Officials Worried About Summer Attack

[Thunder]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/summer_terror_threats

So officials are worried about a summer time terrorist attack in the USA. While I am concerned about possibly loss of life, I am more concerned about how the Bush administration might use such an event to his advantage.

If there is an attack this summer, such as subway bombings, mall bombings, or even a dirty bomb or chemical attack, what would the response of Bush be?

Would he use the attack as a justification to attack Iran? Would Muslims between the ages of 17 and 45 be sent to detention camps? Would the right to be charged with a crime when detained be suspended?

I'm sure it all depends on the severity of the attack, and who we end up blaiming. But I'm sure Bush has some exciting ideas of what he plans on doing once the next attack occurs.

 

[MelBrooksfan]

I don't think Bush would dare try to attack someone else at this point. If a terrorist attack were to occur over the summer, I think the people would likely react with a hardy, "You did this to us!" sort of exclamation.

 

[Thunder]

He is at the helm. He is incharge of keeping America safe. If we get hit again..and it turns out that again...he should have seen ths signs and connected the dots..then I will blaim him..and the terrorists..for whatever happens.

 

[gumboot]

He is at the helm. He is incharge of keeping America safe. If we get hit again..and it turns out that again...he should have seen ths signs and connected the dots..then I will blaim him..and the terrorists..for whatever happens.

You sound like Alex Jones when you say things like that...

-Gumboot

 

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Would he use the attack as a justification to attack Iran? Would Muslims between the ages of 17 and 45 be sent to detention camps? Would the right to be charged with a crime when detained be suspended?

I'm sure it all depends on the severity of the attack, and who we end up blaiming. But I'm sure Bush has some exciting ideas of what he plans on doing once the next attack occurs.

Hmmmm...is this a serious forum..or one that has been hijacked by anti-Bush nut jobs...for a forum that prides itself on debunking conspiracy theory's I think instead it draws weirdo`s.

 

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I don't think Bush would dare try to attack someone else at this point. If a terrorist attack were to occur over the summer, I think the people would likely react with a hardy, "You did this to us!" sort of exclamation.

Of course...as a lefty you can`t wait...damn the people killed it`s all about demorats getting elected.

 

[Thunder]

There is nothing conspiratorial about demanding our leaders protect us and do whatever it takes to stop attacks. IF Bush had all the warnings he needed and did not act appropriately..then yes I would blaim him.

IF the attacks clearly could not have been prevented without there being a complete police state....then I would not blaim Bush. 7 years of a police state is not worth one day of stopping an attack. I'd rather live with moderate freedom and face the possibility of attack..then live without any freedom and hope that an attack has been prevented.

 

[strathmeyer]

I don't think Bush would dare try to attack someone else at this point. If a terrorist attack were to occur over the summer, I think the people would likely react with a hardy, "You did this to us!" sort of exclamation.

 

[Random]

Rove probably has a couple of draft speaches already written up with blank spots that he can shove appropriate nouns into, and Bush is probably under orders to drop whatever he is doing and get out of public sight until he can be told what to do. They don't want another "concussed monkey" moment.

 

[gumboot]

IF the attacks clearly could not have been prevented without there being a complete police state....then I would not blaim Bush

So what previous attack could have been prevented without establishing a complete police state, which you blame Bush for?

-Gumboot

 

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Rove probably has a couple of draft speaches already written up with blank spots that he can shove appropriate nouns into, and Bush is probably under orders to drop whatever he is doing and get out of public sight until he can be told what to do. They don't want another "concussed monkey" moment.

Damn...strange stuff....

 

[SezMe]

That's an interesting chart strathmeyer posted in #8. Take out 9/11 and use the rest of the trend and what do you have today: a President with a roughly 0% approval rating.

 

[Augustine]

We would not need another attack to justify any attack on Iran. If the fact that Iranian forces are not only training, arming, and participating in attacks on US soldiers, but also kidnapping and executing them, has not inflamed public opinion enough, I don't think another terrorist attack will. Frankly, the Bush administration has downplayed Iranian involvement while it is a known fact among the military. I think a lot of the handwringing that "Bush is looking for an excuse to attack Iran" actually ignores the reality: that the US (and the UK as seen with the sailors) are doing their best to avoid conflict or escalation with Iran.

 

[firecoins]

Another terror attack WILL happen inside the United State irrelevant of who the president is.

If it happens this summer, and I hope not, Bush will be blamed. He will not get the reaction that he got after 9/11 because terrorism is now in the public's mind where 9/11 is was just not thought about. Bush is expected to prevent this attack because he has been office for 7 years where 9/11 happened 8 months into his first term.

I don't think the public trusts democrats on the protecting them from terrorism so a 2nd attack will not necessarily help democratic contenders in the 08 election.

 

[Random]

We would not need another attack to justify any attack on Iran. If the fact that Iranian forces are not only training, arming, and participating in attacks on US soldiers, but also kidnapping and executing them, has not inflamed public opinion enough, I don't think another terrorist attack will. Frankly, the Bush administration has downplayed Iranian involvement while it is a known fact among the military. I think a lot of the handwringing that "Bush is looking for an excuse to attack Iran" actually ignores the reality: that the US (and the UK as seen with the sailors) are doing their best to avoid conflict or escalation with Iran.

When did Iran do all this stuff? I’m not aware of any confirmed report of anything, just some incidental stuff that administration officials were trying to puff up into something big a while back. If Iran is attacking US troops, we need to hit back, if only through a quick air strike. Attacks on the US should not be tolerated. Our biggest problem in recent years is not that the US doesn’t retaliate, but that it retaliates against the wrong people.

 

[aggle-rithm]

He is at the helm. He is incharge of keeping America safe. If we get hit again..and it turns out that again...he should have seen ths signs and connected the dots..then I will blaim him..and the terrorists..for whatever happens.

Did Bush develop super powers when I wasn't looking? How can he possibly guarantee that every contingency is covered, especially when the terrorists know exactly what our strengths and weaknesses are?

I'm not worried, though. Even if there is a terrorist attack, odds are I (or any other American) will sooner be killed by an auto accident or a random act of violence than by jihad.

 

[Tailgater]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/summer_terror_threats

So officials are worried about a summer time terrorist attack in the USA. While I am concerned about possibly loss of life, I am more concerned about how the Bush administration might use such an event to his advantage.

If there is an attack this summer, such as subway bombings, mall bombings, or even a dirty bomb or chemical attack, what would the response of Bush be?

Would he use the attack as a justification to attack Iran? Would Muslims between the ages of 17 and 45 be sent to detention camps? Would the right to be charged with a crime when detained be suspended?

I'm sure it all depends on the severity of the attack, and who we end up blaiming. But I'm sure Bush has some exciting ideas of what he plans on doing once the next attack occurs.

I feel sorry for you. You must have trouble sleeping at night knowing there might not be a tomorrow.

 

[Corsair 115]

Did Bush develop super powers when I wasn't looking? How can he possibly guarantee that every contingency is covered, especially when the terrorists know exactly what our strengths and weaknesses are?

On the other hand, the 9/11 Commission report made a lot of recommendations in regards to strengthening America's defences against terrorists, and many of those recommendations still have yet to be implemented.

 

[Augustine]

When did Iran do all this stuff? I’m not aware of any confirmed report of anything, just some incidental stuff that administration officials were trying to puff up into something big a while back. If Iran is attacking US troops, we need to hit back, if only through a quick air strike. Attacks on the US should not be tolerated. Our biggest problem in recent years is not that the US doesn’t retaliate, but that it retaliates against the wrong people.

OSINT:

"U.S. reconnaissance spacecraft have spotted a training center in Iran that duplicates the layout of the governor's compound in Karbala, Iraq, that was attacked in January by a specialized unit that killed American and Iraqi soldiers. The U.S. believes the discovery indicates Iran was heavily involved in the attack, which relied on a fake motorcade to gain entrance to the compound. The duplicate layout in Iran allowed attackers to practice procedures to use at the Iraqi compound, the Defense Dept. believes."
Michael Mecham, In Orbit, Aviation Week and Space Technology, June 4, 2007

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/images/stories/Press_briefings/2007/070702_briefing_transcript.pdf

Sen. Jack Reed, Democrat, R.I. on the Armed Services Committee:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/27/w...169&ex=1332648000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

http://reed.senate.gov/newsroom/details.cfm?id=269509

 

[gumboot]

On the other hand, the 9/11 Commission report made a lot of recommendations in regards to strengthening America's defences against terrorists, and many of those recommendations still have yet to be implemented.

The US Government has to get lucky all the time. The terrorists only have to get lucky once.

-Gumboot