so many liberals are saying that they do support the war on terror but not the way it goes. which way (exactly) is a better way?
2006-08-15 20:47:00 · 13 answers · asked by mankind 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I'm not against the war on terror, however there was absolutely no evidence that Iraq had any direct link with what happened on 9/11. Yes, it's an islamic regime with extremist fundamentalists, but so do most of the Middle East so why Iraq? It seems to me that Iran ( who openly provoques the US) and North Korea were more of a threat than Iraq.
I still don't understand why we attacked Iraq...because Hussain was a dictator? so was Castro, Kadafi,Mobutu, the iranian president (dont remember the name)...
Weapons of Mass Destruction? where are they to this day?
2006-08-15 20:59:55 · answer #1 · answered by Jmyooooh 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We should have waited on Iraq.
We should attempt to diplomatically address the issues that cause terrorism. (I agree that we must make it seem that we are not making concessions based on terror being inflicted, but we'd be wise to figure out a way to stop other radicals from sacrificing their lives to kill us)
We should be more proactive and less reactive in general.
We should build a true international coalition to shoulder the burden with us. We MUST accept that this means we cannot act unilaterally on the global stage. The other option is getting sucked into protracted conflicts (i.e. Iraq) and losing capability to fight on unforeseen fronts.
We should find Osama instead of diverting our attention because he's just so darned hard to find.
We should elect officials (Dem or Rep) that see foreign nations as possible allies and not possible foes.
We should be a shining example and not a purveyor of "freedom" by force.
We should adhere to all international treaties, as we weaken our own protections every time we violate them.
We should accept that even in the midst of violence being inflicted upon us, this is the most important time to protect our freedoms at home. If I'm not as free as I can be, then what are we fighting for?
2006-08-16 04:01:57 · answer #2 · answered by utopiafourteen 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What I support is an independent investigation of 9/11 something Bush was against for 18 months.also i want them funded a hell of a lot better. I don,t support the war at all and to me those who do are the real terrorists
2006-08-16 03:54:43 · answer #3 · answered by tough as hell 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the best way to hv words with each country in UN forum. Invites muslim countries to get their 100% support. have a debate on large scale to find out why muslim countries allowing terrorist act from their land.
unless all muslim countries do not support war against terrorism. these unhuman activities will be increasing only. As many of them indirectly or directly support terrorism.
2006-08-16 03:57:14 · answer #4 · answered by chupke chupke 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Can you prove he was right? I guess I don't believe in fighting violence with more violence. Close our country's borders. Cut off all aid to countries that do nothing about stopping terrorists within their borders. Deport all terrorists back to their country of origin. Tell the world that the borders will reopen when terrorism stops. Encourage other countrys to do the same. No one in, no one out. When you cut off the blood supply to the cancer,it eventually dies out. On the other hand, if you keep fueling it, it will just keep growing
2006-08-16 04:02:20 · answer #5 · answered by Tricia 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.
Just because J. Lieberman was a democrat does not mean that he was liberal, or left leaning in any way.
As far as a better way, surgical removal of threats (ie knives not bombs) without defining an enemy of the state, seems to rank high among hipsters.
2006-08-16 03:55:38 · answer #6 · answered by helix.helix 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Transferring troops to actually get Bin Laden. Of course Bush admitted he "doesn't care about Bin Laden, he doesn't think about him, he could care less".
Then we need to take a firmer stance on Israel. Then we need to slowly pull out of Iraq and send those troops to hunt the man who was really responsible for 9/11, Bin Laden.
Then I would all but close our borders, Bush plans on opening them up by 2010. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965
And I wouldn't be like Bush and hand over our ports to country's linked to terrorism.
I would actually find alternative fuels for all machines including automobiles. Less money to Arabs means less money to terrorists.
I would go on but my list is huge.
2006-08-16 03:56:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
there is no good way to have a war.
2006-08-16 03:52:16 · answer #8 · answered by johnny_zondo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't even know where to start. He's done so many mistakes.
2006-08-16 04:32:12 · answer #9 · answered by tyrone b 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Axioms dont need proof.
2006-08-16 04:02:18 · answer #10 · answered by Amrendra 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋