English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

21 answers

I am proud of my sons service in the war. We must stop the terrorists via force and our policies must adapt. I served in Viet Nam, and you served in Iraq so welcome home!

2007-03-17 12:28:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

First of all, if we conservatives continue to embrace the idea that we are fighting "terrorism" then we will surely lose this conflict.

I don't think any service people in theater consider they are fighting against terrorism. They know that their adversaries are actual people.

We are in a conflict with people that are islamic and who hold fascist ideas as to how the world should be. I cannot thing of a single industrialized country that they do not abhor and seek to destroy.

And, only a few islamic people are cut from the above cloth. While many may agree, they are not active in the killing. Like most Americans, they just want to see the conflict end so they can get on with their lives.

I think the GWOT is an abject failure. I think our war against islamic fascist has, and continues to be successful.

How much time do you think the islamic fascist have in order to achieve their goals? The time cannot be measured.

How much time do you think we will need to defeat them. Also the time cannot be measured.

We have always had criminals. Decades ago. A few years ago. Today. We do not need police presence for the majority of Americans whatsoever. We respect the law and abide by it. Criminals however have a different mindset and as long as people choose that type of "career path" we will ALWAYS need police to fight against them and defend the law abiding citizens from their attacks.

It is very similar to the situation with islamic fascist. It isn't a war like any other war. Some aspects are similar, but there will always be those that choose that mindset and who will have to be dealt with using force...just as we still have to do against the criminal element right here in America.

2007-03-17 05:37:04 · answer #2 · answered by cappi 3 · 0 0

GWOT is possibly the most significant battle that the world's population will ever encounter! Is it winnable? Only if moderate Muslims support the efforts of peace. And personally, if the GWOT keeps terrorist off of our soil here in the US I am ALL FOR IT! Who wants to go the the marketplace, or the bank, or send their kids to school with the underlying fear that a suicide bomber may end it all for you (or your child) right them and there. Fear is a gripping and unbelievably strong deterrent and motivator at the same time. We live in a free society where rights and privileges are in abundance and unfortunately, taken for granted! Ask anyone who has been stalked how terror and fear fell and how long it takes to get over. For that reason alone (although I have many more) I LOVE our President and will always thank him for keeping this war off of our soil and away from my children!

2007-03-17 05:36:31 · answer #3 · answered by MaHaa 4 · 0 1

Finally, a question.

The concept of war on terror seems to be a precursor for another great war. In fact, half of the world is involved in it and whatever the reasons or motives behind it, it is actually increasing terrorism. "An eye for eye..." may be a very effective way of dealing with terrorism but what the war has triggered isworse and the worst is still to come.
Secondly, targeting one nation is wrong. You might want to disgree with me here but give it a thought, and you'll agree. There are all sorts of people in every religion. Saying that all in a particular religion are terrorists and extremists is a very derogatory statement. By definition the word means any sort of harassment (verbal, physical etc).
Those who kill people, kill themselves in the name of religion, do not belong to any religion because it is not acceptable in any religion.

The motive behind the war might be to curb the terrorists activities but the methods adopted are wrong. for example, in order to get hold of one terrorist, they kill millions of innocent people-- are they all terrorists or just because they belong to the same country as that of the terrorist.

To an extent it no more appears to be a global war rather a never ending hatred initiated by one man who will be going away soon and God knows what is to come next- more war or a new idea of dealing with terrorism.

2007-03-17 05:47:10 · answer #4 · answered by sana 2 · 0 0

I have wonder if it is not just a diversion to keep us looking the other way while America is being given away by ALL of our so called leaders. Get your mind off of the war and take a look around. Our leadership is pushing us towards global government at an alarming rate. At the rate they are going, we will be subject to a world body in short order. What do you think about that folks? GOOD? BAD?

2007-03-17 05:32:18 · answer #5 · answered by It All Matters.~☺♥ 6 · 1 1

I think we need to stop using Cold War tactics to approach the war on terror. Rather realize that this is not like any war we've ever seen before and we need to use out of the box thinking. I'm not sure what, but attacking countries isn't going to solve anything.

2007-03-17 05:27:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If the Global War of Terrorism helps terrorism subside, then I feel that it is good.

side note: holding pacifist views is not going to stop the terrorist attacks and isn't going to stop Kim Jong-il from nuking the west coast. I'm just saying, some countries are run by tyrants and nothing we can do will stop them from hurting us except hitting them where it hurts.

2007-03-17 05:26:31 · answer #7 · answered by TilBot1007 3 · 2 0

Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy that can be fought.

Declaring a Global war on terrorism ignores who are enemies really are. Even the Bush administration realized this but has had a hard time identifying what, exactly they want to fight.

They tried calling the enemy "Islamofascism" but that isn't very catchy. Plus they can't really define what it means.

After 6 years, we are still wating for Bush to eleborate what his foreign policy is, other than to react to whatever seems to scare them at the moment.

2007-03-17 05:39:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

There isn't one? It's not the world against terrorists. It's extremists against the states.. who exploit other nations and for some reason feel that they can attack other nations without retaliation. That's all that 9/11 was. A retaliation. American's have to clear out of their propaganda induced funk and realize that THEY are what's wrong with with the world. "Terrorists" aren't attacking the States because they're against freedom, like Bush has said, it's because America's trying to expand their sphere of influence on the entire world, and essentially take it over in a corporate sense. There are no kings and queens now, only corporations. I wish the States would stop acting like the victim.

2007-03-17 05:29:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I feel that it is just a way of reducing our rights, building bigger government and putting up a smoke screen for the Free Trade crisis. If the US and other "free" countries wanted the terrorism to stop, it would be stopped. I'm a conservative Republican.

2007-03-17 05:30:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

We need to fight. When Reagan was Pres. he sent the Navy to destroy terrorist camps, in Libya, because of all the civilians and military people they had killed. We still haven't heard anything from them. Bombings make the news now in America, but attacks are down, no matter what the press says.

2007-03-17 05:31:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers