Lots of thoughts raced through my mind this morning as all of us discovered the latest terrorism plot that started in Heathrow today. A plot that if properly carried out, would have cost (possibly) thousands of people their lives.
I was really disappointed in President Bush's 'lack' of response to the 'news' of the day (he actually knew what was going on as early as three days ago).
By far, the best article analyzing our response the plot (so far) has been from Newsweek columnist Christopher Dickey. He counters Bush's assertion that we are now "safer than we were pre-9/11" by saying:
But the long list of horrific attacks around the world since 9/11, from
Bali to Madrid, Casablanca to London, Amman to Istanbul, should make anyone
think again about such claims. So should the near misses. “Shoe bomber” Richard
Reid fumbled his matches when he tried to blow himself up aboard an American
Airlines flight in December 2001. But he came close, and if he’d
succeeded, hundreds of people would have died with all traces of evidence lost
in the wintry Atlantic. The plot revealed today would have killed more than
1,000 people. By some accounts there would have been three terrible waves of
carnage: first three planes, then three more, then three more. Again, over the
high seas.
I really couldn't have said it better myself. I could really go on and on ad naseaum about the many things that we could have proactively done, but for the sake of time, I'll close with this: the fact of the matter is, today clearly showed that we still have a lot of room to improve as far as our national security is concerned. It's been five years since the United States was violently and verociously attacked, and this administration has failed to deliver on its promise to capture those responsible. Instead, they decided to invade a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Ask yourself this question: does that make sense?
No comments:
Post a Comment