Even though they are funding Al Qaeda to fight Hezbollah, an enemy, Al Qaeda are terrorists who kill Americans. Why would they fund them to fight anyone?????
2007-02-25 05:34:14 · 12 answers · asked by Richard O 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
WOW that is something people should think about... where is the proof? Documentation? Oh wait... there is none? You people and your misinformation, no wonder the US people are confused.
2007-02-25 05:48:58 · answer #1 · answered by John B 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, that was reported today by Seymour Hersh, no slouch when it comes to investigative journalism. The reason is pretty obvious-the stronger Al Qaeda is, the more likely Bush's approval ratings will soar. Much like the 9/11 phenomenom.
2007-02-25 11:03:49 · answer #2 · answered by golfer7 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Be careful about saying your religious, political or personal views of subjects where people can eavesdrop on you unaware, some have been known to be vicious game players to persecute you for it. It's ironic how in this country some think they can mess with you & deny you the same constitutional rights that you don't try to take from & aren't taken from them. Of course you are pretty safe on here where you are anomynous. :) And to the vicious snakes that don't like your views and right to freedom of speech & religious views, someday they'll reap what they sow. Ever had persecuting people mess with you & pretend like you were reaping what you sow by acting like they were karma's foot soldiers? Karma doesn't come by the people that don't like you. That's just people being abusive pretending like they are vigilanties of the law & karma. You'll never know how corrupt some cities could be until some with power (along with their friends/acquaintences) try & get even with you because you've rightfully complained about something & they are covering their butts. :)
Although, I haven't heard that one about funding Al Qaeda to fight Hezbollah. But hearing that we're gonna be giving money to Korea in hopes that they will stop their nuclear program is interesting. They didn't even promise not to continue to go forward with that program. And we have no way to make sure they keep that promise. So, we could actually give them that money & instead of using it for energy in other ways, they could use it to fund their nuclear program. Are they helping terrorists? Therefore, if we give them money, they could use that money to give to the terrorists, then could it be said we fund terrorists?
Yes, you are not a leader of this country to say, for instance, that a certain country had WMD even though there's been no evidence of it... Who was smoking what & when? ummmm, the smoking gun was smoking then. President Bush, himself, said that we don't need to worry about Iran & their nuclear weapons cuz they don't have the technology to use 'em against us, yet. So why was Iraq & their possible WMDs a concern & threat? They were much further behind Iran that is said to not be a threat, yet, as they don't have the technology to lob them over here, yet. Sadam never threatened us. Matter of fact, he was one that was helping keep Iran in check. Plus, there are facts (I heard on c-span) that we've been securing less Nuclear weapons from Iran since we got involved in the war in Iraq. I think Iran & that leader & how they do fund terrorists would've been the bigger concern. But since they have nuclear weapons, better try peace talks with them. Iraq seemed like the easier, lesser one to pick on. Now the whole story over there has changed because of cause & effect.
Just like we would've liked to see more proof of WMDs in Iraq? Of course didn't find them like in forever but there's been enough time for the terrorists over there now to plant their own. Remember that President Bush said mission accomplished. So what the American people voted for & agreed on has come & passed. No way were they mislead for other agendas, either.
2007-02-25 05:51:16 · answer #3 · answered by Nocine 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hersh has made a fantastically reliable residing writing memories that charm to tutor communities of human beings regardless of if he bases them on the actual shown truth that he needs to charm to a particular crew of human beings.
2016-12-04 22:34:16 · answer #4 · answered by cottom 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Go home little boy, stop trying to pick an argument with the big boys.
2007-02-25 08:19:39 · answer #5 · answered by Vince 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Might want to ask ISI (the Pakistani equivalent of the CIA) that question.
2007-02-25 05:39:17 · answer #6 · answered by Paul I 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are mistaken. Check some facts and restate the question.
2007-02-25 05:39:42 · answer #7 · answered by Mother 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I would like to see some proof of that
2007-02-25 05:36:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
They are not. Stop lying or you'll go to hell with muhammad.
2007-02-25 11:56:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you have proof of this, other than www.Whackedconspiracy theory.com?
2007-02-25 05:38:31 · answer #10 · answered by ProLife Liberal 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋