Hilary for president?

[Vautrin]

But few "stable" countries have had such massive terrorist attacks from someone from their own soil. Of course, there are political murders in much of the Western world, but actually blowing a government building up, causing 160 deaths or so, is pretty unique in the "stable" Western world.

Not blaming anyone for not preventing, or being unable to prevent such future attacks. But the question is, why such a thing was possible. It is always easy to claim that the perpretator was a nutjob. But that is begging the question. This is pointing to internal issues, which are not safety issues, that need to be addressed.

[Duke]

There is no way that anyone can pinpoint for sure who is to blame for what during any portion of a presidents term in office. When I replied to this earlier I should have clarified a simple fact that makes me choose Clinton hands down over Bush. Regardless of who thinks Bill is responsible for where the US is now in foreign matters and where they are now with Bush at the helm, I personally did not worry about global politics as much when Bill was president. Quite simply, Bill made me sleep easier at night and I did not worry for the future of my child and my childs children as much as I do now.

I believe that Clinton only used one of the most powerful military forces in the world when it called for it and maybe he did err on the side of caution but I respect that. On the other side of the coin, I believe Bush is an arrogant idiot who wants to play war and will rush in with troops instead of trying to work through the problem via other means (if possible).

Lastly, as for 9/11, only the terrorists actually know why it was done and who was the straw that broke the camels back. For all anyone knows, this plan could have been hatched when JFK was in office.

[temi]

There is something the Psychologists call hindsight bias, I think we all suffer from it when discussing past events, our political views could also influence how we interpret past events.

[Vautrin]

Being a psychology student myself, I can absolutely confirm that temi.

[Duke]

This is not hindsight folks, my post represents my frame of mind over these two guys individual terms. I'm not having any illusions now based off current events that are triggering a psychologically induced happier time, it's just a difference in mindset from then to now.

[Vautrin]

We were not referring to your posts, Duke. But commenting on the tendency of people to say that people should have done this or that to prevent a fact from happening. But only after the occurence of said fact.

You see it in an innocent form for instance in a game of chess. Player A loses because he makes a bad move, and after the act says: "I should have played differently."

[darkangelism]

what about ireland, IRA was much more of a domestic threat then the oklahoma city bombing. We are never going to stop 100% of terrorists, but taking the fight to them is better then waiting around to get hit.

[Vautrin]

The IRA never did slaughter 160 people at the same incident. Nor did the British government / its soldiers serving there. And it is exactly the British actions that caused the IRA to grow in popularity. It did not help the Brits, that they were shooting at protesters for equal opportunity, on Bloody Sunday.

Likewise the fighting between the parties was often between the civilians themselves. And Northern-Ireland is still sharply divided between Catholics and Protestants. Have you seen the images, or footage from the Orange Marches?

Unsurprisingly the first official parliamentary enquire was a total cover-up, immediatly after the affair. And the second was started in 1998; I am not aware if it has come up with conclusions. Or is still writing on the report.