How would've you responded to 9/11?

Eric21ND

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
5,954
If you were President. Everyone remembers Bush looking like a deer caught in the headlights when told that "the country was under attack". Then of course he ends up sitting on butt for the next 7 mins doing nothing except looking like the tard that he is, so my question is what would you have done in that position or how do you think a President should've reacted?
 
irrelevant. these kind of attacks are only possible because of people like Bush. If I were president, people like him would be in jail. Therefore, no attacks.
 
9/11 was blown out of proportion...USA criminals killed thousands more than terrorists in 2001.

Don't see why domestic criminals can kill 3,000 and it's no big deal but if terrorists kill 3,000 then it's a national tragedy.

As president all I would have done is the minimum allowed by the Constitution...declare war, remove the Taliban and that's it
 
Apologized to the kids, ended the publicity stunt, authorized NORAD defense measures from the motorcade on the way to Air Force 1, conferenced in the Joint Chiefs and the NY FAA the moment we lifted off the tarmac to directly authorize any shoot-downs.

Once the direct action was over, launch the biggest joint covert investigation in US history, draft letters of marque and reprisal, and deploy a single SOC Expeditionary Brigade and a CIA field unit to Afghanistan to 'interface' locally and provide 'backup' for respondents to those same letters.
 
Apologized to the kids, ended the publicity stunt, authorized NORAD defense measures from the motorcade on the way to Air Force 1, conferenced in the Joint Chiefs and the NY FAA the moment we lifted off the tarmac to directly authorize any shoot-downs.

Once the direct action was over, launch the biggest joint covert investigation in US history, draft letters of marque and reprisal, and deploy a single SOC Expeditionary Brigade and a CIA field unit to Afghanistan to 'interface' locally and provide 'backup' for respondents to those same letters.

This, at the same time as reassuring the nation that the American way of life would be entirely unaffected; and to keep their dignity in the face of terrorists. Explain that America should provide an example to their foes in the Middle East by standing truly united and defiant against those who would attack its shores through acts of cowardice.
 
I'd issue letters of marque and reprisal specifying the strict objective of deposing Osama Bin laden and other Taliban leaders. That, or perhaps a Constitutional Declaration of War against Afghanistan that was strictly limited to killing Bin Laden and his AQ operatives.
 
9/11 was blown out of proportion...USA criminals killed thousands more than terrorists in 2001.

Don't see why domestic criminals can kill 3,000 and it's no big deal but if terrorists kill 3,000 then it's a national tragedy.

As president all I would have done is the minimum allowed by the Constitution...declare war, remove the Taliban and that's it

I would have appointed a pit bull attorney general and got all of my allies in congress to find the actual guilty parties. It would be a very different USA right now. And a different world.
 
Round up all CFR, Trilateral, and Bilderbergs and Waterboarded them untill i got the confession then Kick the UN the hell out because they had done nothing to promote peace.
 
I am not sure what I would have done but I am sure I would not have started a war with a country that had nothing to do with 911
 
Well first we would have to consult PNAC so we could construct a plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years. We would have to think big if something like that was to occur. We would probably have to hit Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and maybe a few others. .

In addition we'd have to worry about those that constitute a so called axis of evil namely North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

If we use Shock n' Awe campaigns we can topple these governments before they know what hit them.

Link to interview with former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and 4 star general Wes Clark.

Wesley Clark's new memoir casts more light on the Bush administration's secret strategies for regime change in Iran and elsewhere.

By Joe Conason, ICH

10/12/07 "Salon" -- - While the Bush White House promotes the possibility of armed conflict with Iran, a tantalizing passage in Wesley Clark's new memoir suggests that another war is part of a long-planned Department of Defense strategy that anticipated "regime change" by force in no fewer than seven Mideast states. Critics of the war have often voiced suspicions of such imperial schemes, but this is the first time that a high-ranking former military officer has claimed to know that such plans existed.
The existence of that classified memo would certainly cast more dubious light not only on the original decision to invade Iraq because of Saddam Hussein's weapons and ambitions but on the current efforts to justify and even instigate military action against Iran.

In "A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor and Country," published by Palgrave Macmillan last month, the former four-star general recalls two visits to the Pentagon following the terrorist attacks of September 2001. On the first visit, less than two weeks after Sept. 11, he writes, a "senior general" told him, "We're going to attack Iraq. The decision has basically been made."
Six weeks later, Clark returned to Washington to see the same general and inquired whether the plan to strike Iraq was still under consideration. The general's response was stunning:
"'Oh, it's worse than that,' he said, holding up a memo on his desk. 'Here's the paper from the Office of the Secretary of Defense [then Donald Rumsfeld] outlining the strategy. We're going to take out seven countries in five years.' And he named them, starting with Iraq and Syria and ending with Iran."

While Clark doesn't name the other four countries, he has mentioned in televised interviews that the hit list included Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan. Indeed, he has described this same conversation on a few occasions over the past year, including in a speech at the University of Alabama in October 2006, in an appearance on Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now" broadcast last March, and most recently in an interview with CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." On "Democracy Now" he spoke about the meetings and the memo in slightly greater detail, saying that he had made the first Pentagon visit "on or about Sept. 20."


drstrangelove.jpg
 
Last edited:
Find the cause. This may have involved using people NOT picked up from an all night Government Car Wash Like University of Virginias Miller Center see Zelikow. Also Lee Hamilton was basically qualified to dry the hub caps of the CIA as he had been doing for twenty years including October Surprise, and Iran Contra.

Fiind the cause.
 
I would have appointed a pit bull attorney general and got all of my allies in congress to find the actual guilty parties. It would be a very different USA right now. And a different world.
--- Generally I object to Torture, but for CFR I could maybe waterboard with Perier.
 
This is the mentality I'm dealing with on the forums....yikes!


Alright Vic, I’ll give George W. Bush a mild thumbs up. He had his flaws, but overall, I can call his presidency a success. Consider the following things:

1. He kept us safe since 9/11. The Bush Administration with the help of other foreign countries have prevented Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups from hitting our soil.

2. With the help of Alan Greenspan, the recession of 2001, which was compounded with the 9/11 attacks, was the shortest recession in U.S History.

3. As soon as the towers fell, President Bush showed great leadership. Both sides of the aisle (except for the Michael Moore’s of our society) believed that Bush did a great job with handling the 9/11 clean up and taking the fight in Afghanistan.

4. Liberated millions and millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. If more democracies emerge in the middle east, Bush will be seen as one of the greatest Presidents of all-time. Don’t get me wrong, after we found out that there were no "new WMDS" in Iraq, my opinion of the invasion went from supportive to mixed. Still, isn’t liberating people a good thing? Isn’t it honorable to get rid of Saddam Hussein and stop his suppression of individual freedom?

5. Yes a recession happened under his watch, and yes Bush’s failure to veto spending bills clocked full of pork barrel projects and unnecessary social programs was a big program, but the Bush Administration did see the mortgage crisis a long time ago, but their efforts were blocked by the current party in power.

6. He was an honest, caring, and predictable President (I mean that in a good sense). Virtually everything he campaigned for he delivered or at least tried to accomplish. He pledged to work with the other side on key issues. He did that. He promised to tackle education and low income senior citizens lacking access to prescription drugs. He delivered. He promised to tackle social security. He tried, but had fierce opposition from the Democrats. After seeing President Obama backtracking on many of his campaign promises and insulting the mentally disabled on television, I come to the realization that I miss Bush 43.

I would give Bush an A- grade, if it wasn’t for the fact he did failed to control domestic spending and pushed twice for the federal marriage amendment. So for those two things, I have to downgrade him to a very low B-.
 
I would give my answer, but I'm afraid this thread would get sent to "hot topics" in a matter of minutes :D
 
"I'm sorry kids, but I just got a call from my staff and I have some very urgent Presidential business to attend to."


The Pentagon never would have been hit by that drone because I would have authorized our military to shoot down the un-manned David Copperfield drone that flew over the Pentagon while explosives ignited underneath, appearing as if the planed had crashed into the Pentagon.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top