If we left Iraq tomorrow do you think that the Saudi's would just let it turn into a Sunni terrorist launch pad into their country?
2007-02-19
17:42:31
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
No evin you are completely wrong. Bin Laden and all his family, the Saudi Royal family are all Shiite it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
2007-02-19
17:57:21 ·
update #1
And gabriel Iraq did non of those things, actually they were done prosumably by Bin Laden who is a member of the Saudi Royal family.
2007-02-19
17:59:21 ·
update #2
Erhm. The Saudis are Sunnis. The majority of Iraq is Shiite. If it was going to become a terrorist launch pad the Iranians would probably get involved with backing up the majority Iraqi Shiite population and it would be a *Shiite* terrorist launchpad. HOWEVER, Shiites are in the minority as far as the middle east goes, so it would probably spark some inter-regional conflict between Shiite and Sunnis.
Then throw the Kurds into the mix (or "Mountain Turks" as Turkey calls them) who are fighting for their own independent Kurdistan and you have a three way civil war just waitin' to happen whether we pull out or not.
Thank you, Billy Graham....I mean George Bush.
Quick rhetorical question for anyone still supporting our inept president:
Did American become less free after the fall of Saigon?
Was it the Communists who took away our rights or was it the government (The FBI) who kept files on "subversive" students with political agendas different from their own?
Will America become less free if we pull out of Iraq? Or is it less free because of the Patriot Act and the unprecendented seizure of power from the executive branch (like sidestepping the FISA courts with those wiretaps for example)?
Just some food for thought.
I ask because I think Communism was a horribly destructive and virulent philosophy much like radial Islamic doctrines. Yet, not every threat is the end of the world. Russia lost 20 million people in world war 2. That is like 9/11 happening every six hours for 2 years. Put THAT into perspective.
Whatever happened to the true patiots of old that questioned the King George and said, "Don't tread on me?"
I guess now those people are now "un-American" or "unpatriotic" or whatever slur the conservative torries wish to brand them with. HA. Like George Washington would have stood a fighting chance if he would have had to deal with a whole bible belt ful of torries. Yeah right.
2007-02-19 17:46:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Evan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Democrats don't want to, so it won't happen.
".. Bin Laden and all his family, the Saudi Royal family are all Shiite it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"
"Bin Laden was raised as a devout Sunni Muslim. From 1968 to 1976 he attended the relatively secular Al-Thager Model School, the most prestigious secondary school in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, called "the school of the élite."[14] In the 1960s,..."
Sorry Ed, but it appears YOU are the FOOL.
What is it with liberals, in that members from the bottom [Ed here to the top [Senator Reyes] don't even know who we are fighting.
Sheesh.
2007-02-19 22:03:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i'm British. i did no longer help the 'motives' for our engagement/involvement. this is been shown that those motives have been 'fake' (or have been they?) ....... besides the undeniable fact that it is not 'that straightforward'. UN 'investigators' (re WMD) have been continuously 'thwarted' via Saddam. there have been assorted UN resolutions on which no-one had the braveness to 'act'. It replaced into purely after 9/11 - (revenge?) - that action replaced into taken and instigated via usa. have been we 'incorrect'? do no longer understand. I do think of 'timing' replaced into badly incorrect. in line with danger motives too. yet if fact be recommended the lives of harmless civilians is being more desirable - democracy(?) seems to be a real looking proposition. This advantages the individuals. No. Our troops shouldn't come abode now. it would be an utter waste of lost lives, militia and civilian, in the event that they did. the suited, humanitarian 'purpose' might by no potential be fulfilled. despite if we would desire to continuously be there or no longer - and why - is a 'political' subject. enable's no longer undermine our troops - very brave and brave women and men people who do their pastime regardless of non-public perspectives.
2016-10-02 10:37:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by tuberman 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
ed-mike saudis are sunnis iraiqs are majority shiite some kurds and few sunnis saudi had nothin to do with iraq other than protect their own oil fields from being blown up by saddam
2007-02-19 19:11:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by YR1947 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Best argument ive heard yet against war. but i just can't let Somalia both world trade center attacks, the african emmbasy bombings,basilan island,the U.S.S. Cole and the khobar towers incident just go away. I mean why would that prevent the Sears tower or LAX not being next.
2007-02-19 17:47:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Default on your business agreement you don't get another one.
I'll go to the Russians if you don't meet a deadline.
2007-02-19 17:45:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
As long as Americans (droids) out it's OK.
2007-02-19 17:45:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. I'm for mandating nothing that isn't my job to mandate.
EDIT: Funny, I've been thinking about that quote for you.
2007-02-19 17:45:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
and you want to win this world with this knowledge
2007-02-19 22:43:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that is an awesome idea...and so are you!!!!
2007-02-19 18:27:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋