If you were the President, how would you have handled the terrorist attacks. What would have been your plan?

Question

I think Alex is winning this one so far

Answer 1

Nuclear missle, 2 of them, one to Afghanistan, one to Mecca

Then they'd think twice about pulling that crap

Answer 2

Assuming you mean the President of the United States, and the terrorist attacks of 9-11.

--*No* Saudi nationals would have been allowed to leave the country on that day.

--Iraq was a peripheral issue, if not a Bush family vendetta, and would have been put on a back-burner until the larger threat was taken care of...

--Afghanistan and Pakistan both would have been bombed into the Stone Age with as heavy a non-nuclear bombardment as we could have mustered....and both nations would have been embargoed at the borders for the next *ten years* afterward, if the bastards want to make a hero out of OBL, then *Let Them ROT*.

--War would have been declared on Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, the two *biggest* sources of 9-11 hijackers. I mean, enough is ENOUGH already! Aren't you tired of decades and *decades* of these barbaric nations calling *us* "The Great Satan" while *they* directly sponsor the wanton butchery of women and children worldwide?

Yes, as a nation the United States would have had a rough go, breaking its addiction to petroleum as suddenly as this. But you know what? With a proper draft instated to fight a *Just War*, we would have *solved* the damn problem already, if not by nuking Mecca and Riyadh and Dubai outright, then by occupying them with such *vehemence* that the Muslim world gets the point that *we will NOT TOLERATE FURTHER ABUSE*. Seriously.

And yes, in terms of history, it would look really bad, but you know what? The Wahabbi Menace is *not* a real religion anyway, it is a *geo-political* movement *disguising itself* as a religion. And as such it is a cancer. You don't talk to cancer, you don't *reform* a cancer or try to "bring deomcracy" to a cancer and pray for the best.

You cut it out, burn it out, poison it out and kill it *entirely*, in as vicious a manner as possible so that the "other cells" get the damned rotten point and *learn how to act like humans* and NOT barbaric rabid dogs.

You do to Mecca, Riyadh, and Dubai, what the Romans did to Carthage. You solve the damn rotten problem.

Besides, what is the rest of the world going to do? If we are going to be *endlessly* portrayed as a dictator to the world, as the "Great Satan" to the world while the "accusers" butcher and murder OUR people....guess what?

We may as well BE the Great Satan FOR REAL and solve the problem.

Answer 3

Historically speaking, prevention has always proven cheaper than reaction and retaliation. The only somewhat proven methods of ultimately reducing or preventing terrorist attacks are education, decreasing poverty in poor areas, making people self sufficient and most importantly, by not training people to attack Governments you don't like, who are likely to turn around and attack you later on when you stop giving them military aid or they get into power.

Once attacked, I do not think I would have declared the existence of an axis of evil, even if I thought one existed. I would have tried to cultivate those countries in the supposed axis while going after those who really were known to have done the deed. I would not have attacked Iraq because all indications were that Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks.

Only when the actual perpetrators of the act were found would I have tried to do anything else.

Answer 4

1. Find out who did it.
2. Send a stealth company of highly trained military personal to search, interrogate, then put on trial.
3. Keep to the main objectives.

Of course this wouldn't help any president look strong because that person would need to publicly show the rest of the world that the USA means business. With my plan, my advisers and I would have to figure out a way to explain to the American people that business was being taken care of. Sadly, this sounds like a scene from George Orwell's 1984. Yikes!

In response to the bombing of Mecca, that would truly be a HUGE mistake. Repercussion would only weaken the USA, be it sanctions by the rest of the world or all out attack on American soil such as the U.S. Capital and major seaports by other superpowers.

Answer 5

Well I would have read the 8-6-01 PDB, so Bin Laden would have been on the radar screen. And I would have been doing something with my time rather than reading for kids at a FL school, as worthy an exercise (and photo op?) as that might be in different cercumstances. And to CONTINUE reading My Pet Goat DURING an attack would be absurd. So either Dumbya WANTED it to happen or he is a COMPETE idiot. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!!

Answer 6

Eliminate Saddam in a more covert mannor, surgical strikes at terrorist training camps, collect information on Bin Laden, and eliminate him. Pull out the forces that were deployed, heighten homeland security.

Answer 7

To be honest with you, I would have sent a small number of specialized soldier's to the location (Iraq) with the soul purpose of getting Osama Bin La din, Or Saddam Hussein. And After that goal was reached, I would pull out, Buff up defense at home, And Protect our borders.

Answer 8

I think alex deserves the best answer. There is a reason he has a phd

Answer 9

My plan would have been to actually attack the people who attacked us. They are in Afghanistan not Iraq.

Answer 10

Alex stole my answer.