NSA James Jones: Obama’s Decisions Make U.S. More Secure

Obama policies are a larger threat to Americans than terrorism.

To quote, “perfection is an impossible standard”. Who thinks for a moment that Israel has not endeavored to do everything possible to avert terrorist attacks on her soil. Yet they are struck over and over again. The GOP touts it’s success but, in fact, they have just been lucky. Hopefully, the Democrats will also be lucky, but some time, somewhere, we will be hit again. That is reality in today’s world and whoever stands before you and tells you otherwise is telling a fable. With intelligence and care we can, perhaps, minimize our exposure, but we will be hit again. Our government’s arrogance demonstrated the previous 8 years have contributed in no way to making us safer from day to day.

Wow, thats news. Obama’s national security advisor saying his boss made the country more safe. Shocking headliner. Wonder how long it took to pry that out of him.

“I love how you frame perfection and keeping us safe after the events of 9/11. What about on 9/11?”
You know whats funny about American politics, had Bush come out on day one and said “terrorism is my top priority” and resourced that effort to what it is today, he most likely would have been ridiculed by the left for having screwed up priorities. The big news item the summer he was elected was the dot.com bubble bursting the year prior, and tech stocks. No one would have given a crap. It took something as catastrophic as 9/11 to wake America up. So go ahead, sit on your nice hindsight chair of noble thought and take pot shots at the President who was in office a whole 9 months and discount the previous 18 years of terrorism against the U.S. but remember this, prior to 9/11 you wouldnt have given 2 cents about terror and even if he had prevented 9/11, it would have been a fly by news story, forgotten 3 days later.
So please, spare us all the holy-er than though security opinions.

Isn’t Jones the guy who was bragging about how President Obama had saved the NATO vote when Turkish Prime minister didn’t want to vote for the Danish president?
I would love someone to ask how they measure the number of terrorists Guantanamo has created, and if it is greater than the number of terrorists Bahgram created. Or the number of terrorists having a base in Saudi Arabia created.

Come on ABC..that’s National Security Advisor to Obama, you know like Sandy Berger National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton. I am just happy to see ya Sandy replied to a guard as he made his escape from a government archive with classified docs stuffed down his pants. He, James Jones, is an employee of Obama NOT the “NSA.” What would you expect him to say…

Wow, thats news. Obama’s national security advisor saying his boss made the country more safe. Shocking headliner. Wonder how long it took to pry that out of him.
Posted by: KR | May 27, 2009 11:41:17 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you going to magically explain away Admiral Mike Mullen, General David Petraeus and Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates who are also in agreement with James Jones?

PV – Whatever makes you feel better.

“You know whats funny about American politics, had Bush come out on day one and said “terrorism is my top priority” and resourced that effort to what it is today, he most likely would have been ridiculed by the left for having screwed up priorities.”
This is called a ‘straw man’ argument; you ignore the stated argument “9/11 happened on the Bush/Cheney watch so there security wasn’t so perfect” and you substitute a bogus argument and attribute it to your opponent.
The fact of the matter is 9/11 did happen on Bush and Cheney’s watch and they did have advance warning of it in security memos. Are you really trying to say they didn’t take security seriously because ‘the left’ wouldn’t have like it?
Get serious.

It took something as catastrophic as 9/11 to wake America up. So go ahead, sit on your nice hindsight chair of noble thought and take pot shots at the President who was in office a whole 9 months and discount the previous 18 years of terrorism against the U.S
KR
I missed your explanation of what exactly did 9/11 have to do with the invasion of Iraq

Oh, hello, Mr. Jones? Just thought you might like to know, North Korea is testing nuclear weapons and missiles like mad while you’re telling us how much safer Mr. Obama’s speeches have made us all. And please be advised the use of the terms “war on terror” and “terrorism” are verboten. Please see Ms. Napolitano for further advice on terminology. As for Guantanamo creating more terrorists, I’m sure transferring these creators of manmade disasters to federal prisons in several of our “57″ states would not foster any feelings of ill will toward the U.S. and banish any thoughts of terror….oops, there’s that word again.
Thank you, Mr. Cheney. I understood what you said, and I appreciate what you did to keep us safe for seven years.

oh yeah…I wouldn’t know, I am not a Republican… but I have heard on good authority that the Democrats can be just as “cult like.”

This is just political BS, Jones doesn’t have a clue, just like his boss, the Messiah.
N. Korea test a Hiroshima-size bomb, shoots missiles over Japan, talks about war with S. Korea, & sells nuclear & missile technology to Islamic crazies.
Pakistan (a failed state) may be taken over by the Taliban – more Islamic crazies with nuclear weapons.
Iran will soon have nuclear arms & the missile delivery systems to use them while Obama makes empty speeches.
Oh sure, I feel sooooooo much safer.

Arnold is doing the Shock Doctrine on California, and Obama isn’t doing anything to help our state. But he came here tonight for a fundraiser.
I miss Bill and Hillary. They always helped California.

Terry . …
Good to hear you admit President Obama is not responsible for the nasty developments.
I disagree with your assessment on the other items and would note that President Carter had negotiated a release for the hostage in Iran but the sleazeballs behind the Reagan team had negotiated an arms deal for Iran if they kept the hostages captive until the Reagan inauguration. What? You think that was coincidence the hostages were released on Reagan’s inauguration day?
American politicians have been so sleazy over the years. How can you trust a country that supported repressive dictators in order to get cheap raw materials and political sway, while at the same time professing to its people and the world to be the champion of democracy.
Let’s hope that improves.

Let’s reframe this article.
ABC cites an administration employee to praise his boss.

Is he kidding? The world is entering a very dangerous phase of history.Iran is on the cusp of developing a nuclear weapon, and has mastered the bomb fuel process. N Korea is more bellicose than in any time since the 1950′s.
Both of these countries may kick off a nuclear arms race in the ME and Pacific Rim before the President’s term ends.
Pakistan is coming apart and the U.S. is trying to stabilize it with remotely piloted bombing.
It seems Gen. Jones is either ignorant or incompetent to believe we are increasingly ‘safer’.

Obama is not responsible.

Let’s not forget Iraq….Gen Jones is under the impression that Iraq’s democractic history has already been written.
Does he forget we went through a bloody civil war ourselves and it took us more than 200 yrs to get it right?
Does he understand that Iraqis have not settled their ethnic and religious differences yet (to put it mildly)and we are on a strict timetable to leave, no matter what?
Has he forgotten that the most senior AQ leaders are still free to plot more attacks against our country?
Are we really safer when Iran and NK let the nuclear genie out of the bottle and aid our enemy so they can follow up with the most destructive attack in U.S. history?
The President has the audacity to hope that that day never comes.

“This is called a ‘straw man’ argument; you ignore the stated argument “9/11 happened on the Bush/Cheney watch so there security wasn’t so perfect”
Wow, I feel like im trying to explain phsysics to an 8 year old. Prior to 9/11, terrorism was handled peacemeal. Military involvement was minor and only when called upon. Intel resources committed to terror were minor. Translators and collection resources were not allocated. None of this existed prior to 9/11. All of these things were drastically increased after 9/11. A major shift in the military focus happened because of 9/11. None of those things would have, and I argue could have happened, before 9/11 cause no one cared. The American people didn’t care. But yes it did happen on their watch, but I also realize no one gave 2 cents about terror then. I was in the military as a pilot at that time. It wasn’t anything we trained for or briefed on. It wasn’t on the radar. So if your going to use the 9 months prior to 9/11 as a judge of security, then you need to go back 18 years to Beruit and start there to figure out why no one cared, through 3 administrations. We had an opportunity in 1993 to ratchet up resources and go after terrorists after they attacked on our soil and we didn’t. I don’t blame Clinton mind you, there was little outrage from the American people for him to make the drastic changes needed. Plus he was in the middle of cutting out half of the military, we were just coming off the cold war, many factors influence him to handle that the way he did. Embassy bombings, Cole, all happened overseas and no one really cared. It took 9/11 for YOU to care, for ME to care. Anything that happened before is only historical perspective.

“increased defense spending”
Ok Mr. Jones, you know people can look this up. Defense budget for FY09, according to Defense Budget Estimates for FY09, shows a decrease of 51 Billion dollars, going from current (at the time) 552.3 Billion to 501.4 Billion for FY09. I guess even Mr. Jones integrity can be compromised.

I’m not so sure that hundreds of years of animosity toward that West are really affected by the Gitmo closing.. it seems a stretch….to me…
…also, not convinced that the Iraq/Afghan/Paki.. policy is really a big change or adds to regional stability..
maybe this guy is using the POTUS’s teleprompter… nothing new or convincing..so far as I can tell….

“I’m not so sure that hundreds of years of animosity toward that West are really affected by the Gitmo closing.. it seems a stretch….to me…”
Does nothing really. Our enemies didn’t care really. Any use of GITMO propaganda wise by our enemies was directed towards the west. It had a bigger impact with our allies though changing it doesn’t some how magically mean our allies will commit more resources for US interests, that won’t change either. So what we get out of it is closing something that was demonized by political banter. Sort of our own self created boogeyman that we have to get rid of now after we dressed him up as the boogeyman. In reality all we are doing is taking off the boogeyman costume and moving him elsewhere. Didn’t change anything. But makes for good rhetoric.

“He has said clearly and unequivocally that we are at war with terrorism and terrorism can take many facets.”
The former President was often accused of fighting a ‘verb’…i.e., fighting ‘terrorism’, not ‘terrorists’.
So, Mr. President, are we still fighting a global ‘war on terror’, or not?

“The extent of the cuts remains unclear, but the flying-hour reductions will last until the end of the fiscal year as part of the Navy’s fleetwide efforts to deal with the budget crunch on Capitol Hill.”
So much for that increase in defense spending Mr. Jones.

Following the attacks of 9/11, the Bush Administration changed our national security policy from being “reactive” to being “proactive.”
Posted by: James Danley
I repeat, what did attacking and invading Iraq
have to do with the 9/11 attack

“Following the attacks of 9/11, the Bush Administration changed our national security policy from being “reactive” to being “proactive.”"
So they attacked a country that was zero threat to us or our allies.
Makes total sense.

ryan c…Kuwait Invaded by Iraq forces, Gulf War, NFZ Operation Northern Watch and Operation Southern Watch protecting Kurds and mission of preventing further inhumane acts against civilian populations American and British received anti-aircraft fire from Iraqi forces daily….Ummmm sounds like threat too me…

1. The Democrats claimed that Iraq’s WMDs posed a serious threat to the United States and Iraq’s neighbors in 1998. Some even said the threat was imminent. So Congress passed the Iraq Liberation Act. All throughout 1998-2000 the the Clinton Administration continued to talk about the threat that Iraq posed to the United States.
2. The Bush Administration was briefed during the transition by the Clinton Administration on Iraq’s WMDs and the threat that it posed to the United States and Iraq’s neighbors in Dec 2000 and Jan 2001.
3. The intelligence agencies continued to brief President Bush on Iraq’s WMD programs.
4. Former Ambassador Joe Wilson returned from his African trip and verbally told the CIA that an Iraq delegation had traveled to Niger in 1999 and that Niger officials believed that they were interested in buying uranium. Contrary to what his article stated, the CIA believed that this corroborated their belief that Saddam Hussein was seeking yellowcake uranium. NOTE: Iraq sold 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium to Canada in July of 2008.
5. At one point, Iraq actually launched a missile at one of our planes while it was in Kuwaiti airspace. NOTE: This alone was an act of war.
6. Following the attacks of 9/11, President Bush changed our national security policy to one of being proactive — we would no longer wait until after an attack or until a threat became imminent before taking action.
7. Congress passed the Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. Read the entire resolution. It’s on the Internet.
8. We learned that Iraq did not have WMDs ONLY AFTER the invasion. However the fact that Iraq did not have WMDs is irrelevant. That’s because one of the conditions of the 1991 Cease Fire was that Saddam Hussein had to prove that he no longer had WMDs. After 12 years of failing to comply with a single condition of the ceasefire, the UN Security Council finally issued it final ultimatum in 2002. However, they made it clear that they had no intention of following through on the ultimatum. So President Bush issued his own final ultimatum. When Saddam Hussein refused to comply, President Bush rescinded the 1991 Cease Fire and resumed the original Gulf War.
9. The Bush Administration did not view the invasion as a cakewalk. For months leading up to the invasion there was much discussion of how difficult the street fighting would be. Then, when at the very last minute Turkey denied our use of their airspace for the northern flank of the invasion, the Bush Administration knew that minus the northern flank we would not be able to contain Saddam Hussein’s army in Baghdad. And that would make the battle even more difficult.

ryanc…Threat: 1.Expression of an INTENTION to inflict something harmful. 2.An indication of impending danger or harm. 3. One regarded as a POSSIBLE danger: MENANCE
Houghton Mifflin College Dictonary
To say Saddam Hussein posed no “threat” to either our allies or ourselves is someone who is in complete:
Denial: 1. A refusal to comply with or satisfy a request. 2. A refusal to acknowledge the truth of a statement or allegation: CONTRADICTION. 3. A rejection as of a doctrine or belief. 4. The act of disowning or disavowing: REPUDIATION…And finally…SELF-DENIAL