Posted on 09/22/2005 12:50:55 PM PDT by Uncle Joe Cannon
Bush: Weak terror response led to 9/11
Sep 22, 2005, 19:00 GMT
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- President Bush said withdrawing from Iraq would be a mistake that would embolden terrorists just as U.S. responses to other attacks led to 9/11 hijackings.
Speaking Thursday at the Pentagon after an update on the war on terror, Bush said a pullback would be seen as weakness and make the United States less safe.
'The terrorists saw our response to the hostage crisis in Iran, the bombings in the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole,' Bush said. 'The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves and so they attacked us.'
It was the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, carried out by al-Qaida operatives, that led Bush to launch the war on terror with an attack on Afghanistan, where al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden had been given sanctuary. Bush links the fighting in Iraq with the war on terror.
The president said the plan is to follow a strategy of making political gains in the affected counties, while training local personnel to assume security operations.
YEAH! It's about time,I hope he does it more often.
Oh.....you kids make me laugh!
Ask the Taliban about the President's 'backbone'. Ask alQaeda about the President's 'backbone.' As Saddam about the President's 'backbone.'
Better yet...........ask his loyal troops about their Commander in Chief's backbone.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you look ridiculous.
I'm with you Doc!! Is your first name Michael?
It's the wrong word, hophead. The fact that he hasn't lashed out at his political enemies has nothing to do with lack of courage, but rather with presence of class and decorum.
I'm very glad he's finally spoken up, but he probably, with his temperament, was better off to cool down before he made a public statement, lest he say something very UNPresidential (which I'm sure is what he was thinking).
You "inquest" is the worst Bush hater on FR. Come one man just give it up, enough with your idiotic arguments.
ah... but a man can dream, eh?
4 years too late.
Yes, he said it. I'm glad. Damned tired of that impeached president bashing our President. WE voted for him too...both times and would vote a third time if we could. :)
Good points SS. Thanks
We're not the simpletons you take us for.
According to what's being said on this and countless other threads by Bush's fans, the war was already in effect at least since the 1993 WTC bombings. Did he show any signs of acknowledging that fact? Did he at any point during the 2000 campaign criticize the Clinton administration for an inadequate response to the provocations? His talk of "humility" during the campaign suggested that if anything, Clinton was trying to do too much.
He gave no outward sign during the campaign, or during the first eight months of his presidency, that he was about to change U.S. policy toward the terrorists. That lack of outward sign, as much as anything else, was a part of the "response" Bush said that "the terrorists saw", in his statement quoted in the article of the thread.
Mark
Thanks for the reply, cubreporter. Yes, people help people at the point of need. Too bad there was so much press on the looters. That obscured much of the important things that were happening -- things that presented more excellent role models for people to emulate.
Did Ann Coulter really say that? Sounds likes she's back tracking.
Roberts has been working in Washington for years. More likely insiders know exactly where he stands on the Constitution.
Reading this thread...your post is ironic.
You don't see that?
OBL said that after Somalia (black hawk down)when Clinton had the military cut and run he knew America was "a paper tiger" and lacked the willingness to fight and the stomach for death.
I have boycotted Coluter's columns on the Courts since she decided to engage in an emotional tirade because she's not welcome in the inner circle of this President to influence his choice.
She's now stating the President may have accidentally made a good choice? It's twisted, but in a way she had almost be better on her knees praying she's right about the guy after the way she has conducted herself. This guy proves to be what I believe he is, a Strict Constructionist, and her reputation is severely damaged.
I suppose by the same logic I "inadveratently" supported the right guy? Laughable logic.
Ironic.....LOL I thought the same thing, well close, you were nicer! :)
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.