Terrorists backlash because of Bush? Then explain terrorist attacks in Spain, Bali, Sudan,and Grt.Britian.?

Question

Whoever you are please keep in mind that I respect your sense of right and wrong and you should respect mine as well.We both believe in right and wrong ok.I believe that war on terrorism is a matter of right vs. wrong.
I will grant you that Bush' mistake was using WMD's as a reason to go into Iraq.You are correct there.Yet on the other side of the coin he did not need that as a reason to go. He should have stood by the reason being Sadaams refusal to let U.N. inspectors into Iraq as the sole reason.Be that as it may we are in Afghanistan and Iraq.200 Taliban were killed in Afghanistan just recently and we have caught the number 2 Al Quaida leader in Iraq just recently as well. There are more solid reasons to support troop actions in Iraq and Afghanistan than to not support it. Our military is strategically placed at a pivot point for prolific terrorist factions in the Middle East.I.E. Syria,Iran, Sudan, Iraq and Afghanistan.All neighboring countries.

We are not seeking to be on good terms with terrorists Coragryph. We are seeking there demise and the rest of the world is to.To be on good terms with terrorists means that you are one.That is there terms.

Answer 1

Bush has absolutely nothing to do with this.

The Islamofascist would be attacking even if Santa Claus was president.

When are you going to wake up and realize that the religion of peace wants to cut your head off.

Go big Red Go

Answer 2

Islamic Extremists have hit various cities across the world. Bush is not the fundamental motivation for these IE, religious delusion promising rewards in the afterlife is.

Bush's War in Iraq obviously has not stopped or slowed the IE. In fact, it can be argued strongly that the War in Iraq is creating IE. For instance, while many Iraqis welcomed the overthrow of Saddam, when US mililtary actions kill innocent civilians (collateral damage) the family, friends and neighbors of those killed will often immediately (and naturally) see the US military as evil and worth resisting by any means. That is human nature and perhaps not even extreme.

The longer foreign troops occupy their country, the greater will be the number of Iraqis resisting such occupation with some joining Al Qaeda and other IE groups.

No matter how much we might think we in the US know what is best for Iraqis, that is absolutely not for us to decide. While I might believe that secular democracy is the healthiest, fairest, most enlightened path the Iraqi people could go down, that is not for me or the US military or the US government to decide.

However, if you believe it is in the best interest of the Iraqi people for the US to implement its vision upon Iraq's governing institutions and society, the War in Iraq as created and executed by Bush has been a shameful embarassing incompetent catastrophe. The only forward looking plan left to the US now is one of managing chaos while trying to find the least ruinous route out of that region.

We broke it but we don't have the trust of the Iraqi people or the record of competence needed to be able to fix it. The US must leave Iraq. We will pay the price for our arrogance, incompetence and ignorance for a long time to come.

Hoepfully, future US leaders will rectify the disaster that Bush and his cabinet of fools brought to an already dysfunctional MidEast. Hopefully, future US citizens will not surrender their better judgement to the bloodlust and vengeance nurtured by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

(Also, remember, Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world and Paul Bremmer (of the CPA) quickly legislated that the great oil weath of Iraq was open for pillaging by foreign companies. That is shameful, immoral and evil.)

Answer 3

Correction - Saddam did not ban inspectors from Iraq. When we went to the UN for backing to invade Iraq, the inspectors were asking for 6 more months.

Bush came out with propaganda that the inspectors were being banned from Iraq. That was false. I have watched the interviews with them on several series that Frontline has done.

Can't answer your question when your facts are incorrect.

Good Luck.

Answer 4

There have always been terrorist attacks all over the world. Bush did not cause all of them.

But it's fairly naive to think that Bush's policies and actions have put us on better terms with the terrorists, or that they like us better because of what Bush has done. So, arguing that there has been no backlash or no increased hatred against the US is unrealistic.

Answer 5

Who the hell wants to be "on better terms with the terrorists"???

I strongly suspect that we had better lower or commitment to win hearts and minds and start kicking some serious terrorist butts!

If Bush is responsible for the terrorist backlash, it's simply because he's not going to sit around and take their bull crap. Of course they'll be backlash - the psycho bullies have never had their asses kicked before now - they've never had to answer for their murder of innocent men, women and children.

Answer 6

Ridiculous! This is merely the passivist cowards' way to explain why the terroristic attacks continue--which they did while we were officially 'ignoring' their intrusions into our affairs, and appeasing them. This didn't work any better than attacking their supporters, but it's a lot more to the taste of those eggless wonders who claim we deserved 911.
The truth is, the terrorists are going to continue till they win, no matter what they say to the contrary--just intended to convince us to lay down and let them have their way. Sound a lot like 'if it's inevitable, just relax and enjoy it.' And it would be no more enjoyable than rape.
For myself, I'd rather go down fighting than propitiating.

Answer 7

There's always been terrorist attacks since the beginning of time. In our country alone there has been dozens of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil in the past 100 years.

Answer 8

It seemed to me that they attacked in both Spain and in Great Britain because Spain initially joined us by sending their troops to the War in Iraq, and Great Britain, under Tony Blair, sent their troops over, as well. As to the other places, I am not sure.