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

19 answers

Did we win the war on poverty? Did we win the war on drugs? You can't win a war based on a concept.

2007-04-11 05:51:51 · answer #1 · answered by wizbangs 5 · 3 1

Terrorism is a tactic of war. You can't wage war on a tactic. That being said, this is an extremely difficult war to win, seeing as we arent fighting a defined army. The people we are fighting are whoever decides they want to pick up a rifle and shoot at an American. On the other hand, we cant' really lose this war either. The idea that the ultraconservatives want you to believe is that if the terrorists win, then they are going to come to our country and take over. As if were going to have things like terrorist Wal-Mart or Alqaeda Mcdonalds. The thing is that this isnt really a war. In Iraq, we are acting as a police force more than anything else. Instead of fighting for an objective were TRYING to keep some piece. So, no, we can't win this war. But thankfully we can't lose either.

2007-04-11 05:54:41 · answer #2 · answered by joe w 2 · 2 1

There was terror before Bush (just not here). There will be more terror after Bush, he increased it by 400% single handed. Terror is an outlet for the frustration of young men with to much testosterone and women in burkhas, which are not allowed to have intercourse before marriage (just kidding, Muslims).
What about it?
Terror is the way of live for 2/3 of the world population from Africa to Argentina.
What are we going to do about it. Fight 4 billion people with machine guns and Black Hawks. They are not impressed so far.
There is an idea, why don't we just leave them alone and offer peaceful help, if they want it?

2007-04-11 05:57:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

for sure we are no longer winning. we've used up maximum of our elements struggling with in Iraq and what progression we did make when we first began struggling with in Afganistan has because that been lost. we mandatory to placed a lot extra power on struggling with the Taliban and Al Qaida rather of going after Iraq. because we invaded Iraq, we've allowed the real Terrorists to flow free and proceed to achieve help and we made ourselves even extra hated contained in the middle East. we will be winning the "warfare on Terror" if it wasn't for an incompetent President.

2016-12-03 20:36:15 · answer #4 · answered by sarro 4 · 0 0

Nah, it is a rhetorical war. War on Terror, War on Poverty, War on Drugs are all unwinnable, because the objectives are something that can't be ultimately defeated completely. Thus, they are an endless, costly, and frustrating phenomenon.

If it's only about spending endless money that we can't afford, as it is in the War on Poverty, perhaps we can overlook it. If we're only imprisoning those who have no purpose, as we do in the Drug War, maybe our nation will survive. But a "hot" war with soldiers dying endlessly, even in the relatively low numbers that we've experienced in Iraq, will eventually be devastating to our national psyche. It is a no-win situation. We need to identify a realistic objective. If we cannot do so, we need to pull out. I hate to say that, because I'm not a leftist or a dove, but the current situation is long-term untenable.

2007-04-11 05:57:38 · answer #5 · answered by skip742 6 · 1 1

"Can we win this war on terror, if we don't go after the real terrorists?"

There is no war on terror. The war being fought right now is a war on reason, human rights and human dignity. It is being fought by the rich and powerful for the benefit of themselves, and no other.

2007-04-11 05:58:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

How can one even say "war on terror" and keep a straight face? Terror is a mental state and terrorism is a tatic. War is made against an organization, nation, or state. One can no more war against terror than against flanking movements.

2007-04-11 05:54:33 · answer #7 · answered by gunplumber_462 7 · 1 1

No, and that's the issue that Bush doesn't want to discuss (or the GOP in general). In fact, Democrats don't seem to bring this up either. MOst of the 9/11 terrortists were Saudis, and alot of the money to fund the insurgency in Iraq has been traced to....yup, Saudi Arabia.
So, what are we doing about that?

2007-04-11 05:55:50 · answer #8 · answered by JeffyB 7 · 1 1

Oh, what does this question even mean?! Some type of clever dig on your own government, again?

How can we win the war, and get our troops home, until Americans stop taking pot-shots against other Americans, get behind the troops, and decide to get it done?!

EDIT: Yes, we can win a war against radical Islam, but it does require killing some people. We really have not taken that approach with the "war on drugs" and the "war on poverty."

2007-04-11 05:49:23 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 0 3

We can't go after the real terrorists...Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton are all protected by American laws.

2007-04-11 05:49:24 · answer #10 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers