Imagine: March, 2009. A small suitcase nuke ignites in NYC. ( continued)?

Question

Hillary is the President.

The troops have just gotten all back home.

Now who would you blame? What would you do?

Just say "Oh well, we must have deserved it." and wait for the next one?

Listen knuckleheads!

Because we are over there, they are staying over there.

We go home, they bring the fight to us.

They attacked NYC on Clintons watch, they attack countless US and other countries embassies, all over the world.

This is not fear, this is happening !

Steven H- so, you think the middle east was a great peacful place before we got there ,huh?

Go learn history, and what Islam teaches, and realize what our enemy is.

Now we have 2 enemies, extremists, and spinless whimps, like you.

Answer 1

Listen knucklehead the reason they are doing what they are is because WE ARE OVER THERE. They see us as infidels on their sacred land. We leave and we are no longer on their sacred land. They will have no need to do anything. We go after the guys that did 9/11 in the first place and not hit Joe because you don't like him even though you were attacked by Bob.

Your scare tactics have worked on some people for awhile but people are getting wise to the scare tactics and you will be in an increasingly smaller minority.

Peace (you do know what that means, or do you?)

Answer 2

I would certainly blame the Bush administration

BECAUSE
George W Bush and this administration has done very little to shore up defenses against such an attack in the U S A. Instead, he has spent nearly a trillion dollars to dethrone a paper tiger that had nothing to do with 911
Had he spent that money on the citizens of the U S A's security we would not be so vulnerable.

After 911 we had the world on our side, now the majority of people around the world see us as aggressors, so an attack is inevitable

Answer 3

The problem with this kind of mentality is that there's no proof (that I've seen anyway) that the US is going to be bombarded by terrorists the minute we pull out of Iraq.

This kind of logic is akin to never riding in a car for fear of being in an accident.

EDIT: In response to your "knucklehead" comment - very mature by the way- there has ALWAYS BEEN terrorists attacking all over the globe and there ALWAYS WILL BE, no matter where our troops are. Does Munich ring a bell? They are like finding needles in haystacks, there's nothing much that can be done until after the fact in most instances. We should be more concerned about hostile countries, not terrorist cells.

Answer 4

You cons are so fear based and unbelievably paranoid. Do you conduct your daily life out of fear too? It's no wonder you look back to the 'olden' days with such nostalgia. You really are fearful of the future and change.
Why didn't you feel this way about GWB when we were attacked on 9/11? Oh yes, you were too busy blaming another Clinton. Instead, why didn't you question Bush for his ignoring of intelligence and warnings that they were going to attack. Oh, yes, I forget, you guys and your prez can never take responsibility for anything for your boy-child president. You'd rather play blame games.

Answer 5

Uh, the worst terrorist attack in the history of the world happened on WHOSE watch?

Not Clinton's. Just felt you left out that one little detail.

The Iraq war has indeed inspired the greatest rise in terrorism the world has ever seen.

You want to make it worse.

All of the human beings of the world don't.

It would have made much more sense to secure the easiest access for terrorist attack (one example, reroute flamable and other toxic materials carrying trains away for prime targets -- something Bush has refused to do all this time).

Yes, the terrorists have been attacking -- where they can, which isn't here.

So you think that, for example, the victims of the London bombing deserved it -- as long as it wasn't over here.

Every thinking being on the planet understands that Bush is responsible for the unprecedented rise in hatred of America -- with world opinion, especially in Arab and Muslim countries worse that ever in our history.

Wouldn't expect YOU to understand that.

Answer 6

Some Hillary-bashers obviously would.

But if she's only been in office for a few weeks, there's not much she could have done to stop it. If Bill Clinton gets blamed for the attack that was 8 months into Bush's term, then by that logic Bush should be blamed for an attack that's 6-8 weeks into her term. But blaming people doesn't help.

The point of having the troops back home is that they can now be deployed to attack whoever (individuals) were directly responsible for the attack, as opposed to being tied up doing nation-builing and babysitting duties.

Having most of our troops in Iraq means they cannot be used for anything else. And Iraq is not a significant threat right now.

Answer 7

FEAR FEAR FEAR

That's all that you NEO CONS want to talk about.

So exactly how does having troops home from Iraq contribute to a terrorist bringing a suitcase Nuke into NYC?

Maybe Hilliary would want to go after the actually terrorists. That's something the present administration didn't do for very long.

Answer 8

The least we owe iraqis for invading and destroying their country and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths is to leave Iraq. Dont think like a mother f u c k e r without a conscience. It is precisely our stay there that has BRED MORE TERRORISTS than we ever dreamed of and continues to do so.

Answer 9

"Because we are over there, they are staying over there"

That idiotic attitude is the greatest danger we face. It makes us complacent and is just begging for an attack. We were in Iraq and Afghanistan while there was a plan being orchestrated in the UK to bomb airliners out of the sky.

Answer 10

Yeah, that's how they're are controlling you.

It's called fear.

15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Lets invade them?