They were nowhere near the same scale, the Al Qaida connections are dubious or non-existent and they were all situations that were virtually impossible to detect with the intel apparatus that has been preventing the larger attacks. 9/11 was like Pearl Harbor redux; the attacks you've named here would not even be remarkable if the perps had not been Muslims and had instead been "lone nut" types. In fact, it should give you pause that we have only been hit a few times by these individuals in four and a half years; despite my endorsement of the president's security performance, I've been expecting waves of suicide bombers since about the time I realized Al Qaida was having trouble pulling off big time ops in the U.S.
We're getting hit on a daily basis in Iraq as well; I don't necessarily agree with taking so narrow a view as to say that just because we've outsourced terrorist targets to Iraq and that it is military personnel that are bearing the brunt of it, that we aren't getting hit.
I say the following as a veteran: It's as much our job to do the dying as it is our job to do the killing. Nobody would ever have said FDR was a failure because Nazis were killing U.S. troops on the fields of Normandy instead of killing civilians in New Jersey. We went somewhere that the enemy used for training, harbor and funding. If that costs us lives that is the nature of war, and the warriors are professional volunteers who know exactly what they're getting into.
Lastly, you know I wasn't asking about some idiot driving an SUV into something or Marines getting killed on a battlefield when I asked my question. Let's try again: On september 12, 2001, did you think wee'd go four and a half years without Al Qaida launching another mass casualty attack on our soil? I know I expected them to hit us again in days or weeks.
Two reasons.
President Bush knows what he's doing.
The war in Iraq is a roach motel. If you're a roach, you go in and don't get out.