Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jaguar
On the downside the actions of the US since the 9/11 attacks has inflamed world opinion, galvanised the Islamic world's opinion of the US and alienated traditional allies. In the long run, which is better at keeping america safe?
|
Our actions prior to 9/11 didn't exactly prevent 9/11. Clinton (I don't blame him for Sep 11 nor do I question his tactics) used a much more targeted approach and didn't alienate anyone in the process and look where that got us.
These people have been after our asses since the 70s if not longer and it doesn't seem to matter how "politely" we fight back - they still come at us harder and harder. They attacked when Carter was president, when Reagan was president, When Bush's I and II were president and when Clinton was president. Over that range of Commanders in Chief, we have fought the fight any way you can imagine but the resolve of the terrorists has not diminished in the least.
So, given that, how do you suggest we defend ourselves?