Did the liberals REALLY forget about 9/11? Or are they just pretending to so they can hate on Bush?

Question

I am sick of people claiming that "Bush started the war" Do they really not remember the terrorist attacks? Or do they just want to hate on Bush as usual?

Another one is "We declared war on Afghanistan, not Iraq". I don't remember declaring war on Afghanistan! We declared war on terrorism, and I think we should continue to fight it in EVERY country, including Iraq.

Oh yeah, and "Our soldiers are dying for a lost cause". Well, would you rather our citizens die for a lost cause? It is sad the soldiers are dying, but they voluntarily enlisted, and that is what they are getting paid to do. And for all the soldiers who enlisted before the war, just to get a free college education? That's what you get for taking advantage of our country.

There should be no reason to protest the war. Compare 9/11 to Pearl Harbor. Did ANYONE in the country protest our attacking Japan? No! (they might not have liked the nuclear attack, but that is a different story)

Answer 1

you seem to forget most liberals believe in the 9/11 conspiracy that has been proved wrong for the last 5 years , they think bush magically flew the planes himself and hit the buildings therefore startingt the war

Answer 2

Iraq had absolutely nothing, I repeat, nothing to do with 9/11. Saddam didn't plan it, he didn't fund it, none of the hijackers were from Iraq, Iraq did not attack us on 9/11. If you don't believe me then listen to George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. They've both said the same thing that Iraq was not involved. Therefore by what twist of logic does anyone say that invading iraq was justified as retaliation for 9/11?
Oh and I love how you are showing support for the troops. You're basically saying they deserve what they get, that they shouldn't complain about conditions even when the administration has screwed up the execution of this war at every turn. That's not me talking, it's retired 3 and 4 star generals who actually served in Iraq who know a hell of a lot more about what’s going on there than you or I do. Yes the military is voluntary but soldiers don't enlist only to have their lives pissed away by an incompetent administration.
Your last point really shows how much you need to crack open a history book. Both Japan and Germany formally, in writing, declared war on the United States. That was 4 years before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, neither one of which was bombed until after Japan once again refused to surrender.
Bottom line is Bush started a war he didn't have to start and this country is less safe because of it. Again that's not me talking. Thats according to the NIE released a couple of weeks ago.

Answer 3

What you fail to realize is that there is a major difference between the War on Terror and the War in Iraq. We invaded Afganistan and had almost complete support from all over the World, we should have sent more troops in right after the initial invasion to ensure that the leaders of al Qaeda didn't escape. However, President Bush chose to ignore Afganistan for the most part and focus on Iraq. What Terrorist threat was there in Iraq prior to our invasion? Saddam was fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq and he had no Weapons of Mass Destruction.

So to say our soldiers are "dying for a lost cause" is saying that we should never have invaded Iraq and in doing so we have increased Terrorism and hurt our National Security. Our soldiers have been dying for a war that has helped Terrorism. I don't think you could find many Americans that think we shouldn't be fighting Terrorism in Afganistan. But stop listening to Bush's statements and look at reality. We were not attacked by Iraq or Saddam Hussain. We were attacked by al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden.

Answer 4

Iraq was not responsible for 9/11, Bin Laden was (remember him? the guy Bush said he's find, then said he didn't care about, then said he did, then said he didn't?).

Most of the Americans over there signed up to defend our soil (over here, not over there) and help in times of natural disaster or other domestic problems. They did not sign up to go half-way around the world to die to enrich Haliburton.

Without life-saving equipment, or medical care when they are wounded, or pay cuts, or enforced slavery (they aren't allowed to leave when their times are up).

Now that Bush's policies have inspired more people to take up terror, explain how this has helped defeat terrorists.

We've given them more reason than ever, and we have seen the results in increased terrorist attacks throughout the world.

Your analogy to Pearl Harbor is faulty on a number of counts, but I wonder how people would have reacted if, when the Japanese government attacked us, the president had sent troops to invade Laos instead.

Answer 5

Isn't interesting that 8 years later we are finding that our involvement in Iraq was nothing but a bad nightmare, because we were the parents of an illegitimate offspring from that war named ISIS. Now they are being said to be even more dangerous than Al-Quidah.

Answer 6

Let me explain this simply: While Saddam Hussein's government was extremely bad and deserved to be overthrown, they had *NO* connection to Al-Qaeda or the 9/11 attacks. Starting an invasion there because of 9/11 is kind of like invading Japan because of North Korea's nuclear tests: the only connection is that they're in the same general area of the world.

Answer 7

That's becuase Japan actually attacked the US. With the war with Iraq, there was no link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. The only thing that was found was the fact that Saddam found the group to be untrustworthy.

Attacking Afghanistan is arguable. But the Iraq war has nothing to do with the war on terror.

The equivalent would be Japan attacking us, and then us attacking Japan, as well as China. Even though there is extreme animosity between the two.

Answer 8

NO ONE PROTESTED THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN. We wanted Osama bin Laden to pay for his crime. Do we have him? No, so WHO actually FORGOT about 9/11? I believe it would be bush.

bush said there were ties between Saddam and Al-Queda in a press conference. Did you forget that? Since he said it, why are we in Iraq?

Our Valued Soldiers ARE dying for a lost cause. They are in a three-way Civil War, and the only common believe between the three fractions in Iraq is they do not want AMERICAN SOLDIERS THERE. GET THEM THE HELL OUT OF THERE!!!

What did Iraq do to the USA? Nothing. Yet, bush went in there anyway. bush is suppose to "act" like the president and he is not. This is one of many reasons why I do not support him. Hate him? No. Is he a bad president? Definitely.

Answer 9

There are many who are called "liberal" who are simply opposed to the current president. Genuine liberalism is extremely rare. Those who use violent or hateful language are not genuinely liberal, no matter what opinons their vituperation proffers. Democrats do not speak for liberalism, but for what they think an ignorant public will buy, and that is mostly conservative. Does any Democrat that you've ever heard of propose spending as much on development in Africa as is being spent in Iraq (over $300 billion)? No. Such a proposal would be quite liberal. See, I've made my point. Liberalism is not really present in either of the two major parties.

Answer 10

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and the increasingly untrustworthy Republicans continue to dodge that fact and instead bash anyone who questions them as "unpatriotic", Thats rather fascist-like.

There are far too many questionable factors about this war for us to follow Bush like mindless sheep.