Foiled Terror Plots Against America Since 9/11

[Ban my account ffs!]

BRTD is still obsessing about Obama winning Kansas? Something that was big months ago? How surprising!

It's also kind of disgusting at how light hearted people have taken the foiled terrorist attacks. I'm getting the sense that some of the left hate Bush so much that they secretly wish we'd be attacked and scoff at the ones we've stopped. For God's sake, let's all be thankful we haven't had any more bloodshed at home.

Many of those attacks were foiled by nations that are full of "leftists" that "hate America"...

We don't scoff at what the Bush administration has done to foil specific terrorist plots.  I commend him for that.

But he has bankrupted our country by providing irresponsible tax cuts to the rich, ruined our reputation around the world, fueled more terrorists, and sent our nation to war with a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Of course now you can say "oh, things are going well"... but you can't just send a nation to war for no good reason and then say "well, we won, so what's the big deal"

[Ban my account ffs!]

and sent our nation to war with a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Terrorism isn't just about 9/11.

Just like the war in Iraq wasn't just about WMDs... but that's not necessarily a good thing.  $$$$  What an ingenious way to transfer large sums of money from hard working Americans to the pockets of the President's buddies.

[Ban my account ffs!]

and sent our nation to war with a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Terrorism isn't just about 9/11.

Just like the war in Iraq wasn't just about WMDs... but that's not necessarily a good thing.  $$$$  What an ingenious way to transfer large sums of money from hard working Americans to the pockets of the President's buddies.

Just like every other war has been just about "$$$$" right?

What was the main objective of going into Iraq?  WMDs?  Al Queda? 

Hell, even if Bush had said "we need to remove Saddam Hussein from power" from the beginning, that would have been at least a little better.  Sure, he may not have been popular for it, but by now people would have said "well, we accomplished our main objective and now Iraq is becoming democratic and free."  Instead, we're left with "well, at least Saddam Hussein is gone and now Iraq is becoming democratic and free."

But you don't go into war just for the political side effects.  You go in with clear objectives. 

Oh well... there's no sense in arguing about it now because what's done is done and we need to focus on what's best for Iraq and the U.S.

[Ban my account ffs!]

What was the main objective of going into Iraq?  WMDs?  Al Queda? 

Hell, even if Bush had said "we need to remove Saddam Hussein from power" from the beginning, that would have been at least a little better.  Sure, he may not have been popular for it, but by now people would have said "well, we accomplished our main objective and now Iraq is becoming democratic and free."  Instead, we're left with "well, at least Saddam Hussein is gone and now Iraq is becoming democratic and free."

Actually, I don't know about everyone else but I remember that the WMD argument wasn't the only reason for going in.

I know it might not seem to be the case five years afterwards but removing Saddam from power will be much better when you take a long term look at things.

I haven't argued against the fact that Saddam being gone has been a great thing.  My beef is not with the outcome, but with the reasoning and ultimate motives for going in.