Bush first says The War on Terror is not directly aimed at one person, or one country, but then he recently compares Osama to Hitler, which sort of says to me that it IS about just one person. What do you think? I don't think I completely understand this stuff.
2006-09-06 18:18:55 · 7 answers · asked by sx_rx_rocknroll 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Look at your god of liberalism Roosevelts statements. "We must fight the enemy on distant shores, before he comes to us." The idea is to shape the future , not wallow in the status quo and let our enemies fuel up for an opportune time. Wake up!
2006-09-06 18:33:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
till now we invaded, Iraq grew to become into no longer element of that conflict. Saddam had Islamic extremists decrease than administration. Now that he's long previous, American has created a jihadi magnet referred to as Iraq, and made it element of the wider conflict on terror. no you may actually deny that Al Qaeda has created a sanctuary in Iraq and Iraq is getting used to coach and recruit terrorists. The Taliban in Afghanistan admitted that they artwork with the mujaheddin in Iraq. The additionally stated they substitute combatants oftentimes for between the two wars. this is authentic that we are battling terror in the two Iraq and Afghanistan. If we gained in Iraq, we does no longer win the conflict on terror. If we gained in Afghanistan we does no longer win the conflict on terror. which would be a generational worldwide operation the place victory could be considered as authentic peace between the middle East and the West.
2016-12-18 06:12:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the eyes of the Islamic Terrorists, the war in Iraq, the war in Chechnya, the war in Israel, the war in Kashmir, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Sudan, the attacks in London of 7/7 and the attempted attacks last month, the attacks in Madrid, the attack in Beslan, the attacks of 9/11, the attacks in Turkey, the attacks in Jordan, the attacks in Morocco, the attacks Bali, the attacks in the Philipines, the attacks in Mumbai, the attacks in Pakistan, the attacks in Thailand, the attacks in Saudi Arabia, the attacks on US Embassies in Africa....
... Are not individual incidences in the eyes of Islamic Terrorists, they are multiple Fronts in the Global Jihad. Aiming to topple current world Governments, and replacing them with Shari'a based Governments in order to resurrect the Islamic Caliphate. In the hopes of bringing about the 12th Imam, and the return of an Islamic Golden Era.
These are not my own thoughts, they are the thoughts of the madmen, spoken in Arabic Farsi and English around the world. They will stop at nothing until we are Dead, Enslaved, or Praying to the East.
2006-09-06 18:49:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many people use the terms interchangeably.
But no, one has nothing to do with the other. And neither are "wars" as that term is legally defined under US law. Not that anyone seems to care about legal definitions either.
2006-09-06 18:21:53 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is now, the Muslim Brotherhood's Al Qaida branch has made it so.
Hitler was nothing by himself... he needed HATE and others who felt as much HATE as he did.... Osama is nothing by himself... for the same reason
2006-09-06 18:30:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The president only recently learned about Hitler...so we have to cut him some slack...
2006-09-06 18:20:57 · answer #6 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes they are the same
2006-09-06 18:30:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋