Reversing Old Policies

India
January 25, 2009 8:30am CST
Mr.Obama ,Within days he has given instructions to close down gauntanamo bay, ordered for the stopping and closure of secret prisons in Europe. Is this in true interest of the American people or is he trying to please a part of the world that anyway will hate America. Before 9/11 there were signs and patterns that the then American president Clinton refused to see or care for. The beheading of Jewish American Daniel pearl, the bombing of Trade center, bombing of USS Cole, bombing of US embassies in Africa. If the then president Clinton had been careful 9/11 wouldn't have happened. After 9/11 President Bush had ensured that there was no major attack on Americans either at home or abroad. Many would criticize President Bush and call him a failure, but one must note that it is easier to lead during times of prosperity, But very very difficult in times of adversity. Now by reversing all the tough anti terror stance will President Obama ensure the safety of Americans? How will he react to any form of attack? Already he has sided with people who want to kill Americans in their mother's womb, why?
2 people like this
3 responses
• United States
25 Jan 09
George W. Bush was warned many times before 9/11 of al Queda's intentions, even one that stated clearly that they was a plot to use commercial planes. But, Bush was to busy trying to get his millionaire welfare package through congress, and vactioning (which he did alot of before 9/11) to worry about terrorist. Your comment about keeping American safe after 9/11 isn't true, as you recall the country was attack by a bio-terrorist that sent Anthrax through the US postal system killing 5 Americans. With Bush's new anti-American patroit act, it still took them seven years to think they found the bio-terrorist, and they still are not 100% certain it was him. The USS Cole bombing was left the to Bush administration to handle due to the time frame of the new president coming in. It was Bush that did nothing at all about the Cole. George Bush left this country much more worse off then when he came in, that is the sign of a FAILED president. And, in my opinion, Bush was a complete FAILURE of a president. It will be interesting to see if Obama can pull a Clinton, and fix the mess left by another republican failure.
@lampar (7584)
• United States
25 Jan 09
For one thing i can not understand is why a year prior to the 9//11, CIA got solid intel. at least two known terrorists are already in the country from foreign surveillance effort, but did nothing to share the information with law enforcement, then few more signs also point to a major impending attack, like warning from Northern Alliance leader and flight school red flag, all these information are being buried deep inside the spy agency from higher order, till now, nobody really know why is that so and who gave order to remain silent, so far 9//11 congressional hearing is nowhere near to unfold the secrecy behind it.
2 people like this
• United States
28 Jan 09
I agree that there were many signs of an attack, but just like Pearl Harbor, the country never thought it would happen to them, on their own soil. We have seen this kind of terrorism for decades, but we never thought it would happen to us. Everyone in our government is in CYA mode, and no one wants to lose their government job, even if that means we could be attacked again. There needs to be an independant investigation done by people who aren't connected to the government, or any intel agency, but that is the problem. You have to have that kind of security clearance to view the documents you need to investigate this, and that will never happen, even if it means stopping another 9/11.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Jan 09
You've got your facts mixed up here, I'm afraid. Daniel Pearl was beheaded during the Bush Presidency for one and that's a pretty big one. Clinton had had daily briefings regarding terrorism and Bush didn't continue that practice. The bombing of the USS Cole happened so late in Clinton's Presidency there wasn't any time for him to do anything about it, so it was left to Bush who didn't act on it. It was Bush who had ignored the signs and warnings prior to 9/11. No one can say for sure it was because of Bush we weren't attacked again. I'd say it's highly doubtful since they didn't plan 9/11 overnight and it's not likely they'd have planned another attack as quickly either. I know there are those who disagree with me but I believe some of bush's policies made it more likely, not less, that we'll be hit again and helped al Qaeda to recruit new terrorists. Annie
• India
27 Jan 09
Yes you are right and I'm wrong, Pearl was killed in 2002 and after 9/11. However I'm still convinced that the tough anti terror policies by President Bush had indeed prevented further attacks.
@Barb42 (4214)
• United States
25 Jan 09
I can't get into the President's head so I have no idea why he is doing the things he is doing. You will have to ask him to get 'an answer'. I do think he is wrong in the things he's done so far. It is not in the best interest of the people to close Guantanamo because they have no plan on what they will be doing with the prisoners. They were just talking about one of the guys in there that has been water boarded. They said he could not be tried in our courts because some believe that water boarding the prisoners were wrong, so they would have to release him - something we definitely do not want. Also, most of the ones already released went right back to their terrorists ways! And, the abortion issues will never go away. I think it was horrible of him to rescind the ban that kept money from going overseas to fund abortions. There will be many killings of unborn children and it will be the Americans who will be required to give an account one day of the things we have done that are absolutely wrong. We all have free will to do whatever we want,but it's wrong for government to fund those wrong doings. I think we need to pray we never have an attack here during his presidency like we had in 2001. I shudder to think what his reaction would be.