STORM2K

Will the people unite with Bush against the terrorists or will blame his administration for failing on the war on terror.

IMO Bush will benefit if an attack happens hopefully nothing happens.

Please dont jump to me because I dont vote in the US and I have no preference here in PR.

It's hard to judge how an attack would impact the vote. My gut reaction is that it would just add to the polarization if that's possible.

I would say both. It depends on what type and how much damage. All I can say is don't depend on the Government to protect or help you if it goes bad.
<img src='http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/22/22_1_1.gif' alt='Boy Scouts' border=0>

Both or one of the two is my vote because in trying times terrorism did bring us together behind Bush. It defined his presidency.

On the other hand, it can be argued that it is the Bush administration's fault enough for not paying enough attention.

One of these scenarios would play out. I am not sure which.

Garrett I highly doubt there is anyone that can say Bush is not watching out for the United States.

Lindaloo wrote:Garrett I highly doubt there is anyone that can say Bush is not watching out for the United States.

I did not say that they were not watching out for the United States but that a terrorist attack was committed under Bush's watch and not paying enough attention.

Personally, I don't think that an act of terrorism is the person in command's fault unless they miss something big.

Okay then let me change that to paying attention.

NO ONE WINS

Personally..I actually think the next attack may be an attempt to assassinate Bush.. However.. if it's something even bigger like mass attacks at once.. I think Kerry wins.

The terrorists "like" Kerry. They don't like Bush too much..

Just my 2 cents

I think it will hurt bush's chances, just because with all this security you think it would have stoped an attack. And if it doesnt John "basher" Kerry will be Bashing his head off.

I think it'll help bush b/c people here will get in the "no one messes with us, if we do this "they" win" type of mind set.

I think it would help Bushes chances because he has 4 yrs experience dealing with terrorism...Its not his fault but the fault of the administrations before him and they were allowed in way before he was in office and 911. People would think that after an attack would not be a good time to change presidents.

Jekyhe32210 wrote:I think it would help Bushes chances because he has 4 yrs experience dealing with terrorism...Its not his fault but the fault of the administrations before him and they were allowed in way before he was in office and 911. People would think that after an attack would not be a good time to change presidents.

You have any proof of this???

Well, everyone knows Bush has been in office 4 years and was in office when 9-11 happened so he has experience in dealing with terrorists but he shoudn't be the one responsible... The US trained OBL to do what they did as far back as the 80s.

http://www.fjrp.com/index.php?p=160

Osama was trained by CIA or Reagan to kill Russain Reds, so we helped Osama, but why does he want to kill us now?

Oh, ok.

I was specifically referring to when the terrorists entered the country. I am interested in when they might have came here. I didn't know if we had any solid proof of that.

They were in this country training in our flight schools during the Clinton Administration. Is that what you mean Garrett?

Yes, but also, do we have documentation of when they arrived. I have a feeling that the planning for an attack on the US was years in the making.

I was just curious if the investigation into these cells has garnered us any of this information.

I believe there is documentation of when they arrived here. I do know that the original 4 that were training in our flight schools came here in 1998. The rest of them came right before Sept. 11th.

But there must have been some here in order to carry out the first attempt back in the early 90's (93?).

I am assuming we have not gotten this far into the investigation yet.