Is it chance or has he made America safer?
2007-11-26 11:28:09 · 16 answers · asked by Ali 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush has made America much safer - glad to see him going on the offensive constantly (can you say special forces behind the scenes?) instead of the silly idiotic stuff his predecessor did!
2007-11-26 11:31:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
Absolutely not! There could be another 9/11 attack tomorrow and nothing he's done would stop it. (Hey, taking off our shoes at airports--doesn't that make you feel safe?) These people are patient; they come from a much more ancient culture than we do. They bide their time. How long do you think they planned 9/11?
And why does nobody blame Bush for 9/11? He was President then, wasn't he? He had gotten and ignored intelligence about terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings. He attacked Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
Just because there have been no further attacks yet does not prove that Bush did anything to prevent them. I could claim that I stand outside my door every morning and say "There will be no attacks today," and that's what's keeping us safe. You can't prove a negative.
2007-11-26 19:36:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes Bush has made us safer, not safe, but safer.
There is still much to do .
And Bush will not do what has to be done.
I doubt if anyone can force the people of the United States to do all that should be done.
2007-11-26 19:34:29 · answer #3 · answered by SFC_Ollie 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. I know the Bush groupies love to take credit for the lack of attacks with no evidence supporting their statement. Actually, I am going to give the liberals all the credit for the reason there has been no attacks. Apparently, you don't have to any facts or logical evidence to make huge statements anymore, right Republicans?
2007-11-26 19:34:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are terrorist attacks against Americans every day. These attacks are against our soldiers. We conveniently gave the terrorist American targets to attack with no need to travel all the way to America.
2007-11-26 19:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Maybe its that OBL got what he wanted.
Oil @ 100 bucks a Barrel VS 20 bucks
We are no longer in the Holy Land
The US is drowning in debt.
The US has lost its creditability around the world
I think OBL can quote W... "Mission accomplished"
2007-11-26 19:42:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
When ABC News can ship radioactive(same as a nuke) material from Turkey to downtown New York and from Indonesia to LA without being detected, two years after 911, than I would say ,,,,,no,
2007-11-26 19:41:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush has the same record of experiencing a second attack that Clinton had.
It's just costing more. Way more.
2007-11-26 19:35:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am sorry to say that terrorists have been in the US for a while they are a patient bunch,but please remember McVeigh was a home grown terrorist. Terrorism is an ideology not a religion
2007-11-26 19:37:52 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
absolutely. a bonafide defense to al qaeda is much more vivid than clinton battling to keep it zipped up or the unilateral surrender of the pelosi/reid regime.
2007-11-26 19:43:42 · answer #10 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋