Then...um... how come there was NO terrorists coming out of Iraq before we invaded and uh...now it is the terrorist center of the universe and there are more terrorist than ever?
2007-01-15 13:33:01 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No Al, it's a question not a parody.
Your answer was the parody actually. But you were right that it was neither funny nor clever ;-)
If only you were half as smart as the real Al this would be much more fun.
2007-01-15 13:37:23 · update #1
TURNTABLE:
How many Iraqi terrorists were there before. Search LexisNexis and Google and the entire Internet. See if you can come up with ONE Iraqi terrorist who attacked the US or any of our allies before this invasion. Go for it.
2007-01-15 13:38:56 · update #2
The biggest allies the terrorists have are right here in the United States...they're called the Liberal Media.
2007-01-15 13:39:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
We could keep most terrorists from entering Iraq from Syria if we took this seriously and stopped them. It's a no-brainer really. Same thing happened in Viet Nam at this stage. We could have bombed the bridges and stopped the enemy from entering the south. But there are too many who are afraid to win in this country and they end up eventually, with their friends in the establishment media and in wise Hollywood, slowly wearing down those who are realistic. I knew this would happen when it started. It's becomming an old story. We are at war and those with their heads in the sand and their butts in the air are once again winning a war of propaganda in the USA. Good luck.
Maybe we should all just be nice to the terrorists and then they'd all be sweet and gentle. Yea! That's it. Make love and not war. Think peace. Then world terrorism would disappear. What strategy.
The America haters know there is no place on earth better. I'd pay their air fare to a better country but they cling to America like fleas on a dog. They just want to blame but they NEVER have any solutions. I used to be one of them and I'm embarresed to admit it. But I had just enough of an open mind to seek out BOTH sides. 99% of today'sliberals are scared to do that. Liberalism used to be open. Not anymore.
2007-01-15 14:01:26 · answer #2 · answered by Kent 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First of all, there were terrorists coming out of Iraq before we went in. Secondly, it is now a terrorist haven because there is no military supported by a government that is opposing the US in Iraq. Because of this, all people who are resisting in Iraq are now called terrorists because they are not supported by a government. They aren't the same type terrorists, they are simply the equivalent of the American revolutionaries resisting British rule. Isn't it better for all the terrorists to be swarming into Iraq instead of America? BTW I'm really excited to see how many morons take my analogy of terrorists to American revolutionaries the wrong way.
2007-01-15 13:42:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
very solid question you spot, the conflict mongers do not see it like that. are you able to think of Venezuela invading the united statesa.and sending 3 hundred,000 troops to regulate the cities, mutually as installation its very own government and killing the yank human beings wide-unfold, mutually as hiding it from the media. What could the conventional American think of of conflict then. finding at Iraq, they have in no way invaded the west, they have in no way located sanctions on the west and that they have got in no way seen invading the west. yet because of the fact of our conceitedness and aggressive attitudes we went to conflict with them. Our objectives exchange into to seek for WMD, yet they had none left. Then to wreck Al-Qaeda there and seize Saddam. the two certainly one of those have been performed for over a year. Iraq now has a sparkling puppet government and 220,000 puppet infantrymen, why is Britain and the united statesa.nonetheless in Iraq?
2016-10-31 05:29:50 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush is cleaning up after his father. The only reason Iraq would have a remote possibility of harbouring terrorists is from the funding the U.S government gave them to fight Iran. Coincidentially, the U.S government also funded the Iranian war machine during the same period. Hmmmm. I wonder which country Bush will blame next.
2007-01-15 13:39:04 · answer #5 · answered by Jamie 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The real objective of the war was a gray area at most. But what it has done is move the terrorists focus off Mainland US to Iraq. This has consumed much of their efforts in other areas where we can shot them dead and not have to deal with a lawyer that wants to make a name for himself.
2007-01-15 13:42:49 · answer #6 · answered by mdjarhead 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The only terrorist haven is at 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue.
George is not going to bring Jesus back--stubborn fools.
2007-01-15 13:43:10 · answer #7 · answered by scottyurb 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
actually, there were terorrists in Iraq.
they were funded by Iran, and trying to help take down the Saddam regime.
militants, as well, lead by Mugtada Al Sadr a radical anti-American anti-Saddam cleric, that is pro-Iran.
there also was a Taliban, that was funded by good ol uncle sam, in the area, that nearly eradicated poppie cultivation, and heroine manufacturing.
2007-01-15 13:53:56 · answer #8 · answered by qncyguy21 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We created the terrorist haven when we got Saddam. That made Iraq a place where laws cannot be enforced.
2007-01-15 13:39:36 · answer #9 · answered by Nort 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
So how do know terrorists didn't come out of Iraq? Iraq was a huge funder of terrorism! People really need to find out there facts before posting something they dont know anything about.
Saddam Hussein not only tortured his own ppl, but funded suicide bombers in israel.
2007-01-15 13:37:57 · answer #10 · answered by ussoldier 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋