Thread: How Important is Homeland Security to the Election?

Originally Posted by adaher

Depends on how you count them. There was a bomb in Times Square that failed to detonate, that was actually pretty signficant. I'd also count that Army Major who killed all those soldiers, although I don't know that you call that terrorism since it's a military target. Still, it was an attack on US soil.

Right - I think most people saw that as an attack against the military, not so much a terrorist attack. And it was more like a guy who went nuts, as opposed to some Al Qaeda terrorist plot. In most people's minds, there hasn't been a significant terrorist attack since 9/11. OTOH, everyone knows someone who has been affected by this crap-ass economy.

Originally Posted by Jefe

We did? Hmm, they must not have been very significant attacks, because I can't even remember them off the top of my head. We've essentially had no terrorist attacks on US soil. The only one I can think of was the failed Times Square attack. Oh, I guess there were attacks on our military. And that's my point. Until there's another large scale, successful attack on US soil against civilians, or perhaps on a US Naval ship or overseas US embassy, Homeland Security will remain pretty low on people's list of priorities. Jobs, jobs, jobs, economy, economy, economy.

Times Square Bomber, Ft Hood Shooter, and Underwear Bomber were all succesful attacks in that they delivered their payload. Not all caused deaths. There have also been many foiled attacks, some of which we have heard and some of which we havent. Youre right though, unless there is blood, people wont care. My question was, given 911 was on peoples mind, shouldnt there be?

Originally Posted by adaher

Depends on how you count them. There was a bomb in Times Square that failed to detonate, that was actually pretty signficant. I'd also count that Army Major who killed all those soldiers, although I don't know that you call that terrorism since it's a military target. Still, it was an attack on US soil.

I consider it terrorism because it was a lone person motivated by religion to kill infidels in a way that inspired fear. Military attacks dont typically use suicide attacks.

Originally Posted by jviehe

My question was, given 911 was on peoples mind, shouldnt there be?

People probably should care, but they won't, not unless there's another significant attack. The attacks you mentioned weren't significant enough for people to worry too much. They're more worried about their jobs right now.

Originally Posted by Jefe

People probably should care, but they won't, not unless there's another significant attack. The attacks you mentioned weren't significant enough for people to worry too much. They're more worried about their jobs right now.

That seems kind of sad to me, given we could experience a real attack at any moment, and people will be voting in someone who they want to most deal with economic issues. So you get someone Bush who had no real national security experience on watch when 911 happened. Or Obama when Arab Spring happens.