Quote:
|
Originally Posted by geetrue
Somethings wrong with everyone (well not everyone) waiting for the terroist to strike America again to prove President Bush's war on terror was wrong.
Heck, they are already doing that ...  |
I don't think that's neccesarily true and I think most reasonable people will acknowledge that, even Bush aside, there would be something incredibly wrong with the country as a whole if anti-terror security was not significantly improved after 9/11 - and no doubt it was improved. If anything, Bush could rather be blamed for not improving it sooner and preventing 9/11.
At what cost, and to what extent has it been efficient abroad however, is questionable.
Likewise, it's in the nature of terrorism to never be 100% avoidable, it's one of the reasons the tactic works. I don't think another terrorist attack would really prove anything against Bush, to be honest; it'd just prove the fact that "War on Terror", like "War on Drugs" in the sense that the administration seems to be pushing it is a bit of a fallacy - it's a war of containment rather than a war of annihilation.