Don’t the Allies Count?
Posted by
Kevin
God, this irritates me to no end:
We are grateful that there has not been another attack on our soil since 9/11.
First, what about Anthrax? I distinctly remember the Anthrax attacks, and I distinctly remember the fear those attacks engendered, especially in the new people covering them. But for some reason, those attacks have gone down the memory hole, never, apparently, to be seen again.
But it also irritates me that Bush can talk about how we haven’t been attacked in the USA and not say one single solitary word about the bloodshed our allies have endured. Ask the people of Bali, of Madrid, or of London how well our tactics have been working. An attack on our allies has to be considered as big a failure as an attack on ourselves. They are fighting alongside us, and they beled and die just as surely as Americans do. I am getting tired of Americans forgetting that.
UPDATE: in another part of the speech, Bush does make a passing reference to the bombings. He doesn’t talk about them when he gushes about how wonderful his failed polices are, and he does imply that becasue the US has not been attacked then everything is right with his failed polices, but he does say a single, solitary word about them. I got that wrong, sorry. It still irritates me, though, that the lack of attack son the USA is held up as evidence of success when its not, not in any meaningful sense. We are supposed to be in this with ou allies, and attacks on them indicate a failure of the overall strategy.
“But it also irritates me that Bush can talk about how we haven’t been attacked in the USA and not say one single solitary word about the bloodshed our allies have endured.”
Did you actually listen to the speech? Bush did in fact mention the attacks made on Spain, England, and other allies. Americans haven’t forgotten that. I’m getting tired of liberal Americans making up things.
Comment 1/29/2008
Morris
Where? I cannot find any mention of it? And he certainly did not mention them when he was talking about how wonderful our strategy has been.
Comment 1/29/2008
From text of State of Union: “In the past seven years, we’ve also seen images that have sobered us. We’ve watched throngs of mourners in Lebanon and Pakistan carrying the caskets of beloved leaders taken by the assassin’s hand. We’ve seen wedding guests in blood-soaked finery staggering from a hotel in Jordan, Afghans and Iraqis blown up in mosques and markets, and trains in London and Madrid ripped apart by bombs.”
Comment 1/29/2008
Paragraph 36 (if my count is correct)
Comment 1/29/2008
I liked the clip they showed of Hillary chanting about the last State of the Union address Bush will ever give, which was followed by rousing applause.
Well, that’s a little vague, I thought.
That’s kinda like the New York Giants huddling up and chanting about how this Sunday will be the final game of the year.
I hate to burst your bubble, but that would be true whether you win or lose…
Comment 1/29/2008
There were also no attacks on our soil for many years preceding 9/11. George Bush must go to the Isiah Thomas school of two game win streaks as evidence of a restoration of glory and affirmation of championship aspirations.
Comment 1/29/2008
“There were also no attacks on our soil for many years preceding 9/11.”
Oh, really? What would you call the first World Trade Center bombing? Those who died there would probably disagree with you.
Comment 1/29/2008
Morris
Knock if off — eight years counts as many.
Digg
“George Bush must go to the Isiah Thomas school of two game win streaks as evidence of a restoration of glory and affirmation of championship aspirations.”
Look, I hold the man in contempt, but comparing him to Isiah? Dude, thats just over the top mean.
Comment 1/29/2008
“Knock if off — eight years counts as many.”
It does? People making generalizations should be more specific. LOL
Comment 1/29/2008
Okay, Morris.
The history of previous attacks was relatively small. Is that better?
To go a number of years without a terrorist act perpetrated on American soil (specifically, by a foreigner) is not some sort of unprecedented achievement that need be celebrated. That’s all I’m saying. Though certainly from a political standpoint, it makes sense for Bush to note it and be proud of it.
Also, I will grant you that this particular relatively short span of time may be more impressive than most any other relatively short span of time.
Comment 1/29/2008
>First, what about Anthrax?
And the belt way sniper
And the LA terminal shooting
And the smiley-face mailbox bomber
And the Seatle Community center shooting
And the OU stadium bombing
And the UNC Student Union attack
And the Virginia Tech shootings
Nope, there haven’t been any terrorist attacks on US soil since 2001
Comment 1/29/2008
“To go a number of years without a terrorist act perpetrated on American soil (specifically, by a foreigner) is not some sort of unprecedented achievement that need be celebrated.”
Why would you not be happy that a terrorist act by a foreigner has not happened on our soil since 9/11? That’s a very strange attitude. Were you hoping for an attack?
Comment 1/29/2008
Morris:
Are you really that daft? Nobody’s saying they’re not happy that there hasn’t been another attack. What we’re saying is that seven years without a major foreign terrorist attack on American soil is not by itself evidence of anything, given that the previous mark was over eight years.
But that’s precisely what Bush and his supporters do: “See, we haven’t had a major foreign terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11, so that proves what we’re doing is working!” Well, prior to 9/11, we went even longer without a major foreign terrorist attack on US soil. So what does that tell us, apart from the fact that these attacks don’t happen often, which we already knew?
The pre-9/11 standard is 8 years, 6.5 months. In order to just match that, we have to get to late March of 2010 without a major foreign terror attack on US soil. I sincerely hope that we do. But the point stands that a long time between such attacks proves nothing.
Comment 1/29/2008
during the cold war, presidents would claim credit for the lack of a nuclear holocaust on their watch. I guess a low bar is nothing new.
Comment 1/29/2008
“so that proves what we’re doing is working!”
Are you really that ignorant? Examples were given in the State of the Union about terrorist plots that were thwarted. Of course, you would never give Bush any credit for anything.
Comment 1/30/2008
Of course no terrorist plots were ever thwarted in between the first WTC bombing and 9/11…
I said that the gap between attacks was not unprecedented, and hence should not be celebrated as some magnificent achievement. I did not say that not being attacked is less than the ideal - just that the scope of the achievement seemed to be misrepresented, contextually.
By the way, was every time I successfully executed the pull-out method in high school, not impregnating some underclass(wo)man with self-esteem issues, as testament to the virtues of that method of “birth control?” Sometimes success happens in spite of leadership decisions, not because of it. See: Guillen, Ozzie and the 2005 White Sox…
Comment 1/31/2008
Dig: “Of course no terrorist plots were ever thwarted in between the first WTC bombing and 9/11…”
What does that have to do with anything? The fact that terrorist plots may have been thwarted previously has no bearing on whether or not they were thwarted after 9/11. The truth of one doesn’t diminish the truth of the other. I hope we did foil terrorist plots between the first WTC bombing and 9/11. Maybe Clinton’s national security team was paying attention to their jobs while Clinton was messing with an intern.
Comment 2/4/2008