>I don't think there is evidence it took that long.
I remember hearing over and over after 9/11 that the plan had been in the works since about '96.
>Execution? Seems to me all you really needed was a day on which airline schedules were on time.
A lot had to come together to get the plan to work. Every single one of those guys had to make it into the U.S. after having trained in terrorist camps overseas (you'd think that this would be noted at some point for at least one of the 19), they had to communicate over and over with known terrorists in the Al-Qaida network and had to get money wired from that network to them, four box cutters had to get through security at different airports at the same time, they had to be on four particular planes going on long flights (those with lots of fuel)... I can add more, but I really think that this wasn't easy.
>1. So you agree that we're safer today than on 9/10, right?
Marginally so, perhaps, but moreso from increased vigilance and the fact that Al-Qaida has shot its load in the U.S. than anything we've done. Al-Qaida remains strong outside of the U.S. and our borders are still pretty darned open.
>2. So was the previous success luck or planning?
I think that they planned very well, but as I said above, a lot had to fall in to place for 9/11 to happen. So, both.
>3. I think you may underestimate what it takes to make an organization like the United States government accomplish "minimal" tasks. The changes Bush has implemented since 9/11 have been nothing less than staggering, and none of us would have been able to believe our government could have made these changes this quickly.
Such as?
>You're naive. I wish I could find a link to it, but a year ago 60 minutes ran a great episode in which it interviewed six teenager from a NY Islamic school. Every last one of them supported the idea of using suicide bombing in the United States. It obviously isn't as strong as the indoctrination of Palestinians, but this element is present in the United States and we could well see it.
The fact that they support it doesn't mean they could pull it off.
>I really don't disagree about this. But at some point you have to give Bush credit for some level of success
Well, they went after Afghanistan, which was the right move, but never finished the job. They instituted the Patriot Act, which I don't like much. They went to Iraq, which I don't think helped anything. They didn't do much to help make the borders safer. By many accounts, airport security isn't a hell of a lot better than me, which surprises me, 'cause you'd figure just the fact that 9/11 happened would improve airport security a lot. I'm not sure a Kerry administration would do any better, but I know that a ZofSilence administration would ;)
> I think you will be intellectually honest enough that when Iraq proves to have been a huge success (and it is becoming clear to me that it will be) you'll look at it and say, "I was confused, and wrong".
If it becomes a big success, I'll be happy to acknowledge it, but I don't see it.
-Z |
