A terrorist is defined as a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities
He's religious...he bombs innocent people in the name of spreading his "freedom"....
2006-12-24 21:38:03 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ahh yes to the guy that calls everyone morons should take a modern history course...
9/11 Afghanistan, Bin Laden who is a Saudi in Afghanistan
Iraq war has nothing to do with that...
Clearly sir or madam you are the moron...it's funny when uneducated people with IQ's equal to their shoe size come on and tell everyone they are morons...
2006-12-24 21:43:25 · update #1
To the person that needs a defintion of a freedom fighter.
freedom fighter
noun
a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions
You are in their country...they are fighting for their freedom against you since clearly Iraq is not the US's country...that would make them a freedom fighter...
It's not a hard defintion
2006-12-24 21:46:40 · update #2
About terror coming from Iran...
Iran is a Shi'ite country who would love having a Shi'ite neighbor rather than a Sunni neighbor...You must watch Fox News too much.
I'm quoting the definition of a terrorist and freedom fighter...you still haven't given me reason otherwise. It's a fairly simple question but you Bush supporters seem to add more to it. BTW, I'm neither democrat nor republican
2006-12-24 21:58:07 · update #3
On the freedom fighter comments...you clearly can not classify Bush's warrior tactics as a freedom fighter because he is not...
I'm curious to know where you got your facts that they are not Iraqi? Fox News?? or have you personally spoken to them. I don't think anyone knows where they are from...from all we know is they are Iraqi...we just hear from our government sources....they are Saudi, Syrian, Iranian etc. The same sources that said there were WMD...if you still trust them...what a shame...
2006-12-25 08:20:03 · update #4
Great question and you're NOT a moron so just ignore those who are ignorant. Well you have some excellent points and guess you know what my answer is...
2006-12-24 21:47:27 · answer #1 · answered by * TeXaS cHiCk * 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Bush doesn't justify his actions because of a religious belief. He does what he does for his political beliefs. His reaction to 9/11, attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan was justified. That's where Osama was and Osama trained and financed Atta and the rest of the scum that attacked America.
Iraq was a mistake - there was no connection with 9/11 and now this war drags on. I think he actually thought he would bring democracy to Iraq. His ignorance of the political situation and the consequences of the invasion has put America in the situation its in now.
But, no, I don't think he's a terrorist. He is just a poor leader.
2006-12-24 21:59:23 · answer #2 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, he is not. Collateral damage doesn't make him a terrorist. And he is not a radical.
A terrorist is usually defined as such because their ONLY purpose is to incite terror. They have no agenda. They just want to kill everyone who doesn't believe like them.
PRESIDENT Bush doesn't, therefore he isn't.
I'd like to comment on your further comments as well. You say that the Iraqis are "freedom fighters." You're wrong. Most of the insurgents aren't even Iraqi. We aren't fighting the Iraqi people. Yes, they want us out of their country. Of course they do. But MOST of them appreciate what we've done. It's just the minority, the Sunnis, I believe, that don't, because when Hussein was in charge, they had the power.
And before you stereotype me as a Fox-watching, gun-toting, pro-war, Bush-loving Republican, I am none of the above. I watch all news sources, I don't own a gun (though I have no problem with those who obtain them legally, and use them responsibly), I'm not for OR against the war (I don't think any of us have a clue unless we've been there, which I haven't), I support President Bush but don't "love" him, and I'm not a Republican or a Democrat.
2006-12-25 00:13:51 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Are you saying that to be religious , you must be a terrorist ? How about moronic statement rather than moron ? As far as the freedom fighters. I believe that most of the terror in Iraq is coming from Iran. Sounds like they fit the description you use on the US.
2006-12-24 21:52:03 · answer #4 · answered by meathead 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
You could see him as one if you are an Islamofacist (or to use politically correct terminology-"Exploding Peace Activist"), or a leftist drone who steps out of his Jaguar and into a Starbuck's to blog on Y/A from his laptop, loving himself and his imagined intellectual superiority.
A real terrorist would be scaring these barbarians into not attacking us anymore, as it will never be accomplished in an intellectual or diplomatic arena. So My answer is no he's not, but I wish he was.
2006-12-24 22:21:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
As an Australian I have nothing to say on that subject but he is starting to look very old and defeated. Got to feel a bit sorry for him after your mid term elections.( I think that's what you call them.)
2006-12-24 21:49:09 · answer #6 · answered by Ted T 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If the term "mass murderer" can not be applied to George Bush, then we need a redefinition of the term, because, in my mind he's as great a mass murderer as Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin.
2006-12-24 21:45:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
3000 (still counting) of our best soldiers. Several hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. I do not believe there ever was (or ever will be) a worse terrorist.
2006-12-25 03:52:51 · answer #8 · answered by ramshi 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No he is a Terrorent Terrorist+Persident=Terrorent(lol i made up that word)
He should be elected terrorent of the world
2006-12-24 21:40:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I can see your point, but I just don't think that he is a terrorist. One must remember that this situation was thrust upon him. I could agree if he did this with no specific event to trigger it, but 911 did happen. And no, I do not believe it was carried out by the Bush administration.
2006-12-24 22:01:02 · answer #10 · answered by kitty fresh & hissin' crew 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋