How many terrorists attacks have we had since 911

• A very interesting NY Times article - that is definitely a 'must-read' !!!
  • Wow, is this the type of person we want in a position of power? (nm) - Pollyanna
    • Absolutely! If you want 8 more years of the Bush Admin! nm - No Chance
      • I think McCain/Palin would be even WORSE than Bush! - UnderpaidMT - n/m
        • How many terrorists attacks have we had since 911 - My military cousin is so sick of you people.nm
          • There've been alot of foiled attempts. So far, - we've been lucky. - sm
          • Obama leads in military donations and support over McSame! sm - FYI
            • I would wager a guess that the troops overseas...sm - FYI to you
              • Do you vote strictly based on what your - relatives think?
                • Read the post again. Nothing said about how I vote..nm - nm
                  • Then why do you think any of us care what - your cousin thinks?
                    • I don't care what you think....sm - not sam
                      • And so you think our military isn't fed a load of - BS so they'll believe that the job
                        • go away...shoo....nm - not sam
                          • Gad - another voter minus a few chromosomes. - This country gets scarier every day.
            • Let's put this in perspective... - sam
              • Every poll is a sample of what is to come...this is no different...sm - nice try but...
                • If polls are samples of what is to come... - sam
                  • Polls are usually wrong. I don't put much - stock in them. - PollyGram
                  • Not anymore...they are dead even. Everyone is bailin Palin...nm - nice try again
                    • Polls as of today.... - sam
                      • Then we both agree the military poll is very interesting and ....sm - nice try again
                        • Yes, but Obama was leading more than the margin of error.... - sam
                    • meant "sm" not "nm".... - ooops
                    • old age and treachery - Sunday
  • NYTimes = liberal hit piece...no thanks - nm
    • I work in an office. Liberals are the most obnoxious - insulting people. NY times is the same way.nm
      • So didn't somebody on this board state earlier that - Republicans never generalize? Hah! What a laugh.

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

And it's the fault of this president for obsessing about Saddam Hussein (since he's been doing since the early 1990s) and not doing enough to protect his own people from future attacks.

The terrorists have all the power here.  They're holding all the cards.  They once again managed to scare a large part of the world.  They also know something that American soldiers DON'T know.  The know what the outcome of their plan is going to be.  They use the element of surprise, and when they wake up in the morning, they don't wonder if they're still going to be alive the next day.  They already KNOW they won't be because they've planned it that way.  They control their own fate, as well as the fate of everyone who gets in their way.

Our soldiers have to deal with that every single day.  A car bomb here.  A suicide bomber there.  Every single day is 9/11 for them.  It sounds real nice to pretend to respect and honor them when participating in a photo op on an aircraft carrier.  Why doesn't he care enough about their lives to provide adequate body armor and Humvees for them?  He has no problem giving big tax breaks to his rich base (and YES, they are his REAL base, not the Christian right; just wait till he betrays you all with his moderate Supreme Court nominees). He has no problem giving free healthcare to all Iraqis. Forget about the American people for a minute. Why can't he care about our troops -- our CHILDREN -- enough to supply them with adequate equipment?  Of course, he personally would not know what constitutes adequate equipment because HE WAS TOO MUCH OF A COWARD TO EVER SERVE IN COMBAT.

As far as giving this President too much credit, you obviously didn't comprehend one word of my post.

HELLO!

nm

not allowed on this board. Stop immediately.

not allowed on this board.  Stop attacking me personally with your imagining what I have or don't have in my work area.  Stick to the issues.

This has nothing to do with this conversation.  What this person makes and why they make that is none of our business.  The point was that she didn't live beyond her means and doesn't want a handout and that right there makes her a heck of a lot better than a lot of people. 

they happened in London, England and you don't see people London whining and acting like the world is coming to the end.  They got up and got on those darned buses and trains.  These terrorists made very little headway at all yesterday. 

You all don't get the point do you?   You really don't.  No matter where we are in the world you're going to find fault with it as long as it is done under conservative leadership.

I think I understood every word you said loud and clear. 

Stop with personal attacks, the vile name-calling, grammar policing and foul language.

Debate the issues.  Respect opinions. 

I'm not moderating for niceness but there is some troll behavior going on and it has to go. 

Moderator

Debate opinions, argue conflicting viewpoints.  Steer clear of personal attacks.

Thanks,

Moderator

White House plays chicken with a war hero

By Derrick Z. Jackson  |  November 19, 2005

THE WHITE House is so deluded, it actually believes it can turn a soaring hawk into a scrounging chicken. Stung by the call by US Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania to pull out of Iraq, Scott McClellan, President Bush's press secretary, said this week, ''It is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party.

Talk about playing the chicken-hawk card. A White House where most of the architects of war avoided combat in their own lives dared to associate two people who are worlds apart in world views. Moore made the anti-Bush ''Fahrenheit 9/11, which infuriated the right wing by breaking box office records for a documentary film. Moore was booed at the 2004 Republican National Convention.

Murtha is the 73-year-old recipient of two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star for combat duty in Vietnam. He is a Democrat whose three decades in office are marked by support of President Reagan's policies in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Murtha was a top Democratic supporter of the 1991 Gulf War. He wants a constitutional ban on burning the American flag.

In a 2002 press briefing, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz termed the support of politicians like Murtha for the Pentagon as ''wonderful. In the 2004 vice presidential debate, incumbent Dick Cheney said, ''One of my strongest allies in Congress when I was secretary of defense was Jack Murtha.

For all those shows of patriotism, Murtha was skeptical about the rush to invade Iraq in 2003 of Iraq even though he voted to give President Bush the authorization to go to war. He publicly said Bush beat the war drums before building an international coalition. Murtha said he had not seen anything in intelligence reports that indicated an imminent threat. Murtha said Bush ''has put the country in such a box. He can say, 'You'll undercut me if you don't vote for this resolution.'

One month after the invasion, when no weapons of mass destruction had yet been found, Murtha warned that American credibility was at risk. By the September, the absence of weapons of mass destruction made him join the much more liberal House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, in calling for Bush to fire the planners of the invasion. Despite the proclamation that ''we achieved a marvelous military victory, Murtha became increasingly frustrated with the chaos of the occupation. This summer, Murtha said administration officials were ''not honest in their assessment that they were winning the ongoing battle.

Finally, this week, Murtha unleased a scathing attack on Bush's Iraq policy. He called it ''a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. He said he believed military officials when he visited Kuwait just before the war and they showed him where American forces would be attacked by weapons of mass destruction when they approach Baghdad. But now, with no end to the killing in sight, he said, ''The US cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It's time to bring the troops home. . .They have become the enemy.

Murtha talked about soldier after soldier he has visited in hospitals, wounded and maimed by the invasion. Yet, there's more terrorism now than there ever was and it's because of what? Is it because of our policy? I would say it's a big part.

In perhaps the most humble admission of his press conference, Murtha said, ''The American public is way ahead of the members of Congress.

This came the day after Cheney threw mud in the direction of critics who gave Bush his war authorization. Cheney accused them of making ''irresponsible comments. He accused them issuing ''cynical and pernicious falsehoods to make ''a play for political advantage.

He said, ''The President and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory -- or their backbone.

This was the same Cheney who gave us some of the greatest falsehoods of this generation with ''There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction . . . We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons, and that we would be ''welcomed as liberators.

Murtha clobbered Cheney's words the next day, saying, ''I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done.

This hawk still soars, above the scrounging chicken hawks.

Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.  

© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
 

For the slur that was dead on arrival, go here:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/the-khalidi-gam.html

Why in hell would I want to convey anything to terrorists but stay hell out of our country or they will die?  You, on the other hand want them to like us....I couldn't give a rat's behind what terrorists think about us except that they know we will kick their asses all the way to the meeting with virgins they want so desperately to get their hands on.

If you want to stick flowers in their guns go ahead.  I would like to stand back and watch that.

under control per se, but at least we can give power back to the Muslims who don't want us dead.  The more control the terrorists have and the bigger area they have to work in....the more of a threat they are to us.  That is what this war means to me. 

As for Obama....he himself has ridiculed this war and yet states that he will find Osama Bin Laden.  Is he not raging war here?  Obama himself has said that he will not take military force off of the table.  Who is to say that Obama won't pull us out of Iraq and sent us to Pakistan to rage war there.  We can't fight terrorists in Iraq because that is wasteful and wrong, but Obama wants to go to Pakistan and hunt down terrorists....same thing isn't it.  Talk about double standards.

He is going to be spending all this money with no funding and says he will save money ending this war but it sounds to me like he could be starting a war elsewhere and then what money will he use to fund his programs.....TAXES....TAXES.....TAXES.........ON EVERYONE!!!  Including the middle class that he now supposedly is looking after even though he voted before to raise taxes on us middle folks.  Nothing but rhetoric to get in the office. 

and yes I dared to use the word TERRORISTS....strike us again on US soil....what will happen to us then?  Will Obama go after them and strike back or will the US turn the other cheek to be struck again?  If Obama goes after them and no other country backs us.....what will you say then? 

The reason these leaders like Obama is because they see weakness.  They see an opportunity for the US to fall and they are all chomping at the bit.

North Korea is still talking of launching their missile but hey....I guess since it can hit Alaska that is okay because maybe they will get Palin....huh?  One less pub to worry about.

China says they hate us and blame us for the global economy issues and they are using all the money they get from our country to build up their defense.

The Taliban have already said they are planning a strike on Washington.  Right there is a warning.  So if the Taliban succeed....are ya'll gonna give Obama crap too for not stopping it like you did W. for 9/11 since they had "warnings."

Once again, the die hard party liners here refuse to see the mistakes in their own political party and all they can do is point the finger at the other political party.....which is why I'm an independent. 

You all can go on and on about Bushy's war in Iraq but the botton line is this....would you prefer that terrorists still have control of that area?  Would you prefer that the woman in that region be beaten by the taliban for talking to a man or not wearing the appropriate attire.  Regardless of why we went there or not....we helped the Iraqi's.  Yes we tortured to get information that would save people's lives while they captured our people and beheaded them.....yet we are the bad guys.   Their whole purpose of existence is to wipe us out.  They want us DEAD and now we can't even call them terrorists....are you kidding me?

Seriously.....what is your solution to this problem?  Talking to terrorists who want us dead and have no problem blowing themselves up at the same time isn't going to work.  The brutal beating of woman just because they exist and are inferior to men......and yet you never hear women's rights group protesting THAT. 

But hey.....we have our warning from the Taliban and Obama is cutting money from defense.......makes sense.....doesn't it?  I guess the only ones it makes sense too are the MSNBC watching, kool-aid drinking, far-left liberals who swoon everytime Obamanation reads from the teleprompter.

have died being waterboarded?  How many terrorists have we brutally tortured to where they have begged for death?  How many terrorists have had their head cut off at Gitmo?

It isn't like these acts are done merely for entertainment purposes.  They were used to get information out of known terrorists.  It was done in an attempt to save lives.  It wasn't done in an attempt to destroy lives.  All terrorists want to do is destroy us.

As for the treatment at Gitmo, they have it better than prisoners here in the US have it.  They get reading material, food, clean clothes, etc.  Of all the terrorists at Gitmo....how many were waterboarded?  2-3?  Oh my.  It isn't like we have waterboarded each and every terrorist and the ones we did waterboard were done because they were high up in the ranks that they would more than likely know more information/plans, etc. 

As for my religious beliefs....I would much rather do what has to be done in order to keep our country, families, children, parents, etc. safe than to cuddle people who hate us and wish nothing upon us but death.

maime (sp), and kill innocent men, women, children, news people, and our servicemen? I don't think so.

Give it up. Ain't worth it. Concentrate on more pressing issues as the above poster said.

..and announce themselves as terrorists so we can shoot them.  Iraq, London and 9/11 would teach us that they are much smarter and more covert than that.  Besides, when the London bobbies waved their guns around they ended up killing a Brazilian electrician (I think it was Brazil).

I don't spend my days worrying about what if a terrorist shows up at my house.  There really are too many other things in my life that are genuine to wonder about implausible situations such as the one you describe.

Well, he should know. 

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Bush_says_terrorists_are_coming_again_0915.html