Bush takes responsibilty for blunders

[Kid Gleason]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050913/ap_on_...a_washington_14

[Balta1701]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050913/ap_on_...a_washington_14

2 points.

 

1. There is a massive difference between saying "I take responsibility for this" and actually taking responsibility and doing something about it. Bush has said he has taken responsibility for several things...and then changed nothing in terms of policy or the people working under him. Only time will tell if he actually takes responsibility for anything here, or if he'll just keep passing the buck.

 

2. Read this one:

 

The president was asked whether people should be worried about the government's ability to handle another terrorist attack given failures in responding to Katrina.

 

"Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack? That's a very important question and it's in the national interest that we find out what went on so we can better respond," Bush replied.

Did the President of the United States just dodge a question on whether or not we're capable of dealing with a terrorist attack 4 years after 9/11? And I thought John Kerry was the one who was soft on terrorism.

[jasonxctf]

all he has to do now is admit the mistakes made (and for going to) Iraq.

[Middle Buffalo]

What will the response be if a terrorist/group of terrorists walk into downtown Chicago and set off suitcases of "dirty" nuclear bombs or biological weapons? .

 

This hurricane and it's aftermath was predicted years ago, and, still, the response by all levels of government was slow and weak. Does anyone have faith that the response will be better to an unpredictable attack/natural disaster? I don't.

[Balta1701]

What will the response be if a terrorist/group of terrorists walk into downtown Chicago and set off suitcases of "dirty" nuclear bombs or biological weapons?  . 

 

This hurricane and it's aftermath was predicted years ago, and, still, the response by all levels of government was slow and weak.  Does anyone have faith that the response will be better to an unpredictable attack/natural disaster?  I don't.

You think you're concern, you're not the one sitting a few tens of miles from a really big crack in the ground.

 

I decided to double my stockpile of drinking water after Katrina, just in case we get stuck in a similar boat where the government can't get the water back running.

[KipWellsFan]

What will the response be if a terrorist/group of terrorists walk into downtown Chicago and set off suitcases of "dirty" nuclear bombs or biological weapons?  . 

 

This hurricane and it's aftermath was predicted years ago, and, still, the response by all levels of government was slow and weak.  Does anyone have faith that the response will be better to an unpredictable attack/natural disaster?  I don't.

 

just a tid bit of info on dirty bombs

 

Though an RDD is designed to disperse radioactive material over a large area, the conventional explosive would likely have more immediate lethal effect than the radioactive material. At levels created from most probable sources, not enough radiation would be present to cause severe illness or death. A test explosion and subsequent calculations done by the Department of Energy found that assuming nothing is done to clean up the affected area and everyone stays in the affected area for 1 year, the radiation exposure would be "fairly high".

 

Because a terrorist dirty bomb is likely to cause few deaths, many do not consider one to be a weapon of mass destruction. Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through mass panic and terror. Additionally, decontamination of the affected area might require considerable time and expense, rendering affected areas unusable, and causing extensive economic damage.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb

[Balta1701]

While most radiological devices aren't going to be strong enough to hurt anyone, that doesn't mean they can't do damage...if you were living or working in downtown chicago, and you heard there was a dirty bomb set off there but the government said it was safe, would you still want to go to work there?

 

A dirty bomb plays on 2 things...large-scale panic (and the hopes that it hurts people) and 2, the irrational fear of the word "nuclear" that has been drilled inot most Americans.

[Rex Kickass]

I am glad to see the President actually claim responsibility for something.

[Middle Buffalo]

How soon before the Pres stands knee deep in sewage as a banner is unfurled behind him declaring, "Mission Accomplished!"?