Do you support the war on terror? You dont support the patriot act, nsa, detaining terrorist, or homeland security, so what do you support on the war against terror?
2006-08-24 14:31:02 · 20 answers · asked by shut up dummy 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
corag-- tell that to the families of the victims of Sept 11
2006-08-24 14:35:12 · update #1
corag-- have you ever seen the outside of a class room?
2006-08-24 14:52:22 · update #2
corag is gonna 'suit' me now in the supreme court, lmao
2006-08-24 15:06:28 · update #3
they support liberal judges that rule in favor of terrorist activities, they support the hug-a-terrorist foundation, and as some idiot said eariler "war on terror" is a marketing phrase proves that the yellow, lying, heathen, damnocrats are more than ready and willing to turn our country to the terrorist that the demopukes say don't exist
2006-08-24 14:38:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
We have done nothing as far as a war on terror. Where is Bin Laden? Why did we go after Iraq? There were no Iraqi's aboard any of those planes. The patriot act is a step toward communism. Basically it is saying you have no rights and the goverment can do what it wants. Is that patriotic? Homeland security is a joke. First they have a ranking individual trying to seduce little girls on the work computer (and it took them several months to catch that), they did not notice an illegal alien working as a border patrol agent (that smuggled hundreds of illegals in), but they want to read your emails and know who you call. Is that the land of the free? The sad fact is we do not understand what we are dealing with. The terrorists are not people that must strike soon. they might hit us 100 years from now. Time is not a factor in the way they think. We are not programmed like that and cant understand it. It is fortunate that they do not know how to really hurt us or how our society really runs. The goverment may catch a few people that may or may not be really doing something, but the ones that are serious will still be able to bypass all of our safety net.
2006-08-24 21:43:40 · answer #2 · answered by jimbobb1 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I just don't understand how you can believe that liberal minded people are against keeping our country safe. What you are failing to understand is when you let our government leaders defy the law then the terror is real and it is here, at home! You can't continue to base what you think you know on the lies and half truths that litter our media every day. And don't confuse the war on terror with the war in Iraq. Those are two, totally unrelated issues. With the election coming up please do not let the political parties define what the other one is. Make them define themselves and then decide what kind of a country you want to live in.
2006-08-24 21:57:26 · answer #3 · answered by industrialconfusion 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have nothing against the so called War on Terror What I am against is the way Bush is going about it. Bush has not made this country any more secure We never found Osama. Bin Laden Our port security is a joke. We have more tetrrist isurgants in Iran before we started a war there. Maybe if we would lok at it as more of a law enforcement issue We would acually start seeing some real progess. WEe will never win this war the way Bush is doing things all he is acomplishing is slowly gutting our constution and the freedoms we are granted by it
2006-08-24 21:47:01 · answer #4 · answered by bisquedog 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Liberals would support the war on terror if they could get something from that genocide-business.
Democrats and republicans are like 2 faces from a quarter.
2006-08-24 22:54:35 · answer #5 · answered by Mysterio 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
(Lamont speaks:) Listen Pop, get off that liberal/conservative, us/them thinking. That is what keeps us from making progress. As long as we keep identifying with the labels that the political spin doctors come up with, we stay divided and accompish nothing but an ongoing argument. And, it ain't by accident. When we stand around pointing the finger at the other side, the status quo just gets richer and stronger at all of our expense.
Liberal or conservative are hardly wide enough categories to describe the political opinions of people. Pop, why would you let someone tell you that you have to choose one or the other (especially when you don't have to)?
(Fred replies: Shut up you dummy!)
2006-08-24 21:47:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
It is the opinion of several host's on Air America that there is no real terrorist threat. This is a foolish mistake.Eveyone should study up on islam and what the koran says about "infidels" and "people of the book". Find out what a Dhimi is.
2006-08-24 21:55:11 · answer #7 · answered by TIM G 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The War on Terror is a marketing phrase.
It is as amorphous and meaningless as the War on Drugs, or the War on Poverty. And just as useless as a catch-all term when discussing many completely different legal programs or situations.
The Patriot Act was passed by Congress. Whether we like it or not, that's federal law until it is changed.
The NSA has been conducting illegal activity, in violation of federal law (FISA). And not because they had no choice. Everything the NSA is with the warrantless wiretapping program could have been done under existing law. But it wasn't.
So, why are people making excuses for illegal activity, when the exact same programs could have been done legally, and just as effectively, by following proper procedures?
As far as detaining terrorists, again the issue is the US govt following its own laws and its own constitution. If the laws don't work, change them. If the Constitution is too restrictive, try to amend it. But don't just ignore the laws because they are inconvenient.
The issues are unrelated, except that they all deal with either breaking or following the laws. And while we many not like the laws, we're supposed to following them anyway.
That applies just as much to the govt as it does to anyone else.
{EDIT}
Tell what to the families? That the US govt should follow its own laws? Sure. I do. Frequently. Including the ones I know personally.
And before you invoke the 9/11-bomb, do you realize that none of the illegal programs above would have made any difference? Because every one of them could have been done legally under the laws that existed at the time. Not to mention that there was existing evidence of the impending attack that was ignored.
Bush just dropped the ball, and has used that as an excuse to throw out the rule of law ever after. So, how does that provide any possible justification to allow him to violate of law for no reason?
2006-08-24 21:33:42 · answer #8 · answered by coragryph 7 · 6⤊ 5⤋
Yeah, the republcans are just so tough on the war on terror!
I found it quite disturbing when Reagan cut and ran in the war on terrorism in the 80's. Did you?
2006-08-24 21:44:08 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
liberals support going after Osama... the guy who did 9-11... do you remember him?
do conservatives support the war on terror? instead of GOING AFTER THE TERRORISTS they just put in place a bunch of rules and programs... if you kill the terrorists, there won't be a need for all the rules (that go against the constitution and your freedoms, by the way)... you remember the constitution?
Osama and terrorists are an afterthought now to conservatives... they are much more conserned about the rules that they put in place...
GOD FORBID YOU ACTUALLY TRY TO ELIMINATE THE THREAT...
you say "war" yet all you talk about are "rules" and "programs"... how about actually doing a LITTLE WAR ON TERRORISTS?
2006-08-24 22:00:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋