Has the war in Iraq really helped the global terrorist situation?

Question

There are now news reports stating that Osama bin Laden and other chief al-Qaeda leaders have been rebuilding some of their bases and setting up new training camps in Pakistan. Call me crazy, but I can't help but think that this could have been avoided if we had gone after bin Laden in the first place. After all, it was he, not Saddam Hussein, who was responsible for the deaths of 3,000 people on 9/11/01.

mefeelsgreat8: Thanks for not answering my question.:)

Answer 1

No, it just radicalises more young muslims around the world. Generates hatred of the US and UK, and puts us at more risk of attack at home. Iraq had NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER with 9/11. The world had a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11 and most people were in favour of the Afghan invasion. If Bush had finished that job properly, and not got sidetracked with Iraq for whatever reason, things now would be very different. The root cause of all of this however is the decades old problem of Isreal/Palestine, but thats another question.

Answer 2

Our president said he was no longer concerned with finding Osama BinLadin. The tape that was released that was supposed to be of BinLadin confessing to organizing the attacks was fake. In an actual interview, he stated that he had nothing to do with the attacks and that the US government itself was responsible and blaming him in order to start yet another war. In the tape he was using his right hand to eat and write. He is left handed. He was also wearing a watch on his wrist. Followers of Islam know that men who follow the religion are not allowed to wear watches or jewelry of any type. There were many other things which anyone could have easily figured out if they really watched. Saddam was punished, as was his country, simply because of his growing wealth and questioning publicly Israel's human rights violations and illegal land grabs. Now they will go after Iran in the same way. What happened on 9/11 was sickening and disastrous. 3,000 people died to further a political agenda. Now even more US soldiers than that number have died fighting this illegal war. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children our military has killed. It is all about control of the middle east for the protection of Israel.

To answer your question....If we did actually have any imminent threats from "terrorists" that hated our country, do you think they are any less angry now? No. We need to clean up house here at home and find the terrorists in Washington before we start pointing fingers elsewhere. I can say one thing, If I were an Iraqi child who survives this slaughter, I would not be thanking the US for killing my family and destroying my country, would you? Just one more enemy made in that scenario.

Answer 3

the undertaking is that immediately you won't be able to equate an prolonged distance conflict to wars of bygone days. we are too solid to be triumph over via the tyranny of distance. have been the U. S. military to aim a Napoleon type march on Russia, we does not have logistics and climate issue as Napoleon had. we are quite too sturdy for that. As you % to usher in activities, i visit supply you yet another activities metaphor it quite is very apt for this element. the perfect protection is a robust offense. we are in a position to't be defeated no remember the place we pass. If we enable the status quo to proceed to be, then international locations will proceed to supply help to terrorists on an identical time as we deplete money at homestead preserving a protection it quite is in fact ineffective. extra useful to hit them there particularly than supply them the possibility to plot and prepare. And meanwhile, how many countries in the midsection East gave up WMD classes on the instant while we invaded Iraq? it quite is a win-win undertaking for us. regrettably many sturdy individuals could die for this. yet a minimum of partly, by using fact of this we serve.

Answer 4

yes,it has helped.Iraq was a safe place for terror training camps under the former dictator's regime.we are actively hunting them,and killing them. the terrorists must spend nearly all of their assets fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.those news reports you mention are by no means "new"-it is common knowledge.I believe that had we not gone into Iraq,a certain political party would be asking why we did not finish the job-terrorists would have a free hand in Iraq,and continue attacks against the West and their interests.they have failed. and you can thank our current President for making the terrorists fail. history will see that President clinton was a coward who emboldened the terror cells to strike at Western targets.

Answer 5

Of course the war has made a HUGE dent in the terrorist situation. Many key leaders have been ever killed or captured. The biggest proof of the progress we have made is that since 9/11 there has not been any attacks on American soil!

Answer 6

Yes, it has helped make it much worse!! And to those who say we haven't had an attack on American soil since 9-11, I ask you how many we had before 9-11? We had the attack in 1993, which you s**t for brains neocons are more than willing to also blame on Bill Clinton, even though he hadn't been in office for even a month when it happened.

Answer 7

Though I am not sure Bin Laden would have been killed or captured had the US done as you suggest, it would have been more logical then invading Iraq.

Answer 8

You are not crazy. You speak the truth that has been obvious all along to anyone who has a brain and isn't brainwashed by the "tax cuts uber alles" Bush team.

Answer 9

No attacks on the home land yet...

Why would any thumbs down the fact that there haven't been any attacks on the homeland yet? Osama is that you?

Answer 10

Pakistan won't let us cross the border to get them.
When they cross the border we can kill them.
Terrorists have been dying like flies in Iraq.the more we kill the less damage they can do.