Murderous Terrorists Kill Brits

[HungLikeJesus]

Hey look, it's a peace sign.

[Undertoad]

but I do believe the US approach to terrorism has been woefully misguided for the past eight years.

2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil.

Not quite as long as the number of days between the first World Trade Center bombing in '94 and 9/11/01.

I attribute it to better policing and intel, including implementing many of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission (with all its faults) and certainly not as a result of our "war on terrorism" in Iraq, which was the focus of US anti-terrorist actions from 2003-2008.

You may recall how Bush/Cheney initially opposed the 9/11 Commission and the creation of a Dept of Homeland Security.

added:

I also think the FBI/NSA/DHS "terrorist watch list" which is now over 1 million and increasing at a rate of 20,000/month, needs to be more carefully monitored to respect individual liberties and protected constitutional rights.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil.

Why should they attack us over here when we have so many targets over there? And if you recall, Osama bin Laden's target was our financial district. He even said, all they had to accomplish, was to get us to bankrupt ourselves, which we have done. We collapsed our own economy, which was his goal. We helped recruit more terrorists than he ever could have done without us. Fighting smart means getting your enemy to do to themselves what would be too difficult to do yourself. Isn't that part of the Art of War or something?

[dar512]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil.

Yup and this garlic keeps away vampires.

C'mon toad. You know that's no proof that we're doing any better at anti-terrorism than pre-911.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil.

Which accomplished what it was supposed to do.

Sting the bear on it's nose.
The bear then comes out of it's cave, stumbles and thrashes about the whole forest, pisses off all the other critters, and loses it's whole honey stash.
Why sting it again?

[Undertoad]

Redux: "The lack of attacks on US soil has nothing to do with the Iraq war."

sugar: "Why should they attack us over here when we have so many targets over there?"

You two now get to work that one out.

[sugarpop]

Did you even read the rest of what I wrote? Hello!

Originally Posted by sugarpop

Did you even read the rest of what I wrote? Hello!

I dont think he read the rest of what I wrote either.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Redux: "The lack of attacks on US soil has nothing to do with the Iraq war."

Right...that was my point exactly.

It's a shame (bordering on criminal) that the Bush administration made a connection between the two..or between Saddam and al Queda...and still does.

And for 5+ years now, the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been at the center of the so-called "war on terrorism."

[Undertoad]

Everything else you said was weak, silly rhetoric that I've heard 1000 times before and am not interested in addressing.

LOL....ok.

Have it your way.

I guess you wont bother to read the Rand report or several of the NIE's for Bush that raised serious concerns about the impact of our invasion and continued occupation of Iraq as a "cause celebre" for terrorist movements.

[Undertoad]

You two don't want to work that one out? You were directly at odds with each other.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

You two don't want to work that one out? You were directly at odds with each other.

From reading the posts, I think sugarpop and I are in agreement that the use of military force, particularly an invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that posed no threat to the US, is the least effective way to respond to terrorism.

And many defense, national security and anti-terrorism experts agree.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Redux

From reading the posts, I think sugarpop and I are in agreement that the use of military force, particularly an invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that posed no threat to the US, is the least effective way to respond to terrorism.

That wasn't exactly the question. The question was, 2740 days since the last major terrorist attack on US soil, why?

Part of your answer was "certainly not Iraq". sugar's number-one answer was, "Iraq".