Question for Bush supporters....?

Question

Why isn't anyone concerned that Bush shifted his initial attack from Afghanistan to Iraq?

I mean, all this time the Taliban was the real enemy, Al Queda, and so while little pockets of of wanna-be dog-meat-in-the-future-terrorists keep blowing themselves up keeping everyone distracted in Iraq, chances are the REAL hard core Taliban (Bin Laden et al) have likely been re-grouping in Afghanistan and Pakistan planning God knows what while the focus and senseless slaughter has been going on killing not just troops but countless thousands of civilians?

Do you really believe you are winning this war on terrorism?

And how can you claim that you are "safe" at home when grandmothers in wheelchairs require cavity searches at your norther borders while your southern borders are wide open to every corrupt scoundrel who can find their way through Mexico?

Nothing your government does makes any sense at all. I think some Americans should really hear themselves and the hot air they spew.

Yes, I AM unAmerican. I'm Canadian.

Funny how easily every insults. You are too patriotic for your own good. Just because you helped in other wars doesn't mean what Bush is doing in this one is right. Many can't seem to separate one thing from another it seems.

Excuse me we're cleaning up the mess Bush left in Afghanistan...but hey, we're so unforgettable that we don't even care that Bush can't bother with a single THANK YOU ever...what do you expect from a local yocal.

Gee, can't imagine why most people in this world consider Americans ARROGANT.

And that arrogance will take you to war on Iran.

Do you think Bush cares what anyone else in this world has to say about anything...please...don't whine about what comes your way.

Answer 1

Speaking of hot air, have you listened to yourself lately?

And since you're not an American, here's an idea: why don't you just STFU and go away?

Thanks for playing.

Answer 2

Huh? There was no shift in attack. Until some of our units were replaced by UN / NATO troops, the US led coalition was still operating in Afghanistan. As for troop strength in Afghanistan - I'll say one word - "logistics". You either understand military operations or you don't.

Iraq was a second arena in the War on Terror.

You seem unaware that our troops in Afghanistan have been taking the fight to Al Qaeda and the Taliban since we set foot in that country. The mission has not changed, has not diminished, it has only been overshadowed by the much larger mission in Iraq.

Are we winning? Yes, there have been numerous successes. We've significantly damaged Al Qaeda's command structure and have killed many of its adherents. Our ability to detect and locate them and prevent attacks is much improved. The international cooperation is significantly improved. And there has been significant cooperation from Muslim countries, too. Hardly what any objective observer would call "failure".

Yes, we still have issues with our borders, but you cannot magically fix everything at once.

So, what's your solution?

Answer 3

Of course we are winning the war on terrorism. It was never going to be a simple task, thats a real defeatist attitude you have there, you seem unamerican.

The Taliban was never the real enemy, we just needed to take out Afghanistan first because thats where we are plumbing the stolen gas and oil from Iraq. This is why the attack moved.

Bin Laden isnt Taliban, hes Al Queda, you are misinformed.

What does grandmothers in wheelchairs getting cavity searched have to do with your initial question? You arguement is flawed, try to stay on track here buddy.

You sound like a terrorist. Show some pride in your country, and stop doubting the president.

Answer 4

Both operations are active; and, arguably, the operation in Afghanistan is, by far, more successful than the one in the Persian Gulf. Also, if you think about it, the current "war" in Iraq, is actually acting as a supreme smoke screen for the War of Terror to operate in, with little media interference.

They (the media) are too flavor of the month-ish on the politics of what is going on in Baghdad to want to go after the other story in play. Your lack of information on the topic also reflects that, like many, you rely on the media to keep you up to date on the whole thing, which while it isn't a bad thing, can often be ham stringed by politics and current events.

Now. As to my safety:
Expert Shot Medal - Rifles (USN), Sharpshooter - Pistols (USN)
One eight gauge shotgun, one Lee-Enfield .303 carbine rifle, and one M1911A1A semi-automatic .45 caliber pistol by Colt. I am truly safe.

Nothing my government does makes sense? Miss, I believe you have crossed the line, and are speaking the talk of ignorance, now. Take a breather, and go do something constructive.

Answer 5

We took the fight to them. If we are not over there right now, we will have many more terrorist attacks on our own soil. This war makes a lot of sense. The people are happy that we are there and they want to make their country safe. Yes, we are winning the war on terrorism. We still have troops in Afghanistan, but since the media controls your thoughts, they like to focus on Iraq. Again, you let the media control your thoughts and we are much safer now than we were before 9/11.

Answer 6

How Many Libs Understand that we Did not go to Iraq Because of 9/11? Iraq Attacked Our Jets in the No FlyZone
We had a bunch of UN resolutions that forced the situation and we did not act Unilatterally. Our Jets were attacked in the UN mandated "No Fly Zone" We Know it was not because of 9/11 and WMDs was a SMALL part of the reason. Protection of the Kurds ( like when Clinton went to protect the Bosnians) was a large part of it as the UN tends to look down on ethnic Cleansing. So Please stop posting the BS that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 WE KNOW ALREADY!

Answer 7

No one "shifted" any attack. We are still just as promenent in Afghanistan as we are in Iraq, one had nothing to do with the other. As for our borders, have YOU crossed them? I know I have, both Canadian and Mexican and YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, why don't you tell me what country you are from so I may tell you what I heave "heard" about where you live. You can't form an honest opinion without true facts, not just what you "think" is fact.

Talk about hot air, I could inflate the Hindenburg with your rant.

Answer 8

Saddam was a cruel and evil tyrant and refused to comply with UN weapons inspections with the UN Security Council. The vote to go to war was overwhelmigly supported both nationally and internationally. Now people are seeing that this is not a quick fix (Bush warned of that from the get-go) and they want to back out and blame Bush for "tricking" them. Apparently, cowardice and appeasement is now fashionable.

Answer 9

My advise to you is to get a different news source:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/09/terror/main2457144.shtml
The extension of the U.S. buildup means American troop levels in Afghanistan, which increased this month to about 26,000 — the highest of the war — will remain roughly the same until at least spring 2008. Until now, a level of 22,000 to 23,000 had prevailed through much of last year.

Answer 10

evaluate this. heavily, take a second and picture about this: the american military soundly defeated the communists in Viet Nam in each significant conflict fought - jointly with the TET offensive which wisely overwhelmed them. For all purpose and objective, the North Viet Namese were defeated - yet they checked in with the american media and, to their utter amazement, they discovered that they were prevailing. And, genuine sufficient, we lost the warfare at residing house and withdrew our troops - assuring the Viet Cong a victory and the resultant bloodbath. Do you fairly imagine this little bit of historic past is lost on the terrorists? that is the reason i trust that public reflects and rallies geared in the route of our president in a time of warfare is an similar as assisting our enemy. it really is truly no longer that confusing to connect the dots.