Did Obama end the war on terror? Not really, but he has/is fundamentally altering the way in which it is being fought on our side. It is way to early to figure out if the changes will be beneficial, but it is hard to argue against a track record of 100% success rate since 9/11 by the Bush administration. One thing is certain, in making these alteration, Obama is assuming responsibility if the United States is hit under his watch. There will be no arguing, "no one could have stopped this, or this would have happened regardless of who was in office" because Obama is changing the policies in place now. Let me rephrase that; if we are hit again Obama supporters will say those things, but the truth will be inescapable. The truth being that we were kept safe with the Bush policies and are not safe with the new ones. Of course I hope that Obama's methods are just as effective as Bush's were, but if they are not the blame will rest squarely with the Obama administration.
More on the policy changes on http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/22/AR2009012203929.html?hpid=topnews.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Like what you read; Subscribe/Fan/Follow
where are you getting your information? this is just a load of biased crap.
ReplyDeleteif you remember correctly, the only attack on american soil in the last 50 years occurred DURING the bush administration. so . . . how exactly did they protect us? they didn't. when there was a need for protection they didn't protect us.
in the south, after Katrina, there was a need for protection and assistance and the bush administration didn't protect or assist us.
the war on terror (bin laden) is in afghanistan, not iraq, and probably pakistan. so how exactly was the bush admin "helping" us by waging a war on a completely different country . . .
oh wait, that's right. there's brown people in iraq too, so they must be the same people.