Mass-casualty terrorist attacks on U.S. soil throughout the twentieth century:

[babylonsister]

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/01/the_bush_record.php

The Bush Record
Matthew Yglesias


Thinking back to George W. Bush’s farewell address it’s striking that the best thing the man can say about his record in office is that only once during his term in office were 3,000 people killed by foreign terrorists. And it’s really striking that other people in the conservative movement seem to take this “accomplishment” very seriously. Here’s Christian Brose and here’s Dov Zakheim being very referent about the whole thing.

I thought I might draw their attention to the following CAPAF analysis of mass-casualty terrorist attacks on U.S. soil throughout the twentieth century:



Notice anything? I mean, it’s true that Bush’s record in keeping the United States safe from terrorism is good if you ignore the failure. On the economy, they make the same claim. Sure, Bush has overseen the worst performance ever but if you ignore the recessions, times were pretty good!

Of course my chart is arguably unfairly kind to Bill Clinton so maybe we should expand it to include major attacks abroad as well. Then Clinton goes from zero to one (Kenya), while Bush goes from one to three in the West (9/11, Madrid, and London) plus Bali plus dozens and dozens of attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan. There’s just no way to get around the basic facts here. The effort to argue otherwise is basically just trading on the fact that most people, myself included, were very very frightened in September and October of 2001 and our worst fears haven’t come to pass.

[tekisui]

1. Exactly. Well said.

[onethatcares]

2. where's WTC 1?

1993. Just wondering.

[babylonsister]

4. Were there mass casualties? nt

[RB TexLa]

5. Mass-casualty???

[NutmegYankee]

3. Not to be a ass...

But, there was that Right-wing nut who blew up a federal building during Clinton's administration. 168 People would appears to meet the definition of "mass Casualty"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

On edit: added link

[babylonsister]

8. Good point. I'd consider McVeigh a terrorist, but he was our

terrorist. I don't see the difference.

[indepat]

14. And maybe a RW terrorist at that just like those home-grown RW terrorists who blow up

abortion clinics? :P

[RB TexLa]

6. They do need to change one thing

"throughout the twentieth century" add "and twenty-first century"

[crimsonblue]

7. You forgot the OKC bombing

169 people died. McVeigh was a terrorist.

[sarge43]

9. Oklahoma City? n/t

[madrchsod]

10. -wtc1 and the ok city bombing

perpetrators were both tried and convicted in our federal court system. they were not tortured nor stripped of their rights.

interesting is`t it......the federal court system actually works

[John Q. Citizen]

11. We want a government who is on the job and ready to respond whether it's 9/11, Katrina, or

clearcut evidence of global warming.

We also had OK City.

[depakid]

12. Yglesias proves yet again that he's willing to embrace shallow thought

in order to make an ideological point.

[Greyhound]

13. Then there's the Haymarket thingy I think the parasites would classify that as terrorism,

even though it was really an uprising.

You could restrict it to "foreign terrorist" and the 21st century, then it would be accurate.

[MiniMe]

15. Not to be picky, but *'s presidency is in the 21st century.

[reggie the dog]

17. just a technicality........

the graph is what's important, it speeks for itself.... (am I doing a good Rush???)

[reggie the dog]

16. the graph says it all

ipso facto