He should be sent every copy of the Where's Waldo books and required to look over them until he has found all the Waldos. The catch would be that Waldo would be replaced with Osam bin Laden. He was who were going after right?
2007-02-06 02:21:32 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
First, talking like Yoda is cool. Second, imply nothing, when is the last time you heard him mentioned by Bush? I think we deserve some kind of regular update becasue he was the one held responsible for 9/11, the reason we started all this. We get nothing, tell me, why is that?
2007-02-06 02:29:57 · update #1
Funny, it being mentioned about having the intelligence network of the most powerful country in the world. Did Bush not have that about WMDs? How many were found?
2007-02-06 02:34:53 · update #2
I left the word help out. Just like Bush I can be distracted.
2007-02-06 02:42:00 · update #3
I also left we out, again distracted.
2007-02-06 02:43:20 · update #4
He remembers all right! He either does not want to catch him or he is dead or doesnt exist. Those are your possibilities. Lets review for a second....we claim osama is responsible for 911 and the deaths of over 3000 innocent Americans. If this was true wouldnt we devote massive military forces to kill or capture him in the hope of deterring similar future attacks, and obtain some justice for the dead and thier loved ones. Ahhh, as usual Bush did the exact opposite of the right thing (very predictable this Bush fellow), we make a cursory attempt to catch him then magically he slips through our hands only to issue tapes on the eves of elections. It must be remembered that Osama was a CIA agent for many years in our employ fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. We armed him, trained him, gave him stinger missiles, intelligence about Soviet troop movements etc. He was our boy in the 1980's in Afghanistan. Then we turn our backs on the Mujahadeen after the Soviets withdrew, and he becomes enemy #1!?!?! My friends, sorry, this one is obvious to all who think breath and excercise any common sense. I am not privy to secret information, but it appears, that we dont want to catch him. He has much more value lurking somewhere over the horizon in some misty mountain top cave issuing fatwahs that call for the destruction of Israel and the United States. We have to have a enemy that has a face we hate, right out of central casting. Bush would get some temporary benefit from catching him, but then would have to answer questions like..."is the war on terror over now, since we caught the one who started it". This war is NOT about Osama which is why were are not pursuing him (the CIA even disbanded its bin Laden unit!!). This war is about global domination of resources (not just oil by the way, water too...more on that later) and profit for those who supported Bush. Remember wing nuts, war profiteering is actually illegal...lol! But these guys turned 911 into a pretext to give billion dollar no bid contracts to Halliburton (I dont need to remind all you in a slumber how or VP is connected to Halliburton) and others. The key provision was non-accountability of all money allocated to these contracts. So therefore tens of billions or our money has dissappeared with no accounting of where or how it was spent. Bin Laden is forgotten, for now, until it is conveniant again for him to resurface and scare everybody with a tape 3 days before an election. Bush is a puppet, you must look where the strings lead!!
2007-02-06 02:48:23 · answer #1 · answered by chucklogic 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Osama is and has been on the "Most Wanted List" since 1999. He is actively being searched for. He is merely the figurehead of terrorism, not the only terrorist in the world. Catching him and killing him will have about the same effect that the hanging of Saddam Hussein had. It will be a moral and psychological victory, but it will not stop terrorism.
2007-02-06 02:28:06 · answer #2 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dragon, is English your first language ? Your "question" is really hard to understand. He was who were going after right ? Just what does that mean ( in English ) ?
Maybe you've been reading too many Waldo books.
Allahu akbar ( pisse be onto him )
2007-02-06 02:35:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bush administration had to invade Iraq before they even took place of work. Bush talked about how his father's acceptance rose after Operation desert hurricane. He concept that a protection rigidity victory ought to offer him the political capital to enable him to pursue his time table, which incorporates the privatization of Social protection. And Dick Cheney needed us to invade Iraq for its oil aspects. His potential committee grow to be searching at maps of Iraq's oil fields before 9/11 even occurred.
2016-12-03 19:22:18 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Osama will give autographed postcards to the Bush Library from all the places he has been.
2007-02-06 03:24:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're asking "Do you think this will Bush remember about trying to find Osama? " You said "trying to find Osama". You're implying that Bush won't catch him. Yes, we are rying to get him. I believe that Bush will remember because he would have gotten Osama.
2007-02-06 02:26:00 · answer #6 · answered by Prayer Warrior 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you are right, you could probably do it better, since you have the intelligence network of the most powerful country in the world. good idea.
2007-02-06 02:29:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your assumption: The fact that bin Laden has not been found must mean that Bush "forgot" about him.
2007-02-06 02:24:57 · answer #8 · answered by C = JD 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why do you care what GW is going to be remembered for? Your question is more a statement than a question. I would think that someone who has answered as many questions as you have, could answer his own.
2007-02-06 02:27:27 · answer #9 · answered by phxfet 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that Bush has forgotten about Osama.
2007-02-06 02:25:28 · answer #10 · answered by Jess H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋