Bush hasn’t kept US safe

I am hearing a lot of talk about President Bush’s legacy, and some have suggested that he should be credited for keeping America safe after 9/11 because there wasn’t a second attack. The U.S. was not attacked after 9/11 because the terrorists had nothing to gain by a second attack.

The stated goal of the terrorists was to draw attention to the unjust foreign policy of the United States, especially its disregard for the suffering of the ... Full Story »

Posted by Fabrice Florin
Tags Help
Subjects: U.S., Politics, Other
Member Tags: Bush
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Fabrice Florin - Jan 5, 2009 - 5:48 PM PST
Edit Lock: This story can be edited

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Member_photo_thumb
1.9
by Eben Kaplan - Jan. 6, 2009

This is a letter to the editor, not a column. The author offers a one-sided assessment of the Bush administration's legacy on security. While she does have a point, she'd make it much more forcefully by acknowledging and dismantling the arguments against her case.

I tend to agree with the author's general thrust, though I strongly disagree that terrorists weren't trying to attack the US during the last 7 years ... More »

See Full Review » (9 answers)
Fabportrait_smallsquare_180x180_thumb
3.5
by Fabrice Florin - Jan. 5, 2009
See Full Review » (2 answers)
Silhouette_sml
1.5
by Steve Carr - Jan. 6, 2009

This a myopic spew; no facts, just declarations with no context.

See Full Review » (6 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

1.9

Poor
from 3 reviews (30% confidence)
Quality
1.6
Information
1.0
Insight
1.5
Style
2.0
Context
2.0
Enterprise
1.0
Expertise
1.0
Originality
2.0
Popularity
2.9
Recommendation
2.0
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
4.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!