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

2007-02-14 06:06:08 · 27 answers · asked by BushSupporter 2 in Politics & Government Politics

27 answers

No.

If we would've just stayed in Afghanistan and taken that war to completion, then we would've sent the terrorists a message.

What we have done in Iraq is create a breeding/training ground for the terrorists and essentially been the best recruiting tool imaginable for Al Qaeda.

Not too mention the fact that we have greatly helped Iran increase it's influence in the region...

Yeah Bush is hitting it on all cylinders right now

2007-02-14 06:12:47 · answer #1 · answered by Rick 4 · 5 0

OMG this isn't close. check out what percentage more desirable terrorists there are in the global. As one commonplace in Iraq placed it, "we are able to not kill 'em as quickly as they're showing up." each and every time we bomb a civilian objective or worse, that human being's loved ones hate the U. S. and a number of them radicalize. only inspect Fox information' comments on the hatred some radicals have of this usa. that's due on to Bush's rules. also, have you ever talked about how we ought to pressure about N/ Korea, Venezuela, Iran and others? those individuals did no longer have the middle to attempt 1/2 the stuff there doing now six years in the past. we are slowed down in Iraq and do not particularly have the favor to cap and administration those also ran tyrants. safer?? i do not imagine so... also, to all of my acquaintances to assert "we've not been attacked in six years we are safer." After 1993 we weren't attacked for 8 years, does this make Clinton 2 years more desirable to Bush? Judging the administration on the shortcoming of awful attacks in this usa is particularly the bottom bar of approval you may want to likely set for him, pathetic... we may be able to do more desirable sensible

2016-11-03 10:56:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Much worse down the road. The reason we are the target of terrorism has nothing to do with who Americans are and their day to day life. It has to do with the fact that we have meddled in the affairs of other countries for so long. We helped over throw governments in Iran and Afghanistan. How quickly we forget, but I assure you the people of those countries haven't forgotten and won't forget.

This will be the same instance for the Iraqi people. Maybe we got rid of a "tyrant." But the radicals and a lot of the people won't see it that way. No matter if we leave tomorrow or 100years from now, there will always be people in that country that will hate us for what we've done and seek retribution.

Bush followed the advice of a panel that shouldn't have made that suggestion in the first place. He then followed the advise of idiots around him. Then again he is the idiot that surrounded himself with idiots.

2007-02-14 06:14:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

No, it is not safer, he attacked a country that did not attack us, we have been responsible for collateral damage there. If we had not attacked, there would be no insurgency of the magnitude that is there. For every person killed accidentally (oops, our bad) or person slaughtered by those who want us out of the country, we have created a least 1 more potential terrorist.
You all have short term memory loss as usual. How long was it between attacks by foreigners- 8 years. They are patient, start to relax if we make it past the 8 year mark, you can start to feel safer then

2007-02-14 06:13:49 · answer #4 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 5 0

Three thousand dead troops may seem like a lot, but it is really nothing compared to the 58,000 who died during the Vietnam war. Furthermore, if you divide the war profits earned in Iraq by the number of dead soldiers and compare that to Vietnam, we're getting a much better return on our investment now.

Patriots with a singular, unwavering point of view, not a bunch of dissenters, founded this nation. Taking time to debate and investigate is unpatriotic.

Terrorists have information we need to defend America. If we have to torture a thousand Iraquis to save one American life, isn't that worth it?

If we're to continue to live in a democracy, the president needs broad authority to declare war, interpret the law however he wants, and detain U.S. citizens indefinitely without charge. Like it or not, that's the price of freedom.

2007-02-14 06:23:34 · answer #5 · answered by A Box of Signs 4 · 0 1

No. On 9/11/01, 19 illegal alien terrorists attacked the USA. They posed as model U.S. residents and were aided and abetted by countless other terrorist supporters who are currently still operating in the USA. All Bush did was underscore the weakness of the United States and the lawlessness that is running rampant in our country. He showed that the USA does not have what it takes to remain a free country when he allowed 12 to 20 million illegal aliens to live, work, and conspire in the USA. He helps them every day when he talks about not enforcing our laws and about giving them "paths to citizenship". The march by the illegal immigrant population and their supporters for "supposed immigrants' rights" last year further underscored that the terrorists can openly and without any problem whatsoever, start killing American Citizens by simply staging these types of marches. Hugo Chavez and Vicente Fox proved that they can come into the USA, speak in our churches and organize their armies and can make demands on our government without any fear of punishment whatsoever. They can have their illegal aliens register to vote and can vote in insurgents into our political offices without fear because Hugo Chavez has manufactured our voting machines and because we have cities like Chicago that promote sanctuaries for Illegal aliens and actually seek to bring in more of them. How could we possibly feel safe when our border patrol and our police are arrested and prosecuted for enforcing our laws against illegal aliens?

Notice how many foreign doctors, nurses, and healthcare workers are employed in the USA. How many of them are working in our food supply areas? Can they all be trusted not to be killing off American Citizens and old people as they have vowed to do? How about all the foreign gangs -- Salvadorian, Hispanic, Latino, Korean, etc?

If we can't enforce our laws against illegal aliens and drug runners and gang bangers, then we can't enforce any other laws either and we are absolutely and unequivocally not safe!

I guess -- no brains, no headaches!!!!!

2007-02-14 06:22:03 · answer #6 · answered by MH/Citizens Protecting Rights! 5 · 1 0

I would explain how he increased the animosity towards America but as a Bush supporter you would not believe the truth if it hit you. Leave it to say that there are more people that hate America now than did six years ago.

2007-02-14 06:12:17 · answer #7 · answered by diogenese_97 5 · 7 0

No. He's so busy think about the war with Iraq that he's not doing anything to protect us here.

2007-02-14 06:09:54 · answer #8 · answered by PrettyEyes 3 · 3 1

Nope, we're not any safer than we've been in over a 100yrs. 9/11 was an inside job to get the people rallied behind him in his invasions of other countries.

2007-02-14 06:09:10 · answer #9 · answered by Ted S 4 · 4 2

Yes, but then turns around and lets illegal aliens and Iraqi 'refugees' over run us.

Maybe canada can come in and declare war on the illegals.

2007-02-14 06:10:09 · answer #10 · answered by Curt 4 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers