"I would attack swiftly, promptly, and vigorously." Obama on how he'd handle a terrorist attack

wyldwolf

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:08 AM
Original message

"I would attack swiftly, promptly, and vigorously." Obama on how he'd handle a terrorist attack

Edited on Sun May-13-07 10:08 AM by wyldwolf

ABC Stephanopoulos

Good answer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Crazy Dave

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:11 AM
Response to Original message

1. It's exactly what a president should do

Put down the damn story book and do business.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mike_c

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:16 AM
Response to Original message

2. it's the old knee jerk response-- not helpful in the long run...

...although it's what people want to hear so at least it's good politics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Connie_Corleone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #2

15. The OP didn't give the whole answer.

He said that AFTER he talked about first responders, making sure another attack wasn't about to take place, and making sure we knew who attacked us. Then retaliate after that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BeyondGeography

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #15

21. Right, he basically repeated his much-maligned debate answer

Edited on Sun May-13-07 03:20 PM by BeyondGeography

telling Stepha-enough-already in so many words that he wasn't going to play the "retaliate uber alles" game that Hillary got so much credit for from the MSM after the SC debate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dsa

(298 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #2

28. exactly

what candidate on either side isn't going to say exactly the same thing? it's a meaningless response.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NYCGirl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #28

29. If you read the rest of this thread, you'd see that was not the ENTIRE answer. NT

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Smarmie Doofus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:21 AM
Response to Original message

3. How 'bout: respond *pro-actively*, i.e. by reading...

.... briefing memos telling him that 'there's going to be an attack!' ?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NYCGirl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #3

4. That wasn't the question. He was asked about his answer to the debate question,

"What would you do if 2 US cities were attacked?" And Wyldwolf didn't quote the entire answer � first would be to make sure the people in the US were taken care (with a nod to the mishandling of Katrina), then find out who were the attackers, and finally retaliation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

aquart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #4

5. Now that IS a proper answer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ethelk2044

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #4

7. I agree

He would make sure the First responders were ready in case we are attacked because of the retaliation. Find out who attacked us instead of attacking the wrong country and then retaliate was his response. I agree. All of those things need to be done first before going into a country to fight a war. If you retaliate and the US is not ready, it would be complete chaos.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Smarmie Doofus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #4

8. Maybe it's the wrong question.

If I were advising OBAMA, I'd tell him to use it as an opportunity to point up the deficiencies of the current occupant.

Obama's answer is OK ... but it's boilerplate, no? Isn't everyone gonna say that?

Waiting around passively for Stephanopolis to ask the *right* question may be a long wait indeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NYCGirl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #8

9. In THIS instance, it was about the particular question in the debate. NT

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #4

19. What would Bushwad's response had been if 2 cities had been attacked?

Attack 2 more cities before the terrorists did it again?
:crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 10:33 AM
Response to Original message

6. name one candidate who wouldn't?

incidently, he also said find out who they were first

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Davis_X_Machina

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #6

10. This was a transparent attempt..

...to put him in a box. To Dukakis him.

They don't deserve real answers till they ask real questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Rev. Mother Ramallo

(103 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #6

20. What if he couldn't find out who they were?

What if there were 9 people involved and each one came from a different country--who would Obama 'attack' then? Where would he attack?

Too many unanswered questions...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #20

22. that wasn't the question, but if it was, then it would be a police action

co-ordinated with countries throughout the world, NOT AN INVASION

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Igel

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #22

25. Actually, elsewhere he's said that

Edited on Sun May-13-07 06:10 PM by igil

unilateral action would be fine in the event of an attack or imminent attack.

He had in mind a police action. Of course, Vietnam and Korea were police actions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

brokensymmetry

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 11:21 AM
Response to Original message

11. Attack Whom?

Afghanistan (again)? Iraq (again)? Iran? Saudi Arabia?
Syria? Darfur? Nigeria? South Yemen? Belize?

Let's suppose 15 of the 19 attackers were from some
specific country. Should we attack that country?

I'm all for a swift, prompt, vigorous attack. But
maybe it should also be aimed at an appropriate
target.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NYCGirl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #11

12. That's why he said that before we retailiate, we do our homework. NT

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Connie_Corleone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #11

16. It would've been helpful if the OP gave Obama's full answer...

instead of the last part.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

brokensymmetry

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #16

24. Thank you both for the clarification.

Too bad the pResident doesn't do homework.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MethuenProgressive

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 11:26 AM
Response to Original message

13. "If attacked by Norway, I wouldn't attack New Zealand." -would've been a better answer

He needs better writers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zulchzulu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 11:31 AM
Response to Original message

14. That's only part of the good answer

Edited on Sun May-13-07 11:31 AM by zulchzulu

Obama stuck to what he had correctly stated in the debate that the first thing to do after a multiple nuclear attack is to make sure the America people have the correct and full support to help them after the attack (and not like what happened with Hurricane Katrina), then to find out why the intelligence failed as well as work internationally to see what happened for the failure.

THEN, find out who did the attack. I would hope he wouldn't just attack a country where it may in fact be a terrorist organization. Would he attack Saudi Arabia because some of the bombers were from that country? I doubt it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Colobo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 12:23 PM
Response to Original message

17. Wyld, why don't you cite his whole response?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wyldwolf

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #17

26. the whole response doesn't alter the meaning of his answer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nevergiveup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 12:26 PM
Response to Original message

18. For the life of me

I can't understand why anyone would be upset with his response to the question during the debate. Stephanopoulos treated it as if he had made a major blooper. Why was his response so damaging? Hasn't the war in Iraq taught us anything?
I thought Obama did a really good job today especially considering the fact he was faced with some dumb questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mitchtv

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 03:58 PM
Response to Original message

23. raising the age for social security is on the table

Wrong. Typical rich boy answer, shows he never worked with his body and will never get this union mans vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

illinoisprogressive

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-13-07 06:36 PM
Response to Original message

27. he also stuck by doing what he said on the debate which I agree with

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon Apr 29th 2024, 01:06 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.