everyone on the planet knows bin laden is hiding in pakistan, yet bush sits on his thumb....
2007-02-28 08:38:26 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I am not sure why you think he is doing nothing. He is the only leader who understands what type of enemy we are dealing with. An enemy which would kill millions if it could and justify it in the name of ALLAH. I am not a Bush Supporter except for hte fact he understands the true evil of the Islamic Leaders. Everyone else thinks you can negotiate with butchers and thieves. Such is not the case. So if we leave one man who we are not making a greater marter to go after the greater bad, IRAQ then that is what it should be. So, to answer you question, BUsh remembers 911 and is doing more to protect the USA than anyone can imagine.
2007-02-28 08:48:28 · answer #1 · answered by Cy Gold 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
How about some evidence that Bin Laden is in Pakistan. Before we went after him in Afghanistan there was video tapes of him released frequently. Now the best that has come out is a few grainy audio tapes over the last few years. He is either dead or in such a remote area he is a non factor.
I really like how since you say that Bin Laden is in Pakistan that you feel like thats some sort of evidence.
2007-02-28 08:42:14 · answer #2 · answered by meathookcook 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Of course he remembers 9/11. As do I. I remember my brothers being there, digging through the rubble looking for survivors. I have to say I am so sick of hearing Bush get the blame. Its going to rain tomorrow, I guess that will be his fault too? Go back and do some research. Clinton was the one sitting on his thumbs when the we had the FIRST WTC attacks. Do you remember that one? Maybe if Clinton wasnt such a pig and not busy getting a bj there would never have been a 9/11. You know where BinLaden is? Go get him asshole!
2007-02-28 08:55:49 · answer #3 · answered by tcg7213 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Actually, not everybody does know that -- bin Laden may be in Afghanistan. If he is in Pakistan, there are significant questions about what the US can do about it, without Pakistani cooperation. The Pakis have been cooperative in rounding up several of bin Laden's henchmen.
2007-02-28 09:20:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush can't send US troops into Pakistan to try a get Bin Laden because Pakistan won't allow it. He'd have to invade Pakistan & if you hadn't noticed the US doesnt' do too well against Muslim insurgents/terrorists & Pakistan actually has WMDs/Nuke weapons.
2007-02-28 08:44:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
If you really knew ANYTHING about it at all, you'd know that Bush killed Ben Lauden at Tora Bora and if you don't believe me, go dig his rotted butt up oh wait, you're a democrat. You're too lazy to lift a finger!
2007-02-28 12:29:13 · answer #6 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Soon America's version of English will be changes to reflect the political atmosphere of 9/11 being remembered, so that nobody will ever forget. if every 4th word out of an American's mouth isn't "9/11" the thought police will storm their homes and execute them in the war on terror. For example...
I was going 9/11 to the store 9/11 to pick up 9/11 some napalm and 9/11 freedom fries when 9/11 I saw a 9/11 very scary black 9/11 person, so I 9/11 called homeland security 9/11 and they airlifted 9/11 me to malibu. 9/11
and every conversation must end with a scream "NEVER FORGET... HAIL HITLER!"
2007-02-28 08:45:16 · answer #7 · answered by DarkLord_Bob 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Al Kamen, who writes the Post's "In The Loop" column, cited a pair of memos written by Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England in today's paper. The first memo was written Dec. 6 and sent to top military and civilian officials. It identifies eight priorities for the coming fiscal year, and the first of them is to "Win the Global War on Terrorism."
In a second memo from Feb. 15, England writes that "to ensure that warfighters and taxpayers receive maximum benefit from on-going initiatives, it would be highly desirable to complete current projects by the summer/fall of 2008."
The bottom line is that the War on terror is a contrivance to accomplish things other than protect us from "terrists". And whatever those reasons might be (grotesque profits for the oil companies, elimination of the US Constitution) it seems like they are saying "Missions Accomplished".
Reaffirming this "cynical perspective" is this little blurb:
"the first priority of winning the global terror war from the earlier memo is included on the grid, and "looks to be over around October 2008."
Pardon my cynicism, but we have known this War on Terror is fake and no more real/useful than the similarly failed War on Drugs.
It's all bullshit and leaked memos like these bolster this perspective. These people are playing us (or trying to) like a fiddle so it's no surprise to me to read this lovely bit of news.
Arrest Bush, Arrest Cheney, Bring the Troops Home.
2007-02-28 08:47:42 · answer #8 · answered by foolrex 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
President Bush is not just 'sitting on his thumb'. The libs in congress will not allow funding or authorization to go after that pig.
It just isn't the president's fault and things will get worse if the cowardly libs get elected to the executive office.
2007-02-28 08:42:02 · answer #9 · answered by credo quia est absurdum 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Bin laden could be anywhere. My guess is somewhere in SE asia, or blown into a million pieces long ago.
Of course, opinions are like a##holes, everybody has one.
2007-02-28 08:42:25 · answer #10 · answered by TedEx 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋