How can you say bush is tough on terror when the people responsible for 9/11 are still free. instead, we invaded iraq...good move, really stopped terrorism didnt it. at least clinton caught and punished those responsible for the 93 bombing. bush has not.
2007-02-06 05:50:57 · 21 answers · asked by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That's the thing. There hasn't even been a worldwide DROP in the amount of terrorist activity, much less a cessation. Bush's claim that Iraq is the world headquarters of terrorist activity is also ridiculous. It never was before; what changed? Why are all the terrorists there now?
2007-02-06 05:54:45 · answer #1 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 9⤊ 2⤋
Well you do have a point there. Eventhough they've admitted that there weren't any weapons of mass destruction, we're still in Iraq and now Pres. Bush is trying to justify the war by saying that terrorists will occupy an unstable Iraq that we made unstable in the first place. The president no longer mentions Osama, who attacked our country and is still making threats of future attacks. The American people are so easily manipulated that they just believe anything the government tells them and somehow when you're against something that you know really doesn't protect our country, you're labeled as unpatriotic.
With terrorism, you're fighting an enemy who wants to kill you, and has no fear of dying. How can you stop someone who is willing to kill himself, just to kill you? The 93 World Trade Center basically ended the war on drugs and sparked the genesis of the war on terrorism and invading Iraq took us off that course and now our resources are going to the war in Iraq and not to the war on terrorism.
My fiancee recently enlisted in the Army and so I support the troops but who sends them to war? The Commander In Chief and the government. It's time to start finding ways to bring them home and focus more on terrorism. Iran is an even bigger threat than Iraq was, are we gonna go fight them too?
In response to some of the answers on here like the guy above me: It takes a long time to plan an attack like Sept. 11th. From '93 to '01 was 8 years. It hasn't even been 6 years yet. And Bush isn't responsible for foiled terror plots in other countries. Their law enforcement people are the ones who should get the credit. Most people are just misinformed. How much do you really know? How much time do you really put into listening to the issues or doing your own reasearch online. How much do you know about Iraq's history, about Al Qaeda's history? Do you know that the U.S. supported some of the same people we're now fighting? Most Americans don't know jack **** about other places. We know how to order fast food and we worry about which celebrities are sleeping together.
2007-02-06 06:08:09 · answer #2 · answered by mmatthews000 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can only measure his success on terrorism on plans that were spoiled. There have been plenty of them. From London to Russia to the USA. He has made the world wake up, and do something to stop these acts. People have listened and there have not been as many attacks since he has educated people. Yes there are still attacks in the world, but not as often or as severe as 4 planes aimed at buildings. Sure there are letter bombs and car bombs still going off, but the terrorists are finding it harder to pull off these attacks, and I think it is largely due to Bush's response to terrorism. look we know you don't like him, but perhaps you are also not dead because of him. i'm not saying live in fear, but you do have to say you feel pretty safe as you typed this.
2007-02-06 06:00:52 · answer #3 · answered by mbush40 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
bush is not, of course, "tough on terror."
He has done absolutely NOTHING of substance to actually address terrorists whatsoever.
His entire Iraq disaster is nothing more than an excuse to spend money on his Military Friends and Companies. (Halliburton/Lockheed Martin, etc.)
If he had any inclination WHATSOEVER to address terrorism, he would be looking at the root causes, not swatting the horse on the butt after he's already left the barn.
It isn't about terrorism, it was never about terrorism.
It was about creating a boogeyman so that the snivelling class of Americans would give their blessings when he snatched our Constitutional rights out from under us.
All the personal info gleaned by this administration ILLEGALLY is in a database and is being used for POLITICAL GAIN.
Period.
2007-02-06 05:56:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
He swaggers a lot and talks big, but if you want the whole story of why we are hated around the world (well it IS a really big story, so here is a good size piece of it)
http://www.reallynews.com/video/pon/powerofnightmares.htm
The Intelligent questions about 9/11 (not loose change!)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1016720641536424083&q=Press+For+Truth&hl=en
Why anyone would support this Moron
http://patternsthatconnect.blogspot.com/2006/03/rightwing-authoritarianism-and.html
What was really happening in Iraq, (a few months ago before it got worse)http://www.bostonreview.net/BR31.6/rosen.html
A much better answer than mine
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16583889/
2007-02-06 05:57:01 · answer #5 · answered by Dragon 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Do you remember that the people responsible for 9/11 were in the airplanes that hit the buildings. I think bush has been very tough on the Islamic extremists. How can you say he isn't, that doesn't make any sense to me.
2007-02-06 05:57:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
one could no longer ought to appologise for protecting us of a yet obama does reason a lot of bushies moves did not shelter us of a yet angered our acquaintances and allies. demanding on terror is only a political cry for interest from both celebration.
2016-11-25 20:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
O.K. time to come back down to reality! Are you kidding me?!! Clinton punished them? His idea of dealing with Osama was bombing an old aspirin factory at night when all the bad guys were gone because he didn't wanna hurt anyone. He killed a janitor. Wow! Had he not been such a wishy-washy wimp, 9/11 wouldn't have happened!!!!!!! I hope our next President is just like Bush!
2007-02-06 05:57:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Clinton also turned a blind eye to a lot of Iraq's treaty violations in the '90's set forth by G. Bush Sr. after Desert Storm. And if he would have done something about it then it wouldn't have escalated to the 9/11 attack.
2007-02-06 05:56:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
I've been asking myself the same question for years.
2007-02-06 05:59:16 · answer #10 · answered by Hemingway 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋