“The response makes a difference. In 1993, the response was to arrest some people and consider it a law enforcement problem. In 2001, the response was to take out two State sponsors of terror (Iraq and Afghanistan), and bring to heel two more (Lybia and Pakistan).”
So that’s a guarantee terrorists won’t attack the US again?
By the way, how did we bring Pakistan to heel?
No, but that is a straw man argument.
The question never was “Who can we elect so we don’t get attacked again?”
The question was who is best equipped to deal with the aftermath of another attack.
As to how was Pakistan brought to heel, I respond as follows.
Musharraf had taken Pakistan over in a military coup in 1999. On June 20, 2001 (83 days before 9/11), Musharraf completed his power grab by making himself President.
At that time, Pakistan was a new nuclear power and was in open conflict with India over the Kashmir region. It was a beligerent State with posturing towards expansion.
When 9/11 happened, the U.S. invaded neighboring Afghanistan and put Musharraf on notice: you are either with us in out fight on terrorism, or you are the enemy.
Musharraf turned on it’s former Taliban allies in Afghanistan, stopped the saber rattling with India, and has provided essential intelligence and manpower in the fight against terrorism.