Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wouldn't it depend on the facts of how the attack developed or would that be irrelevant?
excellent point. if the attack had been planned for years, like the 9/11 attacks were, and the security systems in place had not changed, you could legitimately lay the blame at the feet of bush and his DHS, much like the blame was laid at the feet of the clinton administration for the 9/11 attacks. however, the current administration also has to accept some responsibility. in the case of the 9/11 attacks, the majority of the blame falls to the clinton administration, but the bush administration also has to take partial blame for not acting on intel given to them.
If a major successful terrorist attack had occurred apx. 30 weeks into Obama's presidency, who would be to blame?
Mel Gibson
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
just a wild guess...the terrorists 
