Why has the Obama administration been so much more effective at killing terrorists than Bush's?

[The_Second_Stone]

@Der_Trihs

Bush and friends had no interest in doing anything about terrorism, and especially had no desire to do anything about Osama bin Laden. One of Bush’s first acts in office was to tell the state Department to leave bin Laden alone. And even after 9-11 at one point he called off all efforts to catch him until Congress pressured him into doing otherwise.

Obama is more effective for the same reason Clinton was more effective; he’s actually trying. The Democrats in general are more effective, in large part because they actually care to make the effort. Republicans don’t care in the slightest about the welfare of the country or if Americans are killed, so they’re terrible at national security issues (and most everything else.

This.

[CoolHandCox]

@The_Second_Stone

This.

is not true.

[boytyperanma]

Not just considering terrorist targets, the FBI has been pretty dam effective taking in criminals in the last few years. It’s been a very bad time for those on the top ten wanted lists.

I think handing credit to Obama is a bit overreaching. In the past ten years more and more money has been pouring into the intelligence agencies, them accidentally using some of those resources to catch people is kinda inevitable regardless of who is in charge.

[tomndebb]

@TriPolar

. . . for neoCons to masturbate to.

Our rules only prohibit suggsting that other posters are getting sexual gratification from a statement or an idea, but making such comments about third parties really does not advance the discussion, either.

[ /Moderating ]

[TriPolar]

@tomndebb

Our rules only prohibit suggsting that other posters are getting sexual gratification from a statement or an idea, but making such comments about third parties really does not advance the discussion, either.

[ /Moderating ]

Yeah, sorry, it was uncalled for.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

Partially luck and partially because we’ve decided to stop kissing Pakistani ass.

[John_Mace]

@The_Second_Stone

This.

This, is yet another unsubstantiated BS post by DT. An odd opinion, not backed up by any facts.

[Princhester]

@John_Mace

So, give us the numbers. How many terrorists did Obama kill and how many did Bush kill?

I doubt the number of high level terrorists killed is that different from one admin to the other. Obama’s numbers seem higher because he has killed less people who aren’t terrorists so his successes stand out more. Bush employed the tactic of killing heaps of ragheads on the basis that it would play well to his base (and no doubt hit a number of high value targets along the way), so his high value successes stand out less. Overall, the key point consequently IMHO is this one:

@Der_Trihs

At best, it would be more like “Bush imprisons 1000 people, 10 of whom are terrorists. Meanwhile his behavior incites 1000 more people into becoming terrorists.”