This is the same logic that the Left uses to suggest that US policy in the Middle East is "creating a new generation of terrorists."
Actually the most recent question the poster said "jihadists" - I'm surprised the question wasn't deleted by YA as being offensive to Muslims.
But the question still stands - there is a movement the objective of which is to kill people who don't subscribe to it. That movement has existed for centuries, long before the United States existed. Presently we're one but hardly the only target - Bali, for example, didn't send any troops to Iraq....
But even if we provoke their ire by fighting them, didn't we do the same thing in the South in the 1950s and 1960s? If we'd just decided not to fight the tyrants there, wouldn't there have been less bloodshed? Clearly that's not a reason to have backed off then - even if were true, it wouldn't be a reason to back off now.
They SAY their motive is for Islam to dominate the world - I believe them.
2007-03-10
11:38:17
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics