Why do people think America should only fight terrorists on its own soil?

Question

Why should we as Americans sit by, and watch countries that are so obviously breeding grounds for the same people that will do anything to kill us, on our soil and their own grow larger and larger. Do people understand that this thing is way bigger than Bush's "personal vendetta", and they arent going to just go away. Its kind of hard to fight people who attack you with airplanes when they are already dead. Saddam Husseins regime wasnt just a threat becase of WMD, it was his terrorist idealogy.

Hussein might not have had ties to terrorists directly, but terrorist thrive in that type of environment.

For the person that said Id like to wage war on Muslims, my wife must be in mortal danger because she and her family are Muslims. Oh, how could this have happened. Guess I better strap a bomb around my waist and blow myself up in the living room.

Answer 1

This is rather like fighting the NAZIs. It was inevitable that they would attack America - so we went after them on their own turf (and in other countries that they had conquered).

It makes good sense to attack an enemy before he gains more strength.

This is a global war. Islamists are conquering nations all over the planet through tactics they have used for over a thousand years. In Sudan, they are at the last stage of Jihad where they simply murder anyone not of the Muslim faith or submitting to it.

Fight now, or we will face them again later when they have more countries and resources under their control. Those preferring to wait until Islamists are prepared to wage war on our soil are utter fools.

[ Note: Our government said Saddam did not have a 'controlling' relationship with Al Qaeda. It is common knowledge he paid the families of suicide bombers $25,000. And, at Salman Pak, Saddam's intel force was training terrorist hijackers. ]

Answer 2

Actually, terrorists do NOT breed very well under a regime like Saddam's. He systematically killed off anyone who was a threat to his totalitarian regime. And he had about 25% of the population working as informants to rat on their neighbors. Nobody knew who was an informant under Saddam. It could be anybody. That's not the same ideology as the Wahabbist terrorists that have attacked us. Saddam's ideology was only what was best for Saddam. It was a very secular Muslim country before we invaded. The Wahabbist terrorists on the other hand are deeply religious. The hate us because we bully the world around, give lip service to helping countries improve economically but have the lowest rate of non-military foreign aid per capita for any 1st World nation, and the foreign aid we do give has more strings attached than you can shake a stick at. Saying things like "we fight them there so we don't fight them over here" may sound good to a lot of Americans, but if you think about how that sounds to an Iraqi, it doesn't sound as good. Fanatics always sound better when you have nothing else to lose. I DO think we should be fighting terrorism over there so as to not have it over here, but you don't fight that kind of terrorism with guns... you do it with butter... and ideas. Or should I say better health care, education, etc. Some people out there will say, "why should we pay for other countries to have that?". Simple... It's more cost effective in the long run. They see how rich we are, and that doesn't bother them as much as the fact that we do very little to help others with it. This is a war of ideas, and that's what most people don't realize. Many Muslims (and non-Muslims) have the idea that we are completely selfish, egotistical bullies, and that's what they hate about us. Give them another idea about us. At least enough to make it more confusing for them. Right now, that's all they see. That's why the terrorists are winning.

Answer 3

Uh, go right on. Drive your country into the dirt.

Do you realize how vague "a war on terrorists" is? Like "the war on drugs" Woohoo!

Why don't you just say it clearly? You want to wage war on Moslems. Oh, tall order, that one.

Saddam Hussein had terrorist ideology? What do you know? He was a Baathist Socialist tyrant. Do you realize how many tyrants there are in the world? Is Bush going to take them all on? No way. Why Saddam Hussein then? Because he was a relatively easy target, or so Bush thought.

Trials aren't going so smoothly, are they? Saddam is not proving the pushover Bush and the US/UK alliance thought he would be. Strange isn't it? Maybe history isn't going the way you'd like it.

The NIE shows we have more of a threat now than at the time of 9/11. Guess that tells you, Bush's strategy has NOT been effective. Go back to school, man. It seems you are another Fox TV fed genius. You'll swallow and regurgitate whatever tripe the neocons feed you.

Answer 4

We are breeding them!! Didn't you read the damn report!! WE ARE THE CAUSE!

What airplanes? Saddam never had a terrorist ideology! He was further from being a terrorist than you!

And he was no worse than we are, or what we have done and who we have murdered!!

I think, if we didn't attack them, rape their children, torture them, steal their resources we wouldn't have much to worry about!

You think pissing more of them off is going to stop terrorist attacks?

Islamic terrorist are not a nation! There is no such thing as war on terrorism! Good phrase for someone who never wants it to end!!

Terrorist DID NOT thrive in Iraq! Saddam would not have allowed it, and he CONTROLLED ALL of his borders!

Answer 5

First let's get it straight. We have proven that Saddam has no proven links to Al Kaida but he was a terrorist. This generation hasn't had to fight for anything. They are spoiled and gutless. We are the most feared country on earth because all other countries know we have a history of not taking crap. At least until now.

Answer 6

Well do you know the nationalities of the 9/11 hijackers? We should start with those countries....don't ya think? GO FOR IT. Look, if you guys want to be so gung-ho, never mind diplomacy, just carpet bomb......if you'd done that to Iraq you wouldn't have so much trouble now. Pu'ss'ies!

Answer 7

The 13 British colonies declared independence as u . s . a . 4 July 1776,and as scuffling with persisted till 1781 this counts as conflict on US soil. conflict of 1812. American Civil conflict. various wars hostile to interior sight community residing in the u . s . a . and its territories. because the Mexican-American and Spanish American wars were fought on territory no longer then component of the u . s . a .,yet later annexed,those do no longer count number as wars fought on US territory.

Answer 8

America does not sit by, it has breed terrorists by suppressing and controlling countries and their resources for american benefit.

I can guarantee you that americans would not sit by peacefully if they were treated the way they treat other countries.

Answer 9

i agrea wit ya we shouldnt w8 4 them 2 atack us we should be out atacking them be4 they atak us

Answer 10

Fight em where ya find em