What would the mission of our outreach delegation to Osama have been?
2007-02-13 15:14:20 · 14 answers · asked by WJ 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Looks like I hit a little close to home for some of you. ;)
-W
2007-02-13 15:26:38 · update #1
The Democrats would have scolded Osama and after months and months and months of talking about it decided that peace was more important than rocking the boat. After all they were only trying to take out the White House in a failed mission, and the Pentigon, and the Twin Towers, is that really worth going to war for?
2007-02-13 15:22:14 · answer #1 · answered by Brianne 7 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Don't be ridiculous, the outreach, unlike Bush, would be to friends and even countries like Russia and China to end the problem...the only good thing about Bush's activities is that it reminds other countries that they have a reason to want to be cooperative...They will do their best in the coming years to give the US reason to trust their purpose, because like many Americans, they really do want the world to run smoothly and do not want an unpredictable, volatile leader of the Western world.
What I blame Bush for most is that he could have really rallied us and our Allies to something really historic because of the moral high ground we enjoyed after 9/11, but he squandered it and choose the low road and alienated half of America
2007-02-13 15:21:05 · answer #2 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I submit to you the following:
Feb 3, 1993- WTC bombed by terrorists.
Feb. 27, 1995- Ramzi Yousef, the head of the plot, is arrested.
Sept. 5, 1996- Yousef and co-conspirators sentenced to life in prison, no parole.
So a Democratic president (Clinton was his name), early in his term, faces a terrorist attack at the WTC. Does he start a war? No, he lets the FBI bring the terrorists to justice.
Sept. 11, 2001- Another president faces a terrorist attack at the WTC and the Pentagon. Does he bring the attackers to justice? No, his first thought is to finish reading to the pre-schoolers while his pants dry.
Sep. 2003- 2 years pass. Osama bin Laden remains at large.
Sep. 2004- 3 years have passed. Osama bin Laden remains at large.
Sep. 2005- 4 years have passed. Osama bin Laden remains at large.
Sep. 2006- 5 years have passed. Osama bin Laden remains at large. Faux News blames Clinton.
So I guess you have a precident there. Democrat- leader of the plot tried and punished. Republican- leader of the plot forgotten in quest to bring McDonald's to Fallujah.
2007-02-13 15:41:59 · answer #3 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Cut and Run - Apologies Kindly Accepted Here - Democrats for the most, has shown their inability to function under international conflict stresses, and bogs down the military response needed to deter further abruptions. If in the past such as Beirut so to say, the military air strike (against Hezbollah) could have straighten out that mess quite quickly. Instead they have gone unheeded, and the Middle East has labeled the USA the "Paper Tiger", that's BS. Thanks to this lack of responses that puts the US, back in the fields to show their military might, or proving once again that you don't want to screw with a country like the US, or you will get a response and harshly.
2007-02-13 15:28:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
He would have invaded Afghanistan, completed the mission, and came home. CIA agents would feel safe knowing that the white house is not out to out them. Iran would not consider nuclear rhetoric as Saddam would not hesitate to attack them. Korea would be trembling at the swift and decisive victory in Afghanistan. We would have a balanced budget making the US dollar stronger throughout the world. Nations around the world would be cheering the US name and telling their children how great this nation is and continues to be. Osama would be dead or rotting in our prison system.
Thank you Mr. Bush for turning the American dream into a global nightmare.
2007-02-13 15:17:38 · answer #5 · answered by True Grit 2 · 7⤊ 2⤋
The outreach would have taken the form of a well-placed .308 slug.
Instead OBL was allowed to escape because we outsourced the operation to Afghani warlords.
Heckuva job, you Bushevik!
2007-02-13 15:19:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
If, if, if. If the dog hadn't stopped to take a crap, he'd have caught the rabbit. These endless iffy type questions can never be answered with any certainty.
2007-02-13 15:22:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Im sure it would have been war against Afghanistan.
Which I am perfectly fine with.
There would not, however, have been a war in Iraq.
Which of course would be nice.
2007-02-13 15:31:03 · answer #8 · answered by Dr. Bradley 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
War, It wouldnt matter if there was a democrate or Independent in office people in america wanted to get those ******* behind it
2007-02-13 15:18:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Its questions like yours that make people think all Republicans are stupid.
I am a republican and I am able to ask questions that are relevant,are you capable of that?
I have read some of your posts, and I figure you are young and inexperienced in life,let alone politics .
Maybe it would better if people like you tried a less serious forum on yahoo,instead of constantly angering people with mundane questions.
2007-02-13 15:21:27 · answer #10 · answered by FOX NEWS WATCHER 1 · 4⤊ 2⤋