Oh my. You can not measure a large scale attack merely by the loss of life from the actual act itself. What would the cost be if somehow the jihadists were able to destroy a city - or to disrupt our government in a significant way? What would be the cost of our nation’s power grid being debillitated? What would happen if our financial institutions were non-functional? The loss of life is the most tragic - but 911 cost us in addition to the loss of life. A larger scale attack - and we may not be so resilient.
What would the cost be to us if we lose our freedoms; if we sacrificed them to gain an imaginary defense against a distant and crippled foe?
There is no evidence whatsoever that Giuliani would prosecute the war any more vigorously than any other candidate. Hillary, at least, has her pro-war votes to point to. Giuliani hasn’t even got that much on his resume. What he does have is a record of vigorously opposing the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms. He maintains this position despite the fact that Americans use those arms 2,000,000 times each year to halt violent crimes. Would you sacrifice 2,000,000, a fair sized city’s population, each year banking on the hope that Giuliani’s imagined anti-terror record might “some day” save another city’s worth? Those numbers don’t add up.