to do with him, and he said give him to someone else to take care of....Monicas' busy right now !!!!
2006-07-23 15:18:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by rochelle_hall2000 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No because we haven't spend the money to secure our country. Instead of spending 300 billion $$ on the Iraq war we should be spending the money here in the USA to make things safer.
2006-07-23 15:21:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no...and it never will. the "war" was so bush could get more money in his pocket. America actually caused 9/11...watch farenheit 9/11
2006-07-23 15:25:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by dmo_87 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Has the US government done ANYTHING successfully since G.W. was elected? NO.
2006-07-23 15:12:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋