Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Renew Deal

(81,869 posts)
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:37 PM Nov 2015

A major terrorist attack in the US would probably be politically ugly.

Someone posted earlier today that it might fully revive the Patriot Act. I think Obama will have a hard time keeping regular military units out. It will also squeeze nuanced views like the difference between "radical islam" and "radical jihad", the acceptance of refugees, and how climate change caused Syria. All of these issues would go further into the wrong direction than they already have. It is encouraging that 78% oppose ground troops, but I think that's because we haven't been directly attacked.

I also have to wonder what it would mean for the presidential race. Would republicans vote for a hard man like Trump or someone more experienced like Bush (3%)?
43 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A major terrorist attack in the US would probably be politically ugly. (Original Post) Renew Deal Nov 2015 OP
The crazies would win and we would be full fascist in months. Eom elfin Nov 2015 #1
Exactly. Nt abelenkpe Nov 2015 #3
+1 nt Javaman Nov 2015 #18
All they require is another false flag event, then. Ghost Dog Nov 2015 #31
Yes, and we would have internment camps faster than that. Orrex Nov 2015 #36
Don't ever forget that the last time the USA rounded-up people in internment camps branford Nov 2015 #41
Probably true. hifiguy Nov 2015 #43
My thought is it would lead to an incredible escalation of the war machine and all types RKP5637 Nov 2015 #2
Right katmondoo Nov 2015 #4
I think that if there is an attack that Republicans will win the Elecdtion Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #5
gee I wonder if that;s crossed the minds of anybody at the RNC.... nt msongs Nov 2015 #6
No matter what people say, the RNC is not stupid. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #8
And their buddies in the MIC and the national security/intelligence community. nt tblue37 Nov 2015 #17
if that were true Bush would have lost in 2004 treestar Nov 2015 #7
Well now that depends on who counts the votes. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #11
He did lose. murielm99 Nov 2015 #12
I think you are referring to 2000 GummyBearz Nov 2015 #22
No I am not. murielm99 Nov 2015 #38
The next logical question GummyBearz Nov 2015 #39
They thought they had stolen it. murielm99 Nov 2015 #40
No I didn't watch Rove's reaction GummyBearz Nov 2015 #42
In Ohio. Remember Ken Blackwell? brush Nov 2015 #34
9/11 did not happen during the election, and Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #29
Despite Liberals winning Revolution, 1812, Civil War, Spanish-American, WW-I and WW-II ... ieoeja Nov 2015 #30
For that reason I wouldn't put a false flag operation past the repugs . . . brush Nov 2015 #35
exactly. nt restorefreedom Nov 2015 #21
Democrats are not being pro-active. earthside Nov 2015 #37
I think people would vote for the person who was in the White House ops room Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #9
If it is a colossal attack the rethugs will be in impeach mode all next year. kairos12 Nov 2015 #10
It sure worked on 9/11 RobertEarl Nov 2015 #13
This is what scared me mainstreetonce Nov 2015 #26
...okay, I would like to know how 'climate change caused Syria', because this one is new to me. Shandris Nov 2015 #14
Syria had a several year long drought RobertEarl Nov 2015 #15
Ohhh, okay. I wasn't aware of that part, thank you. n/t Shandris Nov 2015 #16
Juan Cole had a good piece on the role of climate change in the Syrian revolt last year. pampango Nov 2015 #19
Really? You had one under Bush and he insisted he kept malaise Nov 2015 #20
hmm6 maindawg Nov 2015 #23
Or maybe it's because they're all hawks malaise Nov 2015 #24
We would destroy ourselves. "Ugly" doesn't capture how bad it would be. Oneironaut Nov 2015 #25
It reminds of the The Twilight Zone episode, "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street." RKP5637 Nov 2015 #27
That's my favorite Twilight Zone episode. Oneironaut Nov 2015 #28
agreed, in fact we've been doing as Al Qaeda wanted treestar Nov 2015 #32
As an ex-theology major, the biblical prophecy that seems to be occuring is leading up to libdem4life Nov 2015 #33

Orrex

(63,219 posts)
36. Yes, and we would have internment camps faster than that.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:34 PM
Nov 2015

The current refugee crisis has laid bare the hatred and xenophobia that poison so many minds, that the real horror is that they're totally unafraid to reveal their bigotry. They're proud of it, in fact, and they've conflated it with patriotism and American Values.

Given the chance and the slightest provocation, we'd be rounding up "undesirables" in a matter of weeks.

 

branford

(4,462 posts)
41. Don't ever forget that the last time the USA rounded-up people in internment camps
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 05:10 PM
Nov 2015

due to unjustified bigotry it was the result of the actions of an admired Democratic President, FDR, approved by the Supreme Court, and very popular.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans

Nevertheless, restrictive asylum and resettlement policies are a long way from internment camps.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
43. Probably true.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 06:21 PM
Nov 2015

The low-information, xenophobic and just-plain-stupid mass of sheeple would panic and stampede everyone else over the cliff, with the media relentlessly egging them on.

RKP5637

(67,112 posts)
2. My thought is it would lead to an incredible escalation of the war machine and all types
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:45 PM
Nov 2015

of witch hunts in the US, and with that a tremendous erosion of privacy in the US. No doubt there would be tremendous pressure for back doors to encryption. Depending on the nature, it could lead to great support for Trump, as much as I hate to say it. People will be in a panic mode and not thinking clearly. It will be a very rocky ride.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
5. I think that if there is an attack that Republicans will win the Elecdtion
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:52 PM
Nov 2015

because it will be a referendum on President Obama.

Because Republican electorate is in an anti-establishment mood, I think it would be Trump.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
8. No matter what people say, the RNC is not stupid.
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:56 PM
Nov 2015

It has crossed their minds and the minds every candidate.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
7. if that were true Bush would have lost in 2004
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:55 PM
Nov 2015

because of 911. It happened while he was POTUS. Funny how we acknowledge that double standard for them.

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
22. I think you are referring to 2000
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:29 AM
Nov 2015

When the supreme court stepped in. In 2004 he beat Kerry by 2.5% in the popular vote and 35 electoral votes

murielm99

(30,754 posts)
38. No I am not.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 03:36 PM
Nov 2015

There was widespread concern about voter suppression. There were a lot of questions about voting machines not counting accurately.

He stole it.

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
39. The next logical question
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 04:07 PM
Nov 2015

If they have the capability to steal the presidential election at will, get away with it every time, and hate Obama (as they obviously do), why didn't they steal it in 2008?

brush

(53,815 posts)
34. In Ohio. Remember Ken Blackwell?
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:08 PM
Nov 2015

He was secretary of state and suppressed the votes in the cities enough to give bush the "win".

It was pretty blatant, as was shown later.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
29. 9/11 did not happen during the election, and
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:23 PM
Nov 2015

It did not happen in his last term.
A major attack by ISIS makes this a national security election ad referendum on Obama.

Clinton's as so iation with Obama puts her at adisadvantage, and Noone will take Sanders national security credentials seriously because he has none.

 

ieoeja

(9,748 posts)
30. Despite Liberals winning Revolution, 1812, Civil War, Spanish-American, WW-I and WW-II ...
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:26 PM
Nov 2015

... and Conservatives never achieving a major clear cut victory, ever, Americans seem to think that Conservatives are better at national security.

So I agree that it isn't because of a "referendum on Obama," but it would still probably ensure a Republican victory because of this American blindness to history.

brush

(53,815 posts)
35. For that reason I wouldn't put a false flag operation past the repugs . . .
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:27 PM
Nov 2015

and their operatives.

earthside

(6,960 posts)
37. Democrats are not being pro-active.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:38 PM
Nov 2015

Only three days after 129 people murdered in Paris and I see Democrats and liberals wrapped-up in a silly debate about Syrian refugees.

If there is an attack here, Democratic officeholders and candidates are going to look like wimps ... more worried about refugees than protecting the nation.

And, frankly, unless Pres. Obama makes some kind of bold, forthright statement about standing with France and Pres. Hollande, then he is going to look very weak also.

The politics are not good for Democrats, liberals and progressives at this point, unless they stop being all "love is the answer" in the face of Paris, Egypt, Lebanon, etc., appear out of touch with the concerns of most Americans.

One doesn't have to give in to fear mongering to be proposing some justice directed towards the Daesh murders.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
9. I think people would vote for the person who was in the White House ops room
Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:56 PM
Nov 2015

when Bill Laden was killed, over whichever of the sorry bunch the Republicans end up picking.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
13. It sure worked on 9/11
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:16 AM
Nov 2015

But that was a situation that was allowed to move ahead: because :

Obama and this administration would never allow such a thing. So yall can rest easy.

Our real problem is the one coming from Fukushima.

mainstreetonce

(4,178 posts)
26. This is what scared me
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:47 AM
Nov 2015

The reaction after 9/11 gave Bush a second term. Right after Paris,JEB started talking about ground troops and full scale war. That kind of fear rattling could affect this election.
One day Hillary is a Hawk,the next day onlyva crazy Bush can save us, SCARY.

 

Shandris

(3,447 posts)
14. ...okay, I would like to know how 'climate change caused Syria', because this one is new to me.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:24 AM
Nov 2015

Do you have a good directed source I could learn more on this topic from, RD?

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
15. Syria had a several year long drought
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:29 AM
Nov 2015

Crops failed, people went hungry. Then the wars started. Of course, all the weapons we left in the 'hood helped them get their war on.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
19. Juan Cole had a good piece on the role of climate change in the Syrian revolt last year.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:17 AM
Nov 2015
How Repression and Climate Change Drove the Civil War

However, in a nation where the mukhabarat (secret police informants/intelligence agents) have long infiltrated all segments of society and institutions, a general aura of fear, suspicion, and paranoia persisted well into Bashar’s reign. I witnessed this first-hand when I visited and stayed in Dera’a for a few days with family friends several years before the uprising and recall the kind of vexing stares I received from some of those whom I attempted to raise the issue of Syrian politics with. I was a bit naïve and so I, more than anything, wanted to know if the stories I had heard about Syrian fears of the regime were legit. They were.

During the same year Bashar Al-Assad took power, ninety-nine Syrian intellectuals, writers, and critics crafted and signed the “Statement of 99” calling for an end to emergency rule/martial law that had been in place since 1963, for the state to pardon political dissidents detained, imprisoned, deported, or exiled by his father’s regime, formal recognition and implementation of freedom of assembly, press, and expression, as well as an end to the surveillance of its citizens by the secret police and security forces. The movement behind the statement was composed of both anti-regime hardliners as well as moderates who collectively sought political reform. The result of long-festering political and economic dissent among Syrians, the “Statement of 99” was a brow-raising announcement that, at minimum, made the regime slightly uncomfortable. The formation of various think-tanks, organizations, and social and political ‘parties’ coincided with Bashar’s takeover of Syria- all of which were critical of the regime’s political and economic monopolies on the country caused the regime to crack down on dissenters. The following year, in 2001, one thousand academics, critics, and activists launched the “Statement of 1,000” which expanded on the previous statement’s tenets and called for a multi-party democracy to supplant the one-party Baa’thist state. This was met with another, albeit harsher, government crackdown.

All of these grievances began to fester when anti-regime protests began in early 2011. While initially limited to small demonstrations calling on the lifting of the Emergency Laws and better economic policies, the government was able to contain them with relative ease. When they grew as they did in Dera’a in March of that year, the government’s crackdowns intensified and greater numbers of Syrians became disillusioned by the regime’s insincerity in addressing and implementing political, social, and economic reforms. The zero-tolerance policies of the Assad regime only sought to radicalize some already, economically and politically disenfranchised segments of the Syrian population, some of which had been subdued by his father in previous years and had since been boiling with discontent.

Moreover, the regime’s disastrous mismanagement of water resources during a drought between 2006 and 2010 compounded Syrian economic woes and led to increased gaps between socioeconomic classes in Syria as farmers were unable to make a living due to the desertification of their agricultural lands. Agriculture made up 22% of Syria’s economy before the uprising and subsequent war, and therefore had a wide-reaching impact on the country as a whole when farms began to vanish . This led to frustration with the regime, who then initiated the cancellation of important subsidies which facilitated farming as well as social unrest for the inhabitants of rural communities who had to leave and find work elsewhere primarily in cities in which demonstrations erupted in 2011, according to Dutch environmentalist Francesca de Châtel . 1.5 million Syrians (mainly from farming families) were forced to find work, at times, far away from home . While the drought was obviously not the fault of the regime, its past policies and lack of foresight contributed to the crumbling of one of its most viable economic sectors which led to major financial stress for millions of Syrians.

http://www.juancole.com/2014/09/maelstrom-repression-climate.html

There are several sources listed at the end of Cole's piece.

malaise

(269,144 posts)
20. Really? You had one under Bush and he insisted he kept
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:20 AM
Nov 2015

America safe? I don't remember that being politically ugly for Bush.

malaise

(269,144 posts)
24. Or maybe it's because they're all hawks
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:34 AM
Nov 2015

when it comes to foreign policy and global ambition - as in empire building

Oneironaut

(5,519 posts)
25. We would destroy ourselves. "Ugly" doesn't capture how bad it would be.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:40 AM
Nov 2015

With one attack we might be fine. 10 or so small attacks would be devastating. There would be calls for martial law, internment camps, and killing all of the Muslims. Prominent Republicans, and even the President if a Republican won would support these measures.

If ISIS were smart, they would just use our own media against us. Cut a few heads off publicly. Kill at random, and threaten more attacks. Maybe a few car bombs at popular tourist destinations, scattered across the country. Then, start spreading paranoia. Turn neighbors against neighbors. We would rip ourselves apart from within and possibly disintegrate.

RKP5637

(67,112 posts)
27. It reminds of the The Twilight Zone episode, "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street."
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 11:51 AM
Nov 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street

Panic builds as darkness descends and a shadowy figure is seen walking toward them. Charlie, now hostile, grabs a shotgun and immediately shoots the shadow, thinking it to be the alleged "monster". When the crowd reaches the fallen figure, they realize it is Pete van Horn, returning from his scouting mission. The shot had hit him in the chest, killing him instantly. Although Charlie insists that he did not know, and was trying to protect everyone, no one believes him.

Suddenly, the lights in Charlie's house come on and he panics as the crowd begins accusing him of being both a murderer and the monster responsible for the power outage, and even Steve can't defend Charlie, or what he has done. Charlie makes a run for his house while the other residents chase him, throwing stones, one of them hitting Charlie in the head, creating a bleeding rash. Terrified, Charlie attempts to deflect suspicion onto Tommy, the boy who had originally suggested alien infiltration. Several neighbors agree, as Tommy was the only one who knew about the aliens' plans.

Lights begin flashing on and off in houses throughout the neighborhood; lawn mower and car engines start and stop for no apparent reason. The mob becomes hysterical, with terrified residents smashing windows and taking up weapons as the situation devolves into an all-out riot. Some residents take up firearms and start shooting at anyone they can.

The scene cuts to a nearby hilltop, where it is revealed the mysterious meteor that had flown overhead is, indeed, an alien spaceship. Its inhabitants, two alien but humanoid observers, are watching the riot on Maple Street while using a device to manipulate the neighborhood's power. They comment on how easy it was to create paranoia and panic by turning off the electricity, and conclude that the easiest way to conquer the planet is to let the people become their own worst enemies. They also discuss the fact that there are many, many more Maple Streets on Earth.

Oneironaut

(5,519 posts)
28. That's my favorite Twilight Zone episode.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:03 PM
Nov 2015

It's probably because it never stopped being so true. Fear and paranoia are powerful weapons - especially with a 24/7 news media that sells them as a commodity.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
32. agreed, in fact we've been doing as Al Qaeda wanted
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:50 PM
Nov 2015

ever since 911. bin Laden wanted to draw us over there so he could fight us there. He was disappointed prior attacks didn't do it. He wanted us changed forever. How many times has the media used that phrase?

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
33. As an ex-theology major, the biblical prophecy that seems to be occuring is leading up to
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:59 PM
Nov 2015

Armageddon. The Global Gordian Knot. Br'er Rabbit's Tar Baby is the ME and everyone who touches it gets stuck, then stuck further by trying to unstick itself.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A major terrorist attack ...