Why did you pick who you picked for each question? If the answers to the two questions are different, why didn't you choose the same person for both?
2006-09-12 12:31:34 · 9 answers · asked by timm1776 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Neddie: I didn't say anything about Iraq.
soapintrucker: There were terrorist attacks on the U.S. between 1993 and 2001. Oklahoma City in 1995, and the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
2006-09-12 12:55:23 · update #1
I think the govnt has a whole deserves credit for nothing happenign again, so far. All the intelligence agencies, and Dod, FBI, CIA etc. etc. The most blame would have to go to whoever is in charge cuz they make the descions, call the shots and formulate policy.
I didnt choose the same bcuz you cant blame everybody for the failures of a few but u can assign responsibility to whoever is in charge.
2006-09-12 12:38:34 · answer #1 · answered by rolla_jay510 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
CIA, NSA and FBI for both. Bush gets some credit/some blame if we have another attack. Parts of patriot act and other policies to disrupt the terrorist networks helps.
The war on terror is much more about interdiction, intelligence and disrupting their operations. It is not a military campaign as in Iraq. Afghanistan is a different story as they actually had terrorist camps there and that's where Bin Laden was (is?) .
Iraq was a distraction.
2006-09-12 19:38:03 · answer #2 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hate that crap Bush spews on TV that we haven't been "hit" in 5 years because of our stance on "terror", B.S.!
Do the math, in 1993 the WTC was hit, then again in 2001, that is way over 5 years, I don't doubt that if the "terrorists" plan to "hit" 'us, that they will attempt it when they are ready. It is arrogant to think that we stopped or prevented "terrorism" for 5 years. There are so many freaking holes in the system that we should be fearing what is next!
We didn't know what to do about planes hitting tall buildings until 9-11, so how can we prevent all possible scenarios? (Until they happen?!?!?!?!?)
We have MILES to go in being really truly READY for a "war" on "terrorism"! Anyone who thinks "we bad" is sadly mistaken!
2006-09-12 19:38:04 · answer #3 · answered by Life after 45 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think mainly Bush to some degree (invasion of Afghanistan probably did quite a bit of good... )
but Bush for the second question for not really finishing the job... kind of went to Iraq instead of following bin Laden... got him on the run and then gave up...
2006-09-12 19:39:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Terrorism is a business..nothing more and nothing less ..and its corporate sponsors are in fact in the highest levels of our government..these are the cold hard facts I have accepted. One only has to glance over the financial times when events happen to see the wind fall profits being made.
2006-09-12 19:36:22 · answer #5 · answered by dstr 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Democrats because they are such cowards. The terrorists know they must wait until democrats take over control of the government to conquer the USA.
2006-09-12 19:40:13 · answer #6 · answered by lighthouse 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't know
But in one of those AlJazier tapes Ben Laden said "Mission Accomplished"
Go big Red Go
2006-09-12 20:04:10 · answer #7 · answered by 43 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the CIA and national security,,, the CIA, and national security,,,,
neither has anything to do with the invasion of Iraq,,,,
2006-09-12 19:34:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nobody it was a one shot deal
2006-09-12 19:44:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋