Next Attack: Tell Me I'm Wrong

[ThomWV]

Think about the timing of the next terrorist attack against this country. Lets ask about the timeing, either before or after the Democratic Convention as to benefit the Republicans. If Dean were to be nominated an attack after the convention could be used by the Republicans as a base for a claim that you need Bush's military propensitys running things. On the other hand an attack on this country after the Convention means something very different if Clark is the Nominee. If its Clark then the Democrats have a good bais for saying that Bush did not defend us as someone of military experience should and would have, so Clark is the better choice for President.

The timing of the next attack means a lot in conjunction with who is the candidate and no matter which way it goes the American people suffer.

Thom

[info being]

1. Don't just consider the timing, but the blame

My money's on a staged "Liberal terrorist act" on the West Coast. Just totally guessing, but think of how effective that would be for the neocons.

[brainshrub]

2. If I beleived that the NeoCons could be so evil

I would say AFTER the Dem convention.

When is the date for the convention?

[Booberdawg]

14. There's no doubt in MY mind they could be that evil!

[Justice]

3. My reaction

to this post was first, only republicans think about the relationship between attacks and political gain. That is not to say you are one.

No one wants another attack for any reason. Faced with a choice, I would rather see * reelected than have another 9/11.

However, if an attack like 9/11 occurred (and assuming Tommy Franks was not allowed to declare martial law) I think it would hurt Bush miserably, miserably, miserably. People would know that since 9/11 he has done precious little to make us safer.

[ThomWV]

5. I agree

I agree with your thinking but in the event of Dean being the candidate you know the pitch to the people by the Reupblican press will be that you need Bush now more than ever and that Dean just doesn't have any sort of experience relevent to a proper response - which s to say hightened war. That same base for an attack against the Democrats is nullified and in fact even turns the tide if Clark is the Nominee. So I think that the Bush den of theives will actually work harder to prevent an attack if Clark is the Nominee than they would should it be Dean. I know some would not put it past them to allow an attack on the country should Dean be chosen, but I don't believe even the current clan could be that evil.

Thom

[BeFree]

16. Gee, Thom getting desparate, eh?

Anything to make Clark look good. How long can ya keep it up, i wonder.

Peace.

[Eloriel]

28. No, I disagree

Dean has said, and very explicitly, that Bush has NOT made us safer. He has specifically pointed out such things as shipping crates not being examined and Homeland Security being underfunded, as well as the whole Iraq war thing.

Further, just today (yesterday, actually, on Diane Rehm's show) he raised doubts about what Bush knew re 9-11.

If Bush were to pull something like what you describe off, it would be VERY risky because it would play right into an "I told you so" from Dean.

And I give your post a D for Demogoguery.

Eloriel

[asjr]

12. attack

the election of GW would be another terrorist attack. He is the number one terrorist in the world right now. Not just our country--the WORLD.

[William Seger]

18. This is something the Dem candidates should be talking about every day

"I think it would hurt Bush miserably, miserably, miserably. People would know that since 9/11 he has done precious little to make us safer."

You're definitely right that people should know that, but I'm not so sure that most really do. Who's been saying that? Certainly not the network media, which is about all most people seem to know these days. I'd like to see the Dem candidates really stressing the issue of how Bush's* phoney "war on terrorism" has actually made us less safe. Otherwise, it really worries me -- for a lot of reasons -- that Bush* would actually benefit politically from another attack like 9/11.

[radwriter0555]

4. LOL! why would there be another attack on the USA? And by whom? Give me

a break.

The freaks who were allowed to attack the WTC were nutjob lunatics that the bush regime ALLOWED to perp their freaky revenge fantasies.

Keep in mind it was only the SECOND SUCH ATTACK IN MORE THAN 200 YEARS.

The bush regime simply cannot afford to allow another attack to take place in the USA. It would be utter, catastrophic failure for them to allow such a thing to happen again.

They knew about it the first time and sort of got away with it, but we KNOW without a doubt they had a huge hand in letting it happen. They don't have the audacity to allow it to happen again.

[salinen]

6. My theory

is that Ronnie will die right before the Hate boat party. How does one time a death? How should I know.

[Justice]

9. I Agree With Your Theory

Since we haven't seen Ronnie in - a very long time - I think timing a death could be very easy.

However, despite what many republicans think, ronnie is not "beloved" by all. His death with get 24/7 coverage - but also bring attention to his policies which resulted in a deep recession.

[economic justice]

30. No

This is the wackiest conspiracy theory of them all. Ronald Reagan hasn't been seen IN PUBLIC for a long time. His family, obviously, sees him all the time! Do you REALLY think that Nancy, Ron and Patti would do ANYTHING to help Bush? Anything at all? They **despise** the Bush family! This theory is quite simply....ridiculous and is thought about by people who desperately need a life outside of politics. There IS more to each day than who wins and loses elections. Leave DU for awhile. Watch TV. Listen to the radio. Go to the park. Visit a relatives grave. Read a book to a kid. Do SOMETHING to escape the "politics is everything" thinking that addictive DU'ers can succumb to.

[maveric]

10. What makes you think that "Ronnie" is still alive right now?

He may be dead and in a deep freeze just waiting to be thawed out at the most opportune of times. :tinfoilhat:

[economic justice]

32. Because

His family talks about him and his condition. Ron, Jr. recently was on TV talking about the toll it takes on the family and the need for BILLIONS in Alzheimer's research. The baby boomers are growing older and a calamity is before us.

[stinkeefresh]

15. this friend speaks my mind.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

21. Did you ever hear anything about "Operation Northwoods"?....

<http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html>

"N E W Y O R K, May 1 — In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro."

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties,

IMHO, we're dealing with the same kind of people today.

As far as the people that carried out 9-11, read this:

Did Terrorist Pilots Train at U.S. Military Schools?
<http://www.madcowprod.com/index5.html>

"In addition to having been inducted into the U.S. flight training program by two Dutch-owned flight schools in Venice, Florida, as many as six of the terrorists, including ringleader Mohammed Atta, also received training at U.S. military facilities, according to a flurry of stories between Sept 15 and 17 in the Washington Post, Newsweek, and Knight Ridder newspapers."

"Nutjob lunatics" don't get enrolled in U.S. military schools.

[bluestateguy]

7. Another attack

It will be rather hard for the Bush Administration to duck responsibility if they allow another atatck to happen. Republicans control everything in Washington and blaming Bill Clinton 3 years after he left office will not work.

[Cleita]

8. There won't be another attack.

The first attack did it's job of putting the nation into a state of shock sufficient for the Busheviks to set in motion the rest of their power grab. A second attack would make them look really bad like they didn't have all the security necessary in place. It would really blow the last bit of credibility they had for the preemptive strike on Iraq.

A second attack wouldn't have the same effect as the first because now the nation is more hardened to the possibility and would be second guessing from the moment it happened instead of sitting around dumb struck. A second attack would send the message that Bush can't protect the nation from terrorists so therefore maybe a new President is needed who can.

[DuctapeFatwa]

11. Pros and cons of a second "Unity Operation"

I think there is some division of opinion within the regime itself on this, with some agreeing with several posters here that there might be a perception that the regime was unable to "keep Americans safe," but then there are others that favor it because it would make it possible to formally suspend the constitution, get out of all the hassle of having to have an "election show," and accelerate internment of undesirable populations.

I have no idea which argument will win the day. In the final analysis, it will depend on which one is demonstrably more profitable for Halliburton and Northrupp-Grummond.

[mzmolly]

13. OMG, don't even say it...

I can't bear the thought. The only thing is it would be a double edged sword b/c the Dems could correctly capitalize and state * did not protect us from terra via the Iraq war?

[KoKo]

17. During the Democratic Convention.

That's when. Next date after that is day before Election Day.

[rucky]

19. Olympics. Athens.

seems the most accessable and logical place to make a statement about world affairs.

that's my guess

[Minstrel Boy]

20. The next 9/11 or plus event means code red and martial law.

No need for Rove to spin that one.

[Capn Sunshine]

22. IF THERE IS AN ATTACK, BUSH FAILED TO PROTECT US

and Dean was right.We wasted too much time money and attention on Iraq instead of funding our own domestic forces.

[Minstrel Boy]

25. you got it

Unfortunately, being right will mean only a moral victory in the event of martial law.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. Why worry yourself with this sort of thing?

There either will or won't be another attack, and there is nothing anyone of us can do about it short of seeing it happen and trying to stop it.

The various authorities may or may not be able to stop it if one happens.

I consider it as a random sudden occurence, like an earthquake or asteroid hitting.

Or somebody running a stop sign, or leaving the gas on in the downstairs apartment. Or shooting at cars in Columbus.

There are terrible things that can happen, and there are few we can anticipate or properly defend against.

Why worry about that which we can't control?

[economic justice]

31. You said it!

There is something a bit creepy, too, about "handicapping" the politcal odds of a catastrophic attack on the country.

[Fleshdancer]

24. If another terrorist attack occurs

I think it will make the WH look very bad. They've poured money into Homeland Security and if it fails, then it reflects poorly on bush.

Plus, with all the time and energy spent on invading Iraq which gets messier with each passing day, people are going to wake up to the idea that starting wars does NOT make us safer.

All the Democratic candidates are warning Americans that this admin. is not taking the steps to keep us safe and another attack will make people realize they're right.

The economic implications wouldn't be good either if the attack caused massive damage.

[creativelcro]

26. The timing: next May-July.

later and it would look suspicious. Earlier and something else may happen in between to hold public attention...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. "If.." hypotheticals

"If Dean were to be nominated an attack after the convention could be used by the Republicans as a base for a claim that you need Bush's military propensitys running things."

Or, how about:

If Dumbya was caught molesting a goat...

If Kerry wore a bikini to his next Leno show..

If Lieberman was to convert to Islam..

If Dean was to divorce his wife and marry Britney Spears..

If Elvis were discovered alive in Vegas and run as a republican...

If..if..

[dfong63]

29. if there's another attack, then Bush is on the hook

... no matter who the dems nominate. no amount of spin doctoring will be able to cover up the fact that it happened on Bush's watch, after congress gave Bush everything he wanted in terms of the patriot act, funding for anti-terrorism initiatives, etc. Bush will hardly be able to cast himself as the man to protect America, after a second catastrophic failure. that dog ain't gonna hunt.

[Padraig18]

33. I do *not* agree with your analysis.

If we're attacked, it means * failed to protect us, period. You can't spin it into a positive for Clark but a negative for Dean. Your bias is showing.