2006-06-21 02:53:27 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think he's only doing what Rummie and Dickie told him to do. So, no. They're only exacerbating the situation.
2006-06-21 02:55:46 · answer #1 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There will be no end to terror until people learn to get along. The War on Terror has no end....a war on terror means you're fighting an idea or a thing not a specific person; like the war on drugs. The war on drugs has been going on for 20 years and is there any end in sight to that? Not that I see. Bush uses that excuse to get approval for things that normally wouldn't go. It's said but at least he'll be out in a couple years. If we've learned anything from the past 5 years it should be that people need to get out there and vote and be careful who they vote for.
2006-06-21 03:03:58 · answer #2 · answered by Kyleen G 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It cannot possibly succeed.
There is no possible way that the US will be able to eliminate everyone in the world who wants to attack other people. No possible way to eliminate the racial and cultural tensions, or the history of violence in the Middle East (and elsewhere).
And it takes decades to set up a stable government anywhere after a long war. Just look at Germany and Japan. So even if we limit the scope of the war to making Iraq and Afghanistan stable democratic countries, they won't be accomplished for decades. And that still won't eliminate the violence over there. Israel and Jordan have been stable democratic countries for almost 60 years, and daily terrorist attacks are still common. And how many centuries did the Basque separatists keep fighting?
The War on Terror is purely a political campaign marketing tool to get the American people to willingly give up their rights in the name of something that can never be completed. And to distract the people from massive negligence and mismanagement.
2006-06-21 02:57:12 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. I believe the war on terror is the same as the war on drugs. There will always be terrorists (whomever the government of the time deems worthy of the title) and there will always be drugs. The war on terror as with most wars as of late is to feed the political agenda of both parties.
2006-06-21 03:15:36 · answer #4 · answered by Dissolvo Rae 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in all likelihood no longer. George Bush isn't a social worker or a psychiatrist. he's in basic terms the President of the USA. Britain did no longer be victorious against terrorism in Northern eire, Syria did no longer be victorious against terrorism in Palestine. Terrorism is a psychological ailment. it is not a political situation in the sense which you would be able to clean up the situation politically.
2016-12-08 23:31:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
... well, I think if we focused on who attacked us, Osama, then it could succeed, but now we're spending the majority of our military might in Iraq, which has nothing to do with 9-11... so it's a bit silly
this horribly vague overall idea of terror can never be dealt with and instead seems to be used as an excuse for Bush to do whatever he wants...
The major difference here seems to be: Republicans think we are fighting every arab, while everyone else (Democrats, independents, libertarians, etc.) think we should be fighting Osama and those that attacked us... which does not include Iraq, or even Iran really...
2006-06-21 03:46:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its more a personal or business agenda and at the center of it all is why Osama Bin Laden has never been caught. A 94.5 billion dollar budget has been OK'd just for this year for the Iraq war. It seems to me, for that amount of money the government could find any particular person on this planet and have them setting in any prison they would like.
2006-06-21 03:08:27 · answer #7 · answered by PBarnfeather 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why is that an "or"?
Bush is not going to end terror, it isn't going to happen.
And right now, yeah, it is a political agenda. Or aren't you following the current congressional debate?
2006-06-21 02:59:57 · answer #8 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not political.
It is economical with a moral pretext looking like politics. It will never 'succeed' as ending that war is an end to economical growth. The war is just to profitable
2006-06-21 02:56:26 · answer #9 · answered by Puppy Zwolle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one has conquered the World. And no one shall, ever. Whatever name be given to a 'war' launched.* Also,no one can win over the rest of the humanity to his own religious belief system. This question is answered without reference to any name, such as mentioned by Asker.
2006-06-21 03:04:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush has made a bad situation worse! Sadly, for his, and his family and cabinet's personal monetary gain.
I'm not so sure that, after all this, America really even wants to know who was actually behind 9/11!
I bet America finds out that they all wished they had taken the blue pill...
2006-06-21 03:07:08 · answer #11 · answered by Truth Seeker 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋