Support NeoGAF

[Phoenix]

MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin says terrorist attacks in Iraq are aimed at preventing the re-election of U.S. President George W. Bush and that a Bush defeat "could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world."

Putin, speaking Central Asian Cooperation Organization summit in Tajikistan Monday, made his most overt comments of support so far for the re-election of Bush for a second term.

"Any unbiased observer understands that attacks of international terrorist organizations in Iraq, especially nowadays, are targeted not only and not so much against the international coalition as against President Bush," Putin said.

"International terrorists have set as their goal inflicting the maximum damage to Bush, to prevent his election to a second term.

"If they succeed in doing that, they will celebrate a victory over America and over the entire anti-terror coalition," Putin said.

"In that case, this would give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities, and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world."

Source

 

[duderon]

*cue purple gaming-age crying thing*

 

[Cooter]

Probably not a smart thing to say by Putin but it's true.

 

[Pimpwerx]

No, it's reverse-psychology. Putin knows people will do the opposite of what he says, meaning all the commie sympathizers will vote for Kerry, allowing him to win. Then Putin will take advantage of the most liberal senator in the universe as he rebuilds the red army. This will of course lead to Cold War 2, which we all know was great for spy movies. PEACE.

 

[Nerevar]

Probably not a smart thing to say by Putin but it's true.

Remember, a vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists!

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

So I guess cheney and putin are planning an attack on kerry.

 

[Ripclawe]

It must be (former) world leader's endorsement day,

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_18-10-2004_pg7_9

WASHINGTON: Former Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohammad has appealed to American Muslims not to vote for George Bush on November 2.

In an open letter sent to the community, believed to number seven million, the former prime minister said during the past four years of the Bush presidency, the Muslims and their countries had suffered oppression and humiliation as never before in the history of Islam.

I would slam this one though if I were Kerry.

 

[Zaptruder]

Man, I hate Mahatir, but in his own twisted way he's right. The way Bush approachs world politics can only give justification for extremists of other nations to take offense. Even if it couldn't be further from the truth then islamic persecution at this state (although, in reality, it's not entirely off the mark), people will still find a way to take offense to that. Just like people in america still find a way to support Bush.

From that uprising and rallying of extremist thinking... well only bad things can happen. And not just in terms of terrorism.

 

[ManaByte]

 

[teiresias]

Probably not a smart thing to say by Putin but it's true.

Anyone who honestly believes the above quoted remark (more the second part of it than the first) is quite possibly the most frightening kind of sheep on earth.

 

[Cooter]

Anyone who honestly believes the above quoted remark (more the second part of it than the first) is quite possibly the most frightening kind of sheep on earth.

You honestly think Muslim extremists want Bush to win?

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

You honestly think if Kerry wins, the terrorists will go "Ah ha! Our master plan worked! Our morale is so high now that we can spread evil throughout the world, whereas if Bush had won we would have stayed home watching Sex and the City reruns and crying."

 

[Cooter]

You honestly think if Kerry wins, the terrorists will go "Ah ha! Our master plan worked! Our morale is so high now that we can spread evil throughout the world, whereas if Bush had won we would have stayed home watching Sex and the City reruns and crying."

I never said moral would change one way or the other but if you don't think they would like to see President Bush defeated then you are living in a dream world.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

"In that case, this would give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities, and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world."

This is the part I'm referring to, Cooter. Do you believe this?

 

[Outdoor Miner]

I never said moral would change one way or the other but if you don't think they would like to see President Bush defeated then you are living in a dream world.

It's you who is living in a dream world, Cooter. The worst thing about the Bush administration is that they're going about the "war on terror" the wrong way. You don't fight -more importantly defeat- terrorism by using military force. It just doesn't work.

You have to do it by beefing up your intelligence and anti-terror communities, which I might add, Bush had neglected SEVERELY his first couple of years.

I just can't believe we've gotten to a point where people out there feel Bush is a better terror-fighter than *insert candidate of your choice here*. Any president that had an inkling of competence could have avoided the entire 9/11 incident.

Do you know how many "terror attacks" were thwarted by the previous administration?

 

[Cooter]

No, I don't Mega but the theme of what Putin said is true.

 

[demon]

Vote for Bush or DIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DSN2K]

he's right and wrong at the same time.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

The "theme" of what he said is that terrorists want Bush to lose the election so they can celebrate a victory over America and raise their morale so that they can encourage and spread terrorism further.

 

[Cooter]

Morale is high now. If Bush wins they will consider it a victory but I don't think the short-term morale boost will do anything for recruitment.

A successful and peaceful Iraq can reduce morale and that is why they are increasing attacks closer to the proposed Jan. elections.

 

[Ripclawe]

The "theme" of what he said is that terrorists want Bush to lose the election so they can celebrate a victory over America and raise their morale so that they can encourage and spread terrorism further.

Why is this hard to believe? The terrorists leaders are not stupid, if they can get Bush out of office, they can use that as propaganda to bolster their side and get more recruits. To them, Kerry is less of a threat than Bush.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

Why is this hard to believe? The terrorists leaders are not stupid, if they can get Bush out of office, they can use that as propaganda to bolster their side and get more recruits. To them, Kerry is less of a threat than Bush.

This argument is so tired. When people were protesting the war, people like Dr. Phil said, "Don't protest, because the terrorists will use it as propaganda and their morale will go up and it will hurt America!" Now it's "Vote for Bush, or the terrorists will use his loss as propaganda and their morale will go up and it will hurt America!"

Guess what. People who want to make propaganda will find it. If Bush wins, they can say "Look how much Americans hate us, they reelected Bush to kill us all, we must therefore grow stronger in our fight." OMG A VOTE FOR BUSH MAKES LADY LIBERTY CRY!

 

[maharg]

Jesus this argument could not possibly be any more retarded. If you choose your president based on the whims of terrorists, either way, you lose.

 

[videogamer]

Why is this hard to believe? The terrorists leaders are not stupid, if they can get Bush out of office, they can use that as propaganda to bolster their side and get more recruits. To them, Kerry is less of a threat than Bush.

I'm not going to let you scare me into voting for Bush.

 

[Triumph]

It doesn't matter how you vote. The election has already been bought and paid for.

FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!

Thanks, LieBald!

 

[NWO]

 

[BILL CLINTON]

I am a democrat, but i do see how the terrorists could use bush-cheney losing as a victory in some respects..

however, the terrorists will most likely make/take a "win" out of whoever wins..

if kerry actually beefed up the military more and spent MORE than bush in terms of military/intelligence, than they would have lost.. however, i think the terrorists/many see kerry as saying things but not going to follow up on them. so its all mute anyways.

 

[Che]

My opinion is that Putin is smart. Very smart.

 

[scorcho]

Putin: [political filter on]well, if you re-elect Bush i can use his model of pre-emptive strikes against terrorists to destroy Chechnyan seperatists and paint them in league with Al Queda.

 

[ravingloon]

Well if I were trying to roll back years of Democratic reforms and get it back to the "glory" days of when I was the KGB chief, I'd want a U.S. President who wasn't calling me out either.

 

[StoOgE]

Awesome, lets all listen to a man who is trying to overstep the bounds of his political office and effectively end a democracy when voting!

 

[Mumbles]

Why is this hard to believe? The terrorists leaders are not stupid, if they can get Bush out of office, they can use that as propaganda to bolster their side and get more recruits. To them, Kerry is less of a threat than Bush.

I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again. Al Qaida is a group of suicidally violent religious zealots. No part of that suggests strong critical thinking skills. If Bush wins, it's evidence that america hates islam, and they have to destroy the evil american empire before they crush islam. If Kerry wins, then the evil Americans are weakening, and and just a few more attacks will crush the decadent culture.

As far as they're concerned, they *will* win, because they're on God's side, and God will make sure that they win. Every fact will be filtered through that belief. Because of this, their opinion isn't even worth considering.

 

[Hitokage]

Funny how the anti-democratic leader of Russia endorses the "SPREAD DEMOCRACY" canidate.

 

[iapetus]

As far as they're concerned, they *will* win, because they're on God's side, and God will make sure that they win. Every fact will be filtered through that belief. Because of this, their opinion isn't even worth considering.

And we listen to Bush why, exactly?

 

[FightyF]

Bush has been weak in the War on Terrorism, why do people think that Kerry can't do better?

 

[CrimsonSkies]

I followed Putin's advice.

 

[G4life98]

Another reason for me to vote for Kerry.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Funny how the anti-democratic leader of Russia endorses the "SPREAD DEMOCRACY" canidate.

Isn't that a paradox? If that were allowed to come to pass it would start a localized tear in the space time continuum which would cause the Earth to implode on itself.

 

[Outlaw Pro Mod]

Bush has been weak in the War on Terrorism, why do people think that Kerry can't do better?

Today, President Bush signed the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2005 to provide much-needed funds for our Nation's homeland security activities. This bill contains most of the FederalGovernment's investment in homeland security. With enactment of the remainder of the President's FY 2005 Budget, President Bush will have nearly tripled funding for homeland security activities since taking office.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Act signed today provides $28.9 billion in net discretionary spending, a $1.8 billion increase (6.6%) over 2004, and a $14.9 billion increase (106%) over 2001 levels.

Including Project BioShield, mandatory, and fee-funded programs, a total of $40.7 billion will be available to DHS in Fiscal Year 2005.

The Act includes $4 billion for State and local assistance programs - a 765% ($3.5 billion) increase over 2001 levels. This includes a 19% ($135 million) increase for the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) over 2004.

The UASI distributes terrorism preparedness grants to urban areas based on threat levels, instead of using arbitrary formulas.

Other State and local assistance programs funded by the appropriations act include $150 million for port security grants, $150 million for rail/transit security grants, neither of which were funded in 2001; and $715 million for grants to fire departments, a $615 million increase over 2001.

In addition, the Act provides for other key programs and initiatives vital to protecting America and reducing our vulnerability to terrorist threats, including:
$8.5 billion for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a 7% ($556 million) increase over 2004. This spending level funds programs to help secure our Nation's borders while facilitating the legitimate flow of commerce, including full funding for:

The Container Security Initiative to pre-screen cargo containers from 26 ports representing more than 80% of inbound cargo to the United States. With the legislation signed by the President today, spending on cargo security, screening, and inspections will total nearly $2.9 billion, an 80% ($1.3 billion) increase over pre-9/11 levels; and
The Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, which facilitates partnerships between the Federal Government and American importers to improve security along the entire supply chain?from the factory floor, to foreign vendors, to land borders and seaports.

$340 million for the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology program (US-VISIT), an automated entry-exit system designed to expedite the arrival and departure of legitimate travelers, while making it more difficult for those intending to do us harm to enter our Nation. This is a $12 million increase over 2004.

$5.1 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, including aviation security fees, a $679 million increase over 2004. This includes $475 million for explosives detection system baggage screening equipment and installation, a 19% ($75 million) increase over 2004.

$6.3 billion for the Coast Guard, an 8.6% ($500 million) increase over 2004, and a 66% ($2.5 billion) increase over 2001 levels. Among funding for other programs, the appropriations bill includes $724 million for the Deepwater multi-year acquisition program to replace Coast Guard ships, aircraft, and communications systems.

$894 million for the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate (IAIP), $60 million above the 2004 level. The IAIP is the focal point of the Department's efforts to assess and protect the Nation's critical infrastructures, including cyberspace, from terrorism. The 2005 funding level will allow the IAIP to identify critical assets and send IAIP teams to conduct site visits to assist operators and owners in identifying and reducing vulnerabilities.

$1.1 billion for the Science and Technology Directorate, a $203 million increase over 2004. This includes $593 million to develop technologies that counter threats from chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological weapons, and high explosives; and $61 million to continue the development of innovative counter-measures to protect commercial aircraft against man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

---------------------------------

The dramatic increase in information sharing allowed by the PATRIOT Act has enabled law enforcement to find and dismantle terror cells in Portland, Oregon; Lackawanna, New York; and Northern Virginia.

---------------------------------

President Bush signed into law Project BioShield, an unprecedented, $5.6 billion effort to develop vaccines and other medical responses to biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons.

The Bush Administration is investing more than $7 billion across all aspects of biodefense. In the last three years, the Administration has created the BioWatch program to monitor major cities for a biological release, procured sufficient smallpox vaccine for all citizens, and significantly increased stocks of antibiotics against anthrax.

State and local health systems have been provided more than $4.4 billion to bolster their ability to respond to public health crises.

The Bush Administration undertook several initiatives to detect radiological materials being smuggled into our Nation, issuing thousands of portable radiation detectors to border control personnel and installing radiation detection portals at ports of entry.

 

[Nerevar]

wow Outlaw, just like Stem Cell research, President Bush is the only president to take terrorism seriously. I wonder why? Maybe it was the fact that the biggest terrorist attack of all time occurred during his tenure?

Face it, Bush has done more to encourage international terrorism by invading Iraq than any other United States president, ever. Anyone with a clue in the international community realized that the point of goading the Americans into a war in Afghanistan was that Al Qaeda believed it was a war they could fight similarly to the soviets - retreating and striking from the mountains. The problem was the American Army is vastly superior to the Soviet army, and we demolished them. It was a huge setback to terrorism, and completely shattered Al Qaeda's plans. So what do we do? We invade Iraq, and provide the terorists with exactly what they want - an unwinnable guerilla war where they can spread their ideology and attract vast new recruits every day.

But I presume, with people like you, it's a brick wall. You can only see what Bush has done and not what he hasn't done. You can't see his colossal failures because you don't want to. Whatever.

 

[BILL CLINTON]

I dont understand.. Bush encouraged terrorism by attempting to spread democracy in the middle east? So terrorists are angry because they dont want that.. why are they angry, because democracy might hurt their goals?

isnt that what we want to do?

do you want them to NOT be angry and give in to all their demands so they are totally happy?

if we followed those rules I wouldnt have gone to war with my NATO buddies with slobodan milosevic!!!! since that really made milosevic angry!

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Outlaw, could you provide a link to where you got that info from?

 

[Deg]

however, the terrorists will most likely make/take a "win" out of whoever wins..

My opinion is that Putin is smart. Very smart.

Putin isnt exactly a person people should listen to.

Awesome, lets all listen to a man who is trying to overstep the bounds of his political office and effectively end a democracy when voting!

 

[KingV]

It's you who is living in a dream world, Cooter. The worst thing about the Bush administration is that they're going about the "war on terror" the wrong way. You don't fight -more importantly defeat- terrorism by using military force. It just doesn't work.

You have to do it by beefing up your intelligence and anti-terror communities, which I might add, Bush had neglected SEVERELY his first couple of years.

I just can't believe we've gotten to a point where people out there feel Bush is a better terror-fighter than *insert candidate of your choice here*. Any president that had an inkling of competence could have avoided the entire 9/11 incident.

Do you know how many "terror attacks" were thwarted by the previous administration?

Quantify "doesn't work". Just because it hasn't been uniformly successful in every way, does not mean that there isn't progress being made in the War on Terror. Look at Israel, which seems to have done pretty well against Palestinian terror groups almost exclusively via force. They have not across the board "won" to where they can put up their boots and guns and pat each other on the back, but they certainly have had reduced numbers of attacks within their borders, and how deeply the attacks have been within their borders, particularly in the last year.

There's no real examples of "fighting terror" with military force in the form, and scale that we're doing it. I'm not sure what you're basing this idea off of rather than assumption. I am willing to concede that it may turn out that fighting Terrorists with force may not work, but I don't think there's enough evidence to make the blanket statement that it's unequivocally useless, unless you can see the future. At the very least, whether you agree with it or not, the War in Iraq has refocused the attention of terrorists on Iraq rather than the US shores. I'm willing to bet Al Qaeda had something planned for the three years after 9/11, yet they haven't been successful. I have little doubt that there will be another terrorist attack on American soil sometime in the future, but it's common knowledge that a number of lead terrorists have been captured with intelligence about attacks in Afghanistan and the Pakistan border (I'll completely leave out Iraq as most of that intelligence was about terror in Iraq, rather than on American shores). Surely some of that helped apprehend or prevent something, somewhere, at some time.