IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK NEW YORK, AND AL QUAIDA WASN'T IN IRAQ UNTIL BUSH STARTED THIS UNWINNABLE QUAGMIRE.
DON'T BELIEVE THE LIES OF ZELL LIEBERMAN AND CREEPY CHENEY.
2006-08-14 12:30:51 · 21 answers · asked by Logical Democrat 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
because (in my opinion) Bush wants to be a memorable president and he figured if he went to another country and accused them of harboring nuclear bombs people would remember him, if you ask me, his plan backfired!
~down with Bush~
2006-08-14 12:35:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
There are terrorists all over the world. Yeah i know, it sounds crazy but its actually true. However in conflict we call "the war on terror" our front is centered on the Middle East pretty much exclusively.
Iraq in itself did NOT attack New York, i completely agree with you on that, but Al Quaeda was functioning out of Iraq (however, without the permission of Saddam Hussein's administation).
Some military and political theorists call Iraq a form of a sphere of influence, which The United States has used to dismantle varying terrorist factions throughout the region (Muhajadeen, Al Quaeda, Hamas, Hizballah, etc.). The problem however is that these political and military factions (Terrorists) have not actually been reduced and dismantled for the most part.
In short, i would speculate that The United States may indeed have attempted to produce positive developments toward a lasting peace in the Middle East. Unfortunately, none of this has actually happened and armed conflict is up since last year. Though we may be effectively trainning the Iraqi military to police their country. We have ineffectively used our information technologies to break down enemy combatants.
I know this might not read well since i tossed it together fairly randomly, but if anyone actually has any questions regarding this topic feel free to ask me.
2006-08-14 19:57:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who stopped the war on terror? You do know we have troops in Afghanistan right? Most people know we did not go into Iraq because of 9/11. Saddam brought us into Iraq. Now the terrorist or insurgents are fighting us there. 90% of insurgents are not even from Iraq.
2006-08-14 19:34:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Do you think it was a mishap? Do you really think we "couldnt" find Bin laden? Bush has America right where he wants us, blind and nieve. Watch the right hand, while the left hand shuffles the deck. He stopped the war on terrorism for a reason, after promising us that they would pay. There is a conspericy theory that Isreal was actually responsible for the bombing. When those tapes came from Bin Ladden, what the media didnt tell you was that he prayed for the victims of 9/11. Doesn't sound like a terrorist to me.... Bush is covering something up, and no one will ever know the truth.
2006-08-14 19:36:51 · answer #4 · answered by DJ 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
your ignorance comes shining through in your question...
al Quaeda was most definitely in Iraq prior to the war... Iraqi intelligence documents and personnel confirm this... terrorists were both harbored and trained in Iraq and met frequently with Iraqi intelligence agency reps.
the unfortunate thing is that cowardly left-wingers like the one asking this stupid question (sorry, no stupid questions, only stupid people) can't imagine that there is anything worth fighting for so they prefer to curl up in a ball and hide from the reality of th world.
Team America F*"K Yeah!!!
2006-08-14 19:39:21 · answer #5 · answered by Rat P... 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Do you have a brain disorder?
You don't think Iraq has terrorists? We're basically in all-out war with terrorists -- From Iran & Iraq.
Don't worry, I won't believe these lies either..
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
2006-08-14 19:33:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Same war. Different enemy. Different theater.
WW II included Japan, Germany and Italy. We (and others) fought them all at the same time.
It's too bad that you can't keep more than one thing between your ears at a time. I can.
2006-08-14 20:24:08 · answer #7 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To one-up his father. W has been a failure his whole life. Iraq was his chance to out-do his father, who stopped fighting Iraq when Kuwait was freed. He got to make all the people in the military-industrial complex rich as an added bonus.
2006-08-14 19:36:33 · answer #8 · answered by Phil S 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
According to Bush this is the war on terror, but I think it's a personal agenda.
2006-08-14 19:37:35 · answer #9 · answered by craigash7 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Maybe he thought 40 000 dead iraqi civilians would make up for 9/11... or that creating even more arab hatred and for the US and was a good idea.
2006-08-14 19:37:40 · answer #10 · answered by Paul M 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
YUP all old people in the administration are fu/cked up. We need a younger administration (somthing like clinton) that actually understand our plight. Old people are good for bad traffic and worthless foreign policy. Chuck all of them bald heads and wringkly dimwits i say!
2006-08-14 19:37:30 · answer #11 · answered by savio 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋