How do the Democrats think we should catch Bin Laden?

Question

I keep hearing the Democrats say that we should go after Bin Laden. Bin Laden is hiding in Pakistan. Do the Democrats think we should invade Pakistan to get Bin Laden? If Bush sent U.S. troops into Pakistan to get Bin Laden the Democrats would be crying about how Bush is violating Pakistan's sovereignty. It's almost as if the Democrats care more about politcs than national security.

notyou, there is a difference between Pakistan's sovereignty and Iraq's sovereignty. It's call Pakistan is an ally on the War on Terrorism. Iraq is not.

Notice how the liberals who say that Pakistan is not an ally still did not answer the question. They just say that Pakistan is not an ally but don't answer if we should invade Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Student came the closest to a rational response for a liberal. I disagree that sending more aid to Pakistan and more troops to Afganistan would catch Bin Laden. The Democrats should stop criticizing Bush about not catching Bin Laden unless they come up with a better plan. Also, we don't know everything that is happening behind the scenes to get Bin Laden.

Answer 1

That is so true--the Democrats are crying about Bush....and then one of them will take office in 2008 and end up either having to do the same thing Bush is doing, or he will be a WORSE president by sitting around doing nothing while the terrorists unite under Bin Laden.

Either way, the Democrats are crying just to be crying.

Answer 2

If we could find Saddam in his hole, we could have found Bin Laden in his. The republicans need Bin Laden, he's the only one keeping them in office. That's why he hasn't been caught. The righties want to keep as the Ace in the Hole for them to answer any problem. That's exactly what they do, when the polls start going down the right jumps up and screams Bin Laden's still on the loose and the demos can't catch him. The repubs claim to be the only ones who can win this war on terror, however, 5 years later they are no closer to catching him. I have a good feeling after 2008 and another righty is at the helm, they'll finally go ahead and pick him up. By the way, my crazy liberal idea for finding him. Use all the tecnology we have, satellite imaging, infrared from the air, and good old footwork. If Dubya had commited as many soldiers to finding Osama as he did for Iraq, we would have found Osama by 10/11/2001. But then there's the cynical argument, Osama's is Dubya's business buddy, he can't bring him into custody. He would lose certain business interests with the Bin Laden family.

Answer 3

I am not going to get into all of the yelling etc.

I am just going to say...It is the fault of the entire U.S. Government, Republicans and Democrats, why Bin Laden is still free!

As far as Pakistan, you better do more research...Pakistan is not a true partner to the U.S..

The U.S. does not invade Pakistan because Pakistan has nuclear weapons and will not hesitate to use them, on any Nation who threatens them!

Iraq is just as Sovereign a Nation, as Pakistan!

I do have to add...You Conservatives are really full of hate. The way most Conservatives behave today, it reminds me of the One Party rule, of The Soviet Union.

I will also admit that many Liberals complain too but I like to think to myself that both the Conservatives and Liberals who complain, are not too educated and don't know what they are talking about.

Real adults do not behave that way...the correct way is to talk about their differences and compromise.

We might not agree on some things but we are all Americans and it's about time you Conservatives realize it.

As a Liberal, I do care about the safety of MY Country and always will. That is why I was proud to serve in the Army with Honor and Integrity!

Bin Laden will be caught, when Pakistan becomes a true partner with the U.S.

If Pakistan was a true partner, they would have found Bin Laden long ago and turned him over to The U.S. just like they did with Ramsey Usef, when he bombed the World Trade Center in 1993.

Pakistan had a different Government back then and it was more friendly to The U.S., than today's Pakistani Government.

Now, go ahead Conservatives and prove me right about your hate by giving me the thumbs down!

Answer 4

No. Strangely democrats don't think that invasion is the answer to every problem. There are soldiers in afghanistan and pakistan looking for osama. since pakistan is helping us, as you note, why would we invade them? it would be a lot easier to simply send more soldiers to afghanistan and pakistan to aide the counter-terrorism efforts there. more help going to pakistan and afghanistan to look for bin laden. is that really so ridiculous? a lot cheaper than the war in iraq too.

You're setting up a false situation here with only two choices, the present course of action or the absurd choice of invading pakistan. Since the invasion of pakistan is obviously absurd, you can conclude (from the false either/or premise you set up) that the only sensible option is the present course of action. But you ignore other more sensible options (like putting more troops in afghanistan, sending more aid to pakistan, etc.) Its a very dishonest rhetorical tactic that you're using. I don't imagine you care much about that, but I just hate tricks like this that people use to score points in arguments.

Answer 5

At least we would be after the person we originally started after. It looks pretty bad on the gov when we went after bin Laden and a war on terrorism and ended up taking over Iraq (for lack of a better phrase. Liberate, I don't think we did) and letting bin Laden run free. It makes it look like that was what they cared about all along.

Answer 6

Probably indescriminant bombing.

I disagree with your assessment of Pakistan as an ally in the War on Terror. They are an ally only in name. You really have no clue what it is like within those borders. The government there barely has a handle on the people.

Answer 7

so an ally let's Osama stay in their country?

hey, maybe that's what Republicans call an ally... not me...

it's thinking like your's that will loose this war... we can't just "not do anything" because they said they "love America"... they hand over a few low level al-queda members a year and all of a sudden Osama is safe?

how much crying did you hear about AFGHANISTAN... ZERO... I WOULD SAY THAT'S THE SAME AMOUNT YOU WOULD HEAR ABOUT PAKISTAN...

hide behind your excuses all you want

Answer 8

Bin Laden is dead. Ever notice how "Bin Laden Videos" always pop up when they provide a convenient distraction? And i'm a Republican.

Answer 9

Excuse me? Did Bush worry about Iraq's sovereignty? You can't have it both ways. He let Bin Laden slip away and pursued his own vendetta against Saddam instead. And what has Bush done for the national security? He couldn't even help New Orleans when he had a warning about a hurricane.

Answer 10

The don't want to catch him. They only bring up the issue over and over because Bush was always pointing at TrashBin as the head of the evil (and, of course, because the dems can't seem to come up with a coherent policy proposal.)