How can we win the war on terror if Bush isn't going after the 2 largest terrorists organizations in the......

Question

world: The Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt & the Wahabis of Saudi Arabia? They are like the Havard & Yale of the terrorist world. (Most of the 9/11 terrorists were Wahabis from Saudi Arabia)

Answer 1

We can't win the war on terror, because there really isn't a war on terror. If anyone in the National Security Department really wanted to "make war on terror", Saudi Arabia would have been surrounded militarily, and bound and gaged financially 48 hours after the attacks.

Egypt would have cleaned out every known training camp, along with their bank accounts, within weeks.

Sounds far fetched, but if the United States had acted within the hours that we enjoyed world wide support, might we be still a country respected for dealing with terrorists in strength and honor? Or just end up looking like school boys with slingshots and no stones?

Answer 2

These are factional Muslims, and yes, they are not in my opinion to be trusted either. But throughout history, politicians have made pacts with bad people to further their smaller goals (whatever they might be) to a larger conclusion. Is it right? Well, by the letter of the human concept of right...no. But the spirit of a law or concept is to be taken into consideration when making little "deals with the Devil" such as these. Politics is a hugely dirty business and has been all the way back to the dawn of humanity. Sadly, it likely will always be this way. As long as there is something desirable to be gained by this sort of behavior, people in power will do what they feel is necessary to achieve their goals.

A glaring fact here is that the 9/11 terrorists were indeed Saudi. They are buried in the hide of America like an Alabama tick. The conclusion I draw here is that unless this country becomes self sufficient very darn fast, we are stuck with living alongside these factional lunatic "cousins". If we could reach a state of complete independence from the rest of the world, they would band together to attack us anyway. So once again, we are faced with choosing between the lesser of 2 to infinite evils. I don't like it, but there are a lot of things one must endure during daily life. You're on the mark here and correct but I don't see any way out of this unholy alliance.

My conclusion: We handle one at a time in order of their threat level to us and our allies.

Answer 3

The conflict isn't over yet, meaning the winner keeps to be unknown. Like optimum wars, some battles are received; some battles are lost. generic it may properly be honest to declare that Bush is slightly ahead interior the conflict on terror. actually Osama Bin encumbered has made little progression on his major purpose, which advance into the overthrow of corrupt governments interior the Mid-East to get replaced with techniques from potential of the caliphate spanning the entire Ottoman Empire of previous. There are somewhat 2 fledgling democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan that are somewhat not out of the woods yet, yet are reason behind tempered optimism. The Sunnis brutally suppressed the Shiite in Iraq for some years so it is going to take it sluggish for the revenge and counter revenge to play out. yet optimum heavily, Bush has secured coorperation from both the Saudis and the Pakistanis in this conflict on terrorists. by way of very truth Bush's purpose has been containment, that is going to be judged a fulfillment. by way of very truth OBL's purpose advance into enlargement and restructuring of the political map of the mid east that is going to be judged a failure. of route the techniques and execution of the yankee safe practices rigidity promotion campaign ought to were crisper. The acsendency of Iran as a hegemonic ability interior the section is complicated. yet on a similar time the conflict is being received. even with the actual shown truth that, this is not being received as rapidly by way of very truth the U. S. elctorate ought to favor to love, and this is not being received without casualties, so the Bush adminsitration has attracted multiple criticism. yet is Bush winning the conflict on terror: confident he's!

Answer 4

OMG- you mean that Bush isn't fighting the war on terror correctly? Golly, I thought invading an uninvolved country that had successfully been controlling their islamic extremists was just the perfect thing to do after 9/11.

Answer 5

We can win by attacking their training centers...

"We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaida," said Dr Ayad Allawi, a member of Iraq's ruling seven-man presidential committee.Mohammed Atta, the hijacker believed to be the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was trained in Baghdad by Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal .The memo,written by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti,dated July 1, 2001,outlines a three-day "work program" for Atta at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.Habbush, according to the memo, says Atta "displayed extraordinary effort" and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be "responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy,"

Answer 6

War, control, extermination... it leads nowhere and only can make things constant or worse. War dont solve problem, because it dont destroy the reason and source of terrorists existance and support. Terrorists have mostly crazy demands, but are those demands all radiculous. Hard posture of Americans politicians only shows thier weakness in diplomacy. Thay are even failing in simulating dialog between them and not-terroristic governs of Midle East. This war can be wined only by diplomatical achievement. I dont know full answer, but as long as terrorists will have not radiculous reasons to exist as long both sides will declare war not peace. War, military presence and activity, lack of free economy without political influence, greed on both sides, economy blockades, economy demands, lack of cooperation in pursuading terrorists in their own countries, failures to cope with hatred on both sides - all this and that problems are a formula for war without end. I dont demand. I just show the points of this war to make solved to acquire the only one righteos wining I believe in.

Answer 7

That's what a lot of people on here have been saying, but once you single out Islamo-Fascism, you immediately get labeled a Bushbot even though the 2 subjects are incongruous to each other.

Answer 8

How can we?