If we were attacked again would it change your mind about bush's war?

[Philosoraptor]

Nine eleven seems to be the number one reason we 'went to war' in Afghanistan and amazingly in Iraq, and the neos still refer to nine eleven in every sentence. But the lust for revenge is fading and the fog is lifting and America sees the ugly, bloody truth.

The neos know America wants the needless war to be over, they know we want our people back here at home and safe, but we have grown increasingly irrelevant to them. They know they can make us react as a herd, they know they can fool enough of us to make the hoax work.

We've lost our resolve for the war on terror, but I believe that they think they can reinvigorate our war mojo, just like after nine eleven, jingoism, uber-patriotism, millions of tiny little Chinese American flags on every hummer.

If we were attacked by terrorists again, something as bad as or worse than nine eleven, would it change your mind about our Roman foreign policy? If it were said to be Islamofascists in Iran that attacked us, would nuking Iran make more sense than it does now?

The current mythology says that nine eleven changed everything. Could another terror attack have exactly the same effect? Would our 'leaders' exploit it? Would America fall for it again?

[Heidi]

1. No. We're not at war with those responsible for Sept. 11, or even with their "leader."

Good morning, Philosoraptor. :hi:

[Philosoraptor]

4. Say, whatever happened to that guy who attacked us?

Did we ever git im' dead or alive?

-----------

good morning to you,
good morning to you,
good morning dear Heidi,
good morning tooooooooooooooo,
youoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

[Heidi]

5. Good question!

Let me check Fox News and get back to you. :P

[trumad]

2. Loaded question

but my simple answer is no.

[peacebird]

3. would *I* - no. I would believe that bush's wars CAUSED another attack. But would

ma & pa america, those who are dimly aware of world events and only get the news Ruxh and buddies feed them? Sadly - I have to say yes, they would be outraged... They would place new flag stickers on their SUVs, and sit glued to the teevee cheering as the pretty "fireworks" wreaked havoc on innocent people halfway around the world.

[Eugene]

6. It would harden my belief that BushCo screwed up.

At this point, only a hard-headed 20% or so believe that
the war in Iraq has anything to do with keeping America
safe. The American people are wise to Bush at long last.
Another terror attack might make people afraid, but not
afraid enough to believe anything BushCo tells them.

[mtnester]

7. Watch for the ramping up of terra alerts as we approach 7/7/07

all the BS terror alerts set us up BIG time for not being ready for the real thing.

Would it change my outlook? No. But I am not sure I agree with the poster upthread about ma and pa America. I think a new attack could be the push ma and pa need to get ANGRY.

[maine_raptor]

8. If we are attacked again,

then that's goina, kinda, blow a hole in that "only Reps can keep you safe" thing that Rudy's tryin' to sell, ain't it?

And quite frankly, ain't nothin' going to change my view of this war.

[flobee1]

9. After 9/11

Bush had everyones support
the American people
other nations
and even our enemies
We all rallied behind our president. We all knew what had to be done
He could've been the greatest president in history for going after the people that attacked us and bringing them to justice. He had the power and support to do incredible things.
but he decided to go after the oil instead.

He doesn't care about who lives or dies
he doesn't care about the destruction in Iraq
He doesn't care about the homeless that are still in NO
He doesn't care about the constitution this country is based on
He doesn't care that people have to decide between food and healthcare
He doesn't care that people cant eat fish from our rivers and lakes
He doesn't care that there are REAL threats from other countries that have nothing to do with profit

The only ones that matter are him and his cronies
He has taken all our money and given it to his friends
he has no personality, just greed and contempt
When he doesn't get what he wants, he throws a tantrum like the little kid in the middle of the toystore that was told no. The American people are left redfaced and embarrassed while trying to stop his bellowing and blustering. Do we give him his toy and shut him up until the next toystore, or do we teach him a lesson. Will he even learn that lesson?

If we are attacked again, I will blame bush directly, without hesitation
our country is not secure, we have not defeated our enemy
We are not even fighting our enemy

He has had 6 years
nothing has changed
Things have gotten worse
times up

[momster]

15. Great Post -- Add This

He doesn't care about the war's impact on the Republican Party.

I have long believed that he has zero interest in who will be the next president (possibly because he doesn't plan to give up the job -- tinfoil hat time) and had never had any interest in what his own party members have done or will do on the Hill. Therefore, threatening him with significant losses in the 2008 election is pointless.

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. He NEVER had my support! I didn't rally around him after 9/11.

Maybe I'm the only one though. :shrug:

[Nunyabiz]

25. I has sadly fooled by the false flag attack

Until the blatantly fake fat osama tape magically turned up in some abandoned house Dec of 01', right then and there and knew something was bullshit and started researching it didn't take too long to realise what these treasonous bastards did.
This was their Reichstag fire and anyone that doesn't see that is blind.

[OneBlueSky]

10. my first question would be "Who's REALLY behind this?" . . .

and I'd be HIGHLY skeptical of whatever "official" story the media was peddling . . .

fool me once, shame on you . . .
fool me twice, I'm an idiot . . .

[AndyA]

11. Another attack on American soil would just prove that the Republicans

CANNOT protect us. They didn't protect us on 9/11, and although they try to blame Clinton for that, most people don't buy it. Clinton was long gone, and the warnings in August should have been enough for a responsible administration to take action to warn us and protect us.

The GOP keeps telling us we're safer with them. Despite the fact that historically that's a lie, another attack would prove beyond any doubt that this isn't true.

The person responsible for the attacks on 9/11 (bin Laden) is still on the loose. Bush is on record as stating he doesn't care where the man is. And the bin Laden and Bush families have business ties. Suspicious? You bet.

George Bush is a failure looking for a place to happen. He's a leaking brake line. A natural gas leak searching for a flame.

It's time to stop him with impeachment. For no other reason alone, it will prevent him from attacking any other countries, or removing any more of our rights from us. Bush must be put under a microscope, his every movement, his every word questioned. Only impeachment will do that.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

12. I think there would be a lot more skepticism

because even folks in small town red America realize how little Bush cares for the troops or what he does with them. And they are listening to the retired generals and other officers who are letting them know how poorly this war was planned and executed.

[Matsubara]

13. Why would an attack by terrorists make me change my mind about an unrelated country?

I never had a problem with attacking al qaeda, because they have attacked US troops before, and supposedly planned the 9-11 attacks. (I'm not 100% sure of that, but benefit of the doubt...)

Iraq has never attacked the US. Hussein was a brutal but loyal ally to Reagan & Bush, but Bush screwed him over by having his embassador April Glaspie give him PERMISSION to invade Kuwait when his troops were spotted on tke Kuwait border by satellite. Even the rationale for THE FIRST gulf war was largely fabricated, with lurid tales of babies and incubators being told by a "nurse" who was later revealed to be the daughter of a high-ranking Kuwaiti official and not a nurse at all, and the story turned out to be false, and as always, the retractions appeared deep in the paper, if at all.

There was ZERO, none, ZIP in terms of justification for the second Iraq war, and scant justification for the first.


SO NO, I WOULD NOT CHANGE MY MIND.


And if North Korea attacked us, I would not want to bomb Vietnam. In a sane world it is NOT supposed to work that way.

[Vinca]

14. No. It would make me despise him even more because

the people who might be protecting our borders and defending us in our streets are thousands of miles away making money for the war profiteers in the name of "nation building." Bush's war has everything to do with money and nothing to do with democracy. Does anyone honestly think he went in to Iraq to "help the poor Iraqi people?" In addition, he's now got every fanatic and nutjob in the Middle East pissed off more than they were before and it's a given they will find a way to attack us again on our own soil. Sadly, it might happen during the reign of a Democratic president and the mantra will be - once again - that "only a Republican can protect you from the terrorists." Even more sadly, the dumb people will believe it.

[HughBeaumont]

16. America would be chaotic and demand Bewsh's resignation.

I doubt even the droolers would show their faces to back him. Only the sub-idiotic wouldn't be able to put 2 and 2 together . . . that maybe, JUST MAYBE, a Republican with zero care for diplomacy and an agenda that DOESN'T help the wealthy and no one else might not be the best guy to protect this country.

[earth mom]

17. NO-because I don't buy into who they say are the REAL terrorists.

MIHOP or LIHOP. :tinfoilhat:

[momster]

18. Would only prove we were right all along

GWB treats terrorism as a marker in some twisted political game but if we were attacked again, the blame would rest with him, no matter how they try to blame the Democrats (and they would try!) They've spent too much time trumpeting how "Big Daddy Gov'mint" keeps us safe and, this time, they could not get away with the ol' "We've only been in charge 8 months!" like they did on 9-11. The captain of the ship is responsible for everything that happens during his watch, whether he's been on board twenty years or twenty minutes. Another attack would land him in impeachment or revolution.

[AndyTiedye]

19. They Will Stage Another False Flag Attack If The Democrats Ever Really Threaten their Power

It wouldn't change MY mind, or very many minds on DU for that matter,
but they have been ignoring us for years.

[newportdadde]

20. Most of the US would change their mind.. approval to 80%.

Yeah know it would appear that their efforts to keep us safe didn't work but nobody is going to think through that it. It will be another call to arms.

Imagine if a Nuke was detinated here in the US and killed a million people. What would happen? I think you would see this country unite and call for blood like something out of movie. I think we would end up very very close to a genocide over it as we turned whichever country we blamed for it(Iran) into a pile of ash.

[liberalitch]

21. count me among those who would blame the attack ON the war.

[Solly Mack]

23. Why would I? Didn't support Bush before, day of, or any day after

September 11, 2001. Never had revenge lust. I was more concerned about how Bush would use that day to harm us all than I was about anything happening that day. And that's not the comforting recall of a painful memory - it's the no thrills truth. I was horrified by how people were dying but I was worried about the future.

Never had any "resolve" regarding the "war on terror", which I find to be just as bogus as Bush's legitimacy.


That said...


I have no doubts that people, by and large, would react exactly as they did then.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Would America fall for it again? Of course it would.

The neocon/neolib politicians are praying for such an "I told you so" moment to rouse the populace to it's usual superpatriotic response of flagwaving, blustering, "support the troops", mindlessness.

Given this country's history of responding to every "threat" brandished by the politicians and promises of quick victory by the generals, by dispatching the troops to "save" us, who can doubt that the people won't be "shocked and awed" by the fear of whatever bogeyman is erected.

[RevCheesehead]

26. No. I've seen "V for Vendetta."

And so have millions of others.