If a Democrat is elected to the White House?

Question

and considering how ineffective they were in the past (Somalia, Lebanon, USSCole, etc.) What is their plan to combat terrorism and keep us safe at home?

Answer 1

A pack of wild dingos could do a better job than Bush and Co.

Answer 2

and how is what is going on now effective? No processes are active to stop dangerous substances from penetrating our ports, anyone can get anything through an airport if they are motivated enough, and the terrorist watch list is nothing but a random crap shoot where they just pick anyone for any reason.

sidebar: I'm far more concerned about the rising crime rate in our cities (and you should be too) than some terrorist attack. I'm more likely to get shot by random robbery suspect that a suicide bomber.

Answer 3

Ya know, I see a lot of Bush and Republican bashing here, but I don't see a plan. Read the question again, folks. It's not asking about what we're doing now, it's asking about what plan the Democrats have, if any. Can any of you answer that?

Answer 4

America will pull out of iraq once there is a democrat in the white house again ( and what a wonderful day that will be). And then we will slowly forget all that nonsense nothing will be done until once again we are attacked by some group of terrorists. Undoubtedly we will have created these terrorists in some way, and given them plenty of reason to want to kill our babies. It wont change buddy, there is no killing or stopping an idea.

Answer 5

I didn't know you were all that safe at home NOW, are you?

When will people like you understand that all this terrorist panic is only designed to transform you into a crowd of turkeys voting for Christmas, because they are afraid of the fox at the other side of the fence?

Sadly, it has worked for you and millions of other Bush voters.

Answer 6

If you want to be honest with yourself, you will acknowledge that there was a republican at the wheel on 9/11/01 (and visualize in your mind Condoleeza Rice rolling her eyes and saying "..something like 'terrorists determined to attack on US soil'...". At that point you realize taking the world either by the hand or by the throat isn't going to solve the problems. Just because we haven't been attacked lately doesnt mean it was GWB's "clever" (read "non-existent") strategies that kept us safe.

Answer 7

Not as incompetent as George Bush for sure.
Relationship with the Middle East will be better.
Economy would be better for sure.

Answer 8

LETS take a look at your republican leader ok
That governments have permitted terrorist acts against their own people, and have even themselves been perpetrators in order to find strategic advantage is quite likely true, but this is the United States we're talking about.

That intelligence agencies, financiers, terrorists and narco-criminals have a long history together is well established, but the Nugan Hand Bank, BCCI, Banco Ambrosiano, the P2 Lodge, the CIA/Mafia anti-Castro/Kennedy alliance, Iran/Contra and the rest were a long time ago, so there’s no need to rehash all that. That was then, this is now!

That Jonathan Bush’s Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid conclusions.

That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre, Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must admit those Bush boys have done alright for themselves.

That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the investment of Osama’s brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mahfouz is just one of those things - one of those crazy things.

That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy in no way implies he still is.

That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is merely one of history's little aberrations.

The claims of Michael Springman, State Department veteran of the Jeddah visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations.

That one of George Bush's first acts as President, in January 2001, was to end the two-year deployment of attack submarines which were positioned within striking distance of al Qaeda's Afghanistan camps, even as the group's guilt for the Cole bombing was established, proves that a transition from one administration to the next is never an easy task.

That so many influential figures in and close to the Bush White House had expressed, just a year before the attacks, the need for a "new Pearl Harbor" before their militarist ambitions could be fulfilled, demonstrates nothing more than the accidental virtue of being in the right place at the right time.

That the company PTECH, founded by a Saudi financier placed on America’s Terrorist Watch List in October 2001, had access to the FAA’s entire computer system for two years before the 9/11 attack, means he must not have been such a threat after all.

That whistleblower Indira Singh was told to keep her mouth shut and forget what she learned when she took her concerns about PTECH to her employers and federal authorities, suggests she lacked the big picture. And that the Chief Auditor for JP Morgan Chase told Singh repeatedly, as she answered questions about who supplied her with what information, that "that person should be killed," suggests he should take an anger management seminar.

That on May 8, 2001, Dick Cheney took upon himself the job of co-ordinating a response to domestic terror attacks even as he was crafting the administration’s energy policy which bore implications for America's military, circumventing the established infrastructure and ignoring the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman report, merely shows the VP to be someone who finds it hard to delegate.

That the standing order which covered the shooting down of hijacked aircraft was altered on June 1, 2001, taking discretion away from field commanders and placing it solely in the hands of the Secretary of Defense, is simply poor planning and unfortunate timing. Fortunately the error has been corrected, as the order was rescinded shortly after 9/11.

That in the weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley found her investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui so perversely thwarted that her colleagues joked that bin Laden had a mole at the FBI, proves the stress-relieving virtue of humour in the workplace.

That Dave Frasca of the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit received a promotion after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations into al Qaeda assets training at flight schools in the summer of 2001 does appear on the surface odd, but undoubtedly there's a good reason for it, quite possibly classified.

That FBI informant Randy Glass, working an undercover sting, was told by Pakistani intelligence operatives that the World Trade Center towers were coming down, and that his repeated warnings which continued until weeks before the attacks, including the mention of planes used as weapons, were ignored by federal authorities, is simply one of the many "What Ifs" of that tragic day.

That over the summer of 2001 Washington received many urgent, senior-level warnings from foreign intelligence agencies and governments - including those of Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, Egypt, Israel, Morocco, Afghanistan and others - of impending terror attacks using hijacked aircraft and did nothing, demonstrates the pressing need for a new Intelligence Czar.

Answer 9

you probably would go into shock because only republicans want war and have to create the boogyman in order to keep war going.


i betcha anything the word 'terrorist' on the lips of the media now would subside and folks would be getting back to work, there would be science going on again and probably we'd be focusing on space research again.

and i'd get my god dam step increase again after 8 years.

i hate republicans f.u.c.k. them i don't care anymore i'm soooooo sick of the waste!

and we'd probably have money again.... a surplus.

instead of this s.hi.t going on now.

Answer 10

NOT if, but WHEN and they will have enacted the plan of getting rid of Bush's Republican morons.