Flashback: Obama: We can absorb another 9-11 attack

Could you clarify that? It sounds an awful lot like you actually agree with both statements that President Obama presented:

"We'll do everything we can to prevent it."

"But even 9/11, even the biggest attack ever...we absorbed it and we are stronger."

Sorry, but that sentence doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

Obviously you missed the point of the OP. It was to frame a fabrication around Obama saying what "he" never said, while the OP conveniently planted words in that fabrication that can be found no where else but with the OP himself.

 

Then please, translate Obama's quote for everyone.

Pretty please.

Obama: "We can absorb another 9-11 attack"

 

Why do you keep prattling on about the OP concluding that Obama is telling us to prepare for another 9/11 ? Please copy and paste the words in the OP that say that ?

The nearest that I can derive the OP interpreting Obamas meaning is when it said "This statement demonstrates our Commander-in-Chief’s cavalier and frightening approach to national security, which apparently is based in the notion our country will ultimately “absorb” terrorist attacks, rather than prevent them."

I actually agree with the statement from the OP that I just cut and pasted. There IS a cavalier attitude being projected by stating that we can absorb another 9/11. Of course was can absorb it, but that is beside the point. It would be far more preferable to have a leader that displays a steely resolve to NOT let another 9/11 happen. It could happen even with a steely resolve obviously, but resigning yourself to the fact that we can survive it beforehand is not what Id consider good leadership. It would be like the QB of a football team before the Super Bowl saying " even if we lose, we still had a great season." People do not want to hear that prior to the game. Talking about losing before you actually lose projects a cavalier attitude. There will be plenty of opportunity to reflect on your great season AFTER you lose, not before. The same principle applies to the President.

 

Nice spin (trying to divert), obviously you missed where a leftie attacked the messenger.

 

Because I'm not the one saying that. The OP was." Which apparently is based on the notion our country will absorb more terrorist attacks". Which isn't what Obama said. It's what the OP said.

Thanks! That's my point. The OP was only interpreting. Except he wasn't. He was interpreting what Obama said as fact to plant words that he actually said we need to prepare for another 9/11. Obama never said that.That's the difference. And that the OP has no facts as to what Obama means.

This has nothing to do with the fabrication planted by the OP.

 

You are free to interpret ANY sentence however you wish to interpret. Obviously the OP expressed that he believes his words display a cavalier attitude. I agree with that interpretation, and I would venture to say so do a lot of other people. There is nothing particularly bombastic in that interpretation. This is the Political Opinions & Beliefs section, so it seems perfectly reasonable for someone to put forth their opinion. Why you are acting like a reasonable interpretation of his words is so outrageous defies logic.

Yes I would interpret a Super Bowl QB talking about they had a great season even if the end up losing, as being cavalier. The comparison is rather apropos.

 

Except he didn't. He spoke of Obama's statement as saying we will have another terrorist attack, so be prepared. My highlighted quote of the OP clearly proves that. Just read his title. He isn't fooling anyone.

Not seeing forest for tree, is what is not logical here. His interpretation turned fact, is all one needs to see. You can interpret all day long if that is your liking, but turning it into a fact, then you better back it up with something that we know Obama said.

Poor comparison! "Is based on the notion our country will absorb more terrorist attacks" has nothing to do with your example. Just basic logic will never let you go there. The statement the OP made was a direct quote based on "his" facts. There just is no other way to work around that.

 

It seems like your tactic is to prattle on with inanity long enough that people tire of you and move on. You win.

 

Negative! I'm not trying to win anything, because I don't need to. Whether I win or lose is irrelevant. It's meaningless. I have only one interest in this debate; and that is to see that the "truth" wins. That's it.

 

It's not agreeing at all with Obama' s statement. I first start off by acknowledging what he's saying(which is the rough equilvalent to other posters here who I've had the argument with). And then I shot it down with the following reasoning: It underplays terrorism. this heinous crime which disrupts(and takes) daily lives and it destroys the trust of governments around the world(and through their own lax behavior, it contributes to this American feeling of incompetence!)

I further go onto state, that even though "life goes on"(after a terrorist attack). I refuse to live in fear of "what next", just because that makes it more convenient for the current administration not to take action!

This government only HAS one job. To protect this country's security. And "playing the percentages" is not a sovereign country or government. It's what you expect from hapless governments.