The President's Speech - Live Thread

carton253

[carton253]

Live thread for the President's speech!

[MEG33]

Your comment on the speech to the UN is spot on.I loved it.I thought the one at the Cathedral was magnificent.I get goose bumps remembering.This time of the year I'd love to see it again.I think some in this Nation,the Dems in particular, forget why we fight this war on terror.

[AFPhys]

Ah, well, it's just another 87 billion down the drain right?

My man, rather you choose to recognize it or not, 9/11 cost us far more than 87B$. I understand that for most of us, numbers with six or seven digits are incomprehensible, but you really must attempt to challenge that disability.

At a minimum, 9/11 cost us in excess of 80B$ in clean-up and rebuilding cost alone. It has cost us more in additional attempts at security, some of which will certainly go awry as we try several approaches to discover what will work. Indirect costs to the US economy for the past 2 years are greater than 500B$ and probably amount to paring 3+% off the growth rate of the economy. This economy could well have been screaming along without the drag from 9/11, but nobody wishes to admit that, apparently because in a real sense, that is admitting that BinLadin and his fanatics succeeded.

We must work as hard as we can in efforts to prevent this type of thing from happening again, and it will cost us several hundred billion dollars, at least, to secure our country, our economy, and our way of life. I still believe it is inevitable that there will be another major terrorist attack on this country which will succeed, and will cost us dearly. It will again not bring us to our knees (I disagree with you, Peach, for once, I guess I'm not one of your triplets - LOL), but it will only put more steel in our spineless class.

Oh, by the way, if any of you have a more cost effective method --- feel free to run for president --- or let Kerry or another Demodog know --- they can sure use some ideas right now.

MM, Howlin, Mo1, et.al ... I loved reading your commentary as I read the president's speech this morning on whitehouse.gov.

[billbears]

My man, rather you choose to recognize it or not, 9/11 cost us far more than 87B$. I understand that for most of us, numbers with six or seven digits are incomprehensible, but you really must attempt to challenge that disability.

Yes it did. And I would assume that we would go after the terrorists behind 9/11 instead of fulfilling policy plans put forth by the PNAC. Heard anymore about those papers 'tying' Al Qaeda and Iraq? How about the caches of WMDs that we just 'knew' were there? Thought not. And all the while Saudi Arabia continues to support terrorism and North Korea actually has nuclear weapons. But you keep hope alive okay?

[Peach]

Your comments were spot on regarding the financial cost to our country in dealing with 9/11. No one ever admits it, but we haven't recovered financially yet and there is no way to make up for the brain trust lost of those souls who died at the hands of the murderers on that day.

AFPhys - you may not be a "triplet" (LOL) but I pray you are right that the terrorists do not find a way to cripple us financially if indeed they are able to pull off a "next time". If ever I wanted to be wrong...

[MEG33]

In some quarters if we build a fence around the borders and all arm ourselves...we will be OK.We can fight terrorism on our front lawns and town squares.

[billbears]

Wow big bold letters!! I read the speech and watched the first half. BTW, Fox News went over the speech pratically sentence by sentence BEFORE the speech. Do I have to hear it come from the man's mouth before I can comment on it?

[Tamzee]

Ouch.... I'm sorry to hear that :-(

It was just lovely to see him address the nation again and the speech went beautifully!

I think somewhere in the 300 or 400's is a full transcript of it posted by deport :-)

[billbears]

But you keep the insults and and other things coming okay? Haven't seen an argument out of you yet.

[Peach]

And now you are changing the subject from the cost of the war in Iraq to WMD and tying Iraq to AQ.

The cost of war has been adequately described and defended by those more capable than I.

Reading any of the dozen of links I can send you regarding AQ and Iraq may change your mind as well. You would have to commit to a lot of reading -let me know if you're interested.

Regarding WMD - we know he had them because he used them. Did you know that all the intelligence agencies for the nations on the Security Council at the UN believe he had them and thus the 17 resolutions that dealt specifically with WMD. Why do you think Hussein chose war rather than reveal their whereabouts? Why do you think Hussein chose war rather than permit the UN inspectors free access?

[Peach]

Just read your #968 - so true. Great end of legacy for Clinton analysis in the form of poetry.

[Mo1]

THank you and you made some very excellent points in your post

[arete]

At a minimum, 9/11 cost us in excess of 80B$ in clean-up and rebuilding cost alone. It has cost us more in additional attempts at security, some of which will certainly go awry as we try several approaches to discover what will work. Indirect costs to the US economy for the past 2 years are greater than 500B$ and probably amount to paring 3+% off the growth rate of the economy. This economy could well have been screaming along without the drag from 9/11, but nobody wishes to admit that, apparently because in a real sense, that is admitting that BinLadin and his fanatics succeeded.

That is utter, complete and total nonsense. If 9/11 hadn't happened, we would have had to create it ourselves. The economy was getting ready to tank and would have if the government didn't step in and start spending massive amounts of money. The spending spree has continues since and there is no end in sight. 9/11 if anything provided the excuse for historic borrowing and spending in a losing battle with the economy and not terrorists.

Richard W.

[mass55th]

Very well said. The problem after the '93 bombing of the WTC was that no one took it seriously or believed that such terrorism could ever happen again. The Clinton Administration shrugged it off as just another crime which should be dealt with in the courts. That was a very bad mistake and it led to further attacks on our embassies, etc.

The old saying: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" can certainly be applied here. Better to spend the money on prevention, preparedness and protection, than to wait until it happens again and be caught off-guard once more. The stepped-up security around the country has made it harder for terrorists to get a toe-hold, or to attack us again. Yes it costs money, security always does. But if liberals had their way, that security budget would be the first thing cut. The people willing to authorize funding for after-school programs, are the same people willing to cut the security funding that would keep that after-school program safe and sound.

[LS]

Joe, beat it. Nothing would make YOU feel safer, short of putting up Roman-style guard posts all along the border (hint: it didn't do Rome a bit of good).

Just chill on the anti-immigrant stuff. And go vote Greenie or Libertarian or whatever other USELESS party you care to vote for . . . or, hell PLEASE stay home. Just don't answer another one of my posts, because you have nothing constructive to say.

[LS]

Ok, then you aren't a gold bug. That is a smart strategy. But even miners ain't gonna be doing well for long.

[Miss Marple]

You know, sometimes you absolutely go off the deep end, and this is one of them. Who do you think paid for the removal of the tons of debris and the repair in the surrounding building in New York? Do you think that work was donated?

The cost to the economy was HUGE! Lost work hours, NYSE closed for a week, drop in air travel, costs to increase security, calling up reservists, people not shopping because of FEAR, loss in advertising revenue for most networks due to 24-hour news coverage, cancelled events, etc. etc.

Yes, we would have been in a recession anyway. But this was a HUGE blow to the economy, and to act like it isn't is just plain foolish.

[LS]

I would certainly join such a party if it reached critical mass. To those who say, "Well, it will never do so if everyone has YOUR attitude," that's not true. The Republican Party arose out of three different parties (the Liberty, the Free-soil, and the Whigs) in a matter of TWO YEARS. But the issues must be right.

Right now, the two most important issues on my agenda are 1) national security (i.e., war on terror, not necessarily BORDER PATROL, although that is important, but a much more complex issue), and 2) taxes/regulation. I do separate the "size of government" from regulation. I think you can have, unfortunately, a somewhat big government and have low regulation. Not common, but it happens. That's why W and the GOP will get my vote for the foreseeable future.

[LS]

You're exactly right. And one BIG difference between 1945 Japan and 2003 Iraq is that the Japanese were TOTALLY beholden to the Emperor---whatever he said, went. When he said, "surrender," they did, almost to a man. I was talking to a fellow who was in Guadalcanal and he was scheduled to do MP duty in Japan. He didn't get there, but said his buddies were amazed at how submissive the Japanese were after the Emperor's announcement. We will not get such an announcment from OBL or Saddam---who are much closer to Hitler in insisting that the world go to hell with them!

[FITZ]

The economy was already bad in the 90s -- well before 9-11. NAFTA and globalism were already put into place back then ---- the area of the country I'm in was doing very poorly as a result of NAFTA.

[LS]

Interesting that Hitler commanded his people to fight on, and many did. But in Japan, the Emperor told his people to lay down their arms, and they did, almost to a man. I just spoke to a vet who was scheduled to do MP duty there, and who got out of it, but whose friends were amazed at the submissiveness of the Japanese.