Would you say the Bush Administration's War on Terror has been successful?
2006-12-09 09:27:00 · 20 answers · asked by Wego The Dog 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Thanks for the chart Lily. Are those incidents in the US?
Fred - I think you are most right so far.
2006-12-09 09:45:27 · update #1
Unfortunately one can cite the absence of terrorism as proof that the administration is doing something right.
How long was the period of terror-absence BEFORE 9/11? Isn't this proof that EVERYBODY ELSE was doing better than Bush?
2006-12-09 09:29:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Well i can see from all the posters here that they are all experts on foriegn policy and national defense. The facts remain that there were terrorist attacks on the US before the 9/11 attacks, and President Bushs watch. There was the World Trade Center Bombing, the US Cole, the Beruit Barracks, and many more. It is really sad that people only believe what the press and the media say, and not seek what the truth is. Bush did not lie. If he did, then most the liberal Democrats, such as Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton did too. All made the same statements that Saddam had WMD's. It was the lack of good intelligence, that got us in Iraq. Now the liberals dont want good intelligence, or they would pass every resolution thats been presented to them on national security issues, instead of voting against it.
2006-12-09 17:48:27 · answer #2 · answered by ob10830 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That's difficult to say. The time period between major terror attacks tends to be, historically, rather long. Our intelligence is definitely not as perfect as we all thought it was, and there remain major security flaws with our borders and ports. Homeland Security is a bumbling bureacracy which can't handle a natural disaster properly (Katrina anyone?). Our international war on terror has definitely been bungled (Iraq has definitely spawned even more enemies of the United States than before) and we've failed to capture Osama.
All that said, I do think we have done plenty right. We definitely have hindered (if not crippled) Al Qaeda and their ability to plan attacks and coordinate resources. I think slowly we're also convincing the world of the dangers of radicalism and despite Iraq are building international alliances against terrorism. I think we've gotten a little better at screening people at airports and creating a slightly better feeling of safety.
Has it been successful? Only time will tell. So far, at least, it has.
2006-12-09 17:58:36 · answer #3 · answered by Owen 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Don't like the name. It really should be a war against an entity, not against a tactic; the war on Islamic Totalitarianism (or something like that).
Let's, if terror is the measure... Anthrax, DC Sniper, Anthrax again (in FL), Jews in LAX, [maybe] Airliner downed over Queens, kid flying plane into FL skyscraper, repeated calls of Death to America from Iran unanswered are terrorizing me.
2006-12-09 17:52:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bit like the guy who jumped off the Empire State Building and thought that things were better because he hadn't hid the ground !!!!
The reality is that terrorist attacks have increased around the world.
Soldiers are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of Bush's War on Terror.
Or don't they count to you ?
2006-12-09 17:29:53 · answer #5 · answered by cavinue 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes. I think we've gained all sorts of intelligence on them in the mean time. I think we see their movements and countering alot of their plans. I've heard several threats with no actions. The war on terror isn't marked by how many terrorist ya killed/busted but on how few attacks have taken place. Has the Administration been perfect or politically correct? No but they have functioned better than alot would have done.
2006-12-09 17:35:51 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If you think Fred's answer is the best, then there is no amount of information, no amount of proof that can be shown to you that will matter. You have obviously made up your mind and even the truth won't change it.
2006-12-09 18:24:08 · answer #7 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Febuary 26.1993 was the last attack before September 11, 2001. We have got until 2010 before we beat the previous mark between attacks. We certainly didn't beat it after 1993. Your being premature if you think we have now.
2006-12-09 17:39:24 · answer #8 · answered by Count Acumen 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Answer me this, how often were there terrorist attacks in America before 911?
Some of you people act like before the War on Terror terrorist attacks in the USA were frequent.
2006-12-09 17:32:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anthony M 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
London Train Bombings??Attempted blowing up of about 6 + planes in mid air on the way to the US???
2006-12-09 18:15:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋