English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Do they think once Bin Laden is killed/captured, that's the end of it?

Something tells me a four-year-old would even know better...

2007-02-05 02:26:21 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

18 answers

Well, isn't that exactly what W is trying to tell us...We kill them there so they won't come here...well, It just doesn't work that way, as you just pointed out!!

2007-02-05 02:29:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 3

No, Islamic jihadism did not begin or will end with Bin Laden. However, we were responsible for creating some of these groups during the Afghan War. And you are forgetting one important detail. It was Bin Laden and Al Quada who attacked us on 9/11. Even been linked to other attacks such as the attack on the USS Cole and the 1993 World Trade Center Bombings. Bin Laden was the one who orchestrated these attacks as their leader. Iraq had nothing to do with these attacks, if very little. All other terrorist attacks if you look back at those responsible very rarely were those who attacked us linked with Iraq. While there will always be terrorism in the world, the least we can do is go after those who attacked us.

2007-02-05 03:01:48 · answer #2 · answered by j 4 · 2 0

The jihad is a spiritual quest. Not necessarily one of violence.

Capturing Bin Laden will not be the end of terrorism, you cannot stop terrorism, you cannot fight terrorism. It is an entity that lives in every society of every nation.

The quest to capture Bin Laden is to punish him and bring him to justice for instrumenting a Catastrophic attack on America.

2007-02-05 02:34:48 · answer #3 · answered by smedrik 7 · 3 1

jihadism is NOT a word...and would it be alright if we kept looking for Bin Laden? All of those billions of dollars being spent, do you think we could make room for the one person we were told was responsible for 9/11? Or do you think that the war in Iraq would be the end of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda?

2007-02-05 02:33:23 · answer #4 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 4 2

George W Bush stated after 9/11 that we would hunt down and bring to justice those responsible for the attacks. We know that OBL is the mastermind. I don't believe that terrorism ends with OBL. I do believe that OBL should be the focus of the war on terror until he is caught. The people who died on 9/11 and their families deserve that. Instead, GW decided to get into the nation-building business, something he said he would not do. My question is this: How do you propose that we do end terrorism? Will winning Iraq somehow end it? Or, do we keep pre-emptively attacking each muslim country in hopes that eventually they will love us? It isn't going to happen.

2007-02-05 02:45:51 · answer #5 · answered by rob 3 · 3 1

Nice question. Did you think the war on Iraq actually had anything to do with the war on terror? Do you still think so even after all the evidence that Hussein had no dealings with the AL-Qeada . I find it funny that everyone thinks no one as any understanding at all about the war on terror except their side. It is possible to understand the conservative point and not agree with it. It is also possible to understand that bin-Laden is not the end all of terror and still not agree with Bush's actions.

2007-02-05 02:32:21 · answer #6 · answered by Richard Bricker 3 · 6 1

i love a number of your solutions from actual authoritys on the quest for OBL. Like sagehand, and Demo guy and Angel eyes. those 3 responders have spent limitless hours traversing the mountain passes and grids of Afghanistan. walking the paths of Helmond Province. i'm particular that with there huge information on the thanks to artwork those grids from a S&D vantage element has given them the perception they carry forth from. See we've in common words had memebers of 10th Mountain branch and over 6,000 Speical Forces individuals, alongside with others from Nato mountain educated instruments searching for this guy. yet then what the hell may all of us comprehend. that is the computing device warriors who've each and each and every of the glib solutions. like it even as the variety of **** takes position. Arm Chair quarterbacks play an outstanding sport after its over.

2016-11-25 03:44:09 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

of course not, there is always somebody ready to take the leaders place. That would be like somebody killing GW and expecting Cheney to quit. Doesn't make sense. However Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attacks so of course we will start there.
But thank you so much for your generalization of liberalism, occasionally I catch myself thinking....maybe conservatives have a point, but you my dear have just made me re confirm my liberal views. I would rather not be a part of a group that has members such as yourself. I like mine to be more selective.

2007-02-05 02:32:15 · answer #8 · answered by Chrissy 7 · 6 2

If Liberals don't "realize" this, why do they want to develop alternative energy so that American dollars won't support Arab countries that export terrorism...take the blinders off...Personally, although terrorism exists and needs to be guarded against, I do not need to worry that 50 Arab terrorists are going to invade my town and start killing women and children...the threat is to our economic core...if it was a real threat, the government would be asking me to curtail my energy consumption, raise my taxes and take my son away in a draft....the president is asking for a trillion or more to fight this phantom war...for one trillion dollars we could fund the construction of 200,000 modern giant windmills to generate enough power to serve the residential needs of 2/3 of the US (does not include commercial or industrial uses, or transportation)....so what is the real agenda of the Admin. wanting to control the Middle East? I have to conclude they are pro-oil and can get rich controlling us and forcing us to use oil.

2007-02-05 02:36:38 · answer #9 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 4 1

Answer #1: No.

Answer #2: No.

Something tells me that a four-year old should not be exposed to terrorism, war, and your malevolent rhetorical questions.

2007-02-05 02:32:04 · answer #10 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 5 1

.. and alot of people are so intelligent to buy into a war that will last 100 years or more to fight this phantom force of jihadism ... give up every value and right given them by the constitution to be protected from this phantom .... and allow their leaders to have free reign of oppression in the world without question because this phantom is such a threat ... i was never afraid of binladen and im not afraid of radical islamic terrorists either ... i am afraid of a way of accepted thinking that seeks to take over the world and change my country though ...

2007-02-05 02:35:18 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers