so let's get to it.....?

Question

after forming in 1988 Al-quieda has sucessfully killed americans in somalia in 1992, the WTC in 1993, Kenya and tanzinia in 1996, in yemen in 2000, in the WTC (AGAIN) in 2001, the pentagon in 2001 and PA in 2001.

Explain to me how all these sucessful attacks and Bin laden still being alive means either liberals or conservatives are worth anything politically or is it time for the democratic AND republican parties to die??

1st massive

Attack under your beloved Bill clinton..

the battle of mogdishu 1993 ie bill clinton in office.

WTC one

Kenya and Tanzanian emmbassy bombings

U.S.S. cole in yemen...


and yes I acknowlegde that W. was the greater of the two incomptentcies.

Elana .. I think it time it was a crime, don't you??

oh and scince you one of the people that belives in the two party system. I should let you know I was refering to dissilution as the parties are political and certanly forigen policy incompetent.

Randall z . ... i'd like to kill Bin Laden given the chance but your parties would stop me.. with a bunch of drivel about international law and religon and so on....
I'd die of boredom before i could shoot him...

Lesroys... youv'e perfectly illistrated all those government's flaws... there so busy trying to look good in the mirror people get killed for it.

Answer 1

Who is responsible for the deaths of more Americans?
Bin Laden or Bush?

Lets compare BODY COUNTS:

Osama bin Laden:
First WTC attack: 6 killed
Khobar Towers: 19 killed
U.S. African embassy attacks: 12 Americans
9/11 attacks: 2,973 Killed
USS Cole: 17 Americans killed
Battle of Mogasdishu (Black Hawk Down): 18 Americans Killed.
TOTAL: 3045 Americans dead

George W. Bush:
Iraq War Casualties: nearly 4000 Americans dead, and rising!!

Answer 2

The republicans have become too moderate and left leaning and the democrats have all become totalitarian centrists that make Marxism look like Catholicism.Because of this I believe the Federalists,Libertarians and Independents are growing in high numbers.

Answer 3

Let me approach your question from a different angle...

Successive UK governments were unable to prevent numerous attacks on civilian targets on the UK mainland for 40 years. Do you think this was a failure of the two main political parties, or simply went to the determination of the IRA to kill and create mayhem?

Successive Spanish governments were unable to prevent numerous attacks on civilian targets in Spain for 40 years. Do you think this was a failure of the main political parties, or simply went to the determination of ETA to kill and create mayhem?

Successive Israeli governments have been unable to prevent attacks on civilian targets on its own soil for 60 years. Is this a failure of the main political parties (again, largely a 2-party system), or just a comment on the determination of suicide bombers to kill and create mayhem?

You have mentioned two attacks on US soil (counting the attacks of 9/11 as a single, coordinated attack on multiple targets), and two on foreign soil (Al Qaeda didn't do Somalia, that was the work of the Somali warlord, General Aideed; the bombings of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were coordinated, simultaneous attacks).

What if there was one fatal attack a week on the U.S. mainland for 40 or 60 years, as happened in the UK and Israel? And how do you stop that? Israel tried to implement tight border controls to little avail; it tried various peace initiatives to no avail; the UK accepted partition of Ireland in the early part of the 20th century to no avail; it gave Northern Ireland autonomy including its own government and ability to make its own laws a few decades later to no avail; it engaged in peace talks for over a decade and the bombers just kept coming. Spain negotiated until it was blue in the face and ETA constantly broke the ceasefire agreements it entered into. The US should consider itself lucky, in light of this, and certainly not anything "special" because out of all of the terrorist attacks happening around the world over the past half century, the US has got off lightly.

You simply cannot blame governments (or opposition parties) for terrorism. Terrorists do not play by the same rules as civilized people. They intentionally abandon all semblence of civility and humanity when they carry out their murderous acts. You can question the wisdom of your government's policy (US policy has consistenly been "no dialogue"), but if you think the best way to bring Al Qaeda to heel is to have talks - I think you're wrong. The Israeli, Spanish and British experiences have shown us that even talks with seemingly sensible political proxies do not amount to much in the short-term. It's hard work and it takes decades to even negotiate a ceasefire. Even then, you are going to have splinter groups who ignore ceasefire agreements and continue to carry out terrorist attacks.

Answer 4

Let's say ten individuals all want to smash a window on broadway in NYC...random people with a random desire and a will to carry it out.

Name anyone who could detect all 10, and stop them all wihtout shutting down all traffic on broadway.

Answer 5

You forgot they are responsible for attacks world wide, Spain, England, France, Indonesia, to name a few. Since the world looks to the USA to take care of all it's problems, because the UN is weak and corrupt, shouldn't all those attacks be considered as attacks against us?

Answer 6

Hey, I have a thought, why don't you find and kill Bin Laden? Now, better get busy.

Answer 7

Politically worthless does not mean that they should be executed.

Incompetence is not a crime.

Inciting killing, however, is.