Mr. Ingram, you are quite confused. It is keen how you bring in entirely different subjects in a feeble attempt to discredit me and my letter.
Introducing discussion about attacks in Jordon is not only irrelevant in this conversation, it is an entirely new debate. You then bring in your opinion that I feel those deaths not on American soil shouldn’t be counted. Of course they should and are of great significance, to say the least. But once again, were talking about Homeland Security, and that’s another subject.
Then to try and gain support by using the phrase as for us who value peace over war? Who would not agree with that? I will always value peace over war and don’t have to think for a split second over that decision. As I recall in America the morning of Sept. 11 started peacefully.
But let’s quit the bickering and name calling. Since it’s clear what I feel we have done has been at least somewhat effective (along with many others) and it is apparent that you do not, I present you with a challenge.
Provided that no action achieves horrific results, what would you do? What would you have done to stop terrorism in the United States following 9/11? How would you be MORE effective than the current administration and what would the results of your plan look like? Oh, and Jack, do not forget we are talking about Homeland Security, since that is the topic you chose.