2006-08-16 08:19:44 · 22 answers · asked by mrkitties420 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Because there's a lot of them.
2006-08-16 08:25:16 · answer #1 · answered by Me 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, cause as you kill one. You create a symathizer to his cause (or multiple). There were people that were related or friend of his that will not understand the reason he died. They just know we did it and will take up his cause. Hmm, now you why those "liberals" keep saying this is a bad idea to just randomly kill "terroist".
And as I see there are plenty of people ahead of me that supported my theory. They just want to kill without thinking of possible consequences of the actions.
Alot of conservative blame Clinton for "not dealing with Bin Laden". However, even the right leaning program on Nat. Geographic channel "Inside 9/11" showed that Clinton had on three seperate occasions set plans into motion to take out Bin Laden. The first two time the missions were terminated at the last minute due to updated intellegence that showed possible international pressures from the attack (first time children were in the camp, the second time the crowned prince of UAE -- a US ally-- was with Bin Laden). The third time Bin Laden was not at the location the intellegence had point him to being.
2006-08-16 08:27:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the insurgency in Iraw is "in the last throes"
Dick Cheney-June 20th 2005
"mission accomplished" GWB-May 1, 2003
And for those of you who want numbers....
American Troops wounded in Iraq 542, killed 139 as of May 1, 2003
American Troops wounded in Iraq 19,270, killed 2600 as of August August 16, 2006
2006-08-16 08:28:58 · answer #3 · answered by Franklin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There weren't any (or many) there before we got there.
Saddam had them pretty well under control. He was quite militant against muslim extremist as he saw the threat to his power (and he was right).
We're not willing to go to the extremes that Saddam went to... and every day it's looking more and more like Saddam may have known more about what was best for his country than we do.
2006-08-16 08:50:35 · answer #4 · answered by Morey000 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because the terrorist can just blend in with the general population...and (unlike the terrorists) we're not willing to just start bombing indiscriminately and killing everybody around.
2006-08-16 08:24:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
One mans terrorists is another may freedom fighter. So who says you are going after terrorists. We fought terrrorists in my country and the world called them freedom fighters. Guess what they where terrorists or where they freedom fighters.
2006-08-16 08:27:35 · answer #6 · answered by cheryl l 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because you haven't learned anything from the Viet Nam fiasco. You have to get the people on your side, and you haven't done that, ane you won't as long as you keep on being the typical American.
2006-08-16 08:31:56 · answer #7 · answered by judy_r8 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Way too many and Democrats keep causing the dropping the effectiveness and morale of the the troops
2006-08-16 08:26:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For every one terrorist killed, many are waiting in line to take his place.
2006-08-16 08:28:53 · answer #9 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they don't fight strategically like military does during war. They change their ways of attack often and they use innocent people by hiding in those areas. They don't wear military clothing but the clothing of the people in that population.
2006-08-16 08:25:54 · answer #10 · answered by rltouhe 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we have become too politically correct of a country. Time to kick em in da groin!
2006-08-16 08:26:38 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋