Do not you think it is a pausible explanation? Because from a logical perspective I can not believe that OBL would restrict his "holy warriers" only to Iraq.
2007-05-10
04:02:09
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
If US does not make deals with terrorists (and I do not believe for a chance that OBL would not go to US) , then GOP is lying ?
2007-05-10
04:08:04 ·
update #1
earnest .. .Dio you really think that AlQuaida has a problem with recrutment? You contradict all intelligence reports!
It was a sarcastic question ! Because, I think that GOP is busslhitting us! It is a simple propaganda!!!
US is on the other hand is bogged down in Iraq. In order to pacify Iraq we need 200k additional troop instead of 35k (which we do not have!!!)
2007-05-10
04:26:46 ·
update #2
The premise is more than a little far-fetched.
It seems a bit deep within the realm of fantasy, to assume that al-Quaeda is not able to send a few operatives across the Mexican border, with a enough money to construct a device of some sort.
I think my grandfather, were he still alive, would label the entire idea of "over there, instead of over here", as a grand pile of BULLSH IT.
But some people have an affinity for believing BULLSH IT.
What can ya do?
2007-05-10 04:08:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by sarcasm_generator 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's a possibility. I think OB-L and Bush the Antichrist are in cahoots, and have been all along. They know exactly where he is, why do you think they told the troops to fall back from Tora Bora??
Months before 9/11 happened, I forget the exact amount, but I believe it was 2.9 trillion dollars went missing from the US budget.
I think that was OB-L's down payment for creating the bogey man that Bush has been scaring the sheeple with for 6 years.
2007-05-10 11:10:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by tiny Valkyrie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know about the GOP because the GOP and the Bushies are two very different things. I wouldn't put anything past the Bush Administration. First respondent is wrong, the US does negotiate with terrorists at least when a Republican is President....Reagan?? Arms for hostages remember?
2007-05-10 11:07:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
No the G.O.P. did not make a deal
We gave the deal, after Sept.11, 2001 it was smarter to go after those whom wish to hurt us, also called the offensive, rather than to sit around here like donkeys, and wait for another attack here, also called the defensive.
know one is restricted from trying to hurt us, but they are on the defensive now as we have them on the run, and as long as we continue to take care of business, and also protect our borders we can enjoy peace here.
And that is called being 'Smart'
Once we withdraw, or redeploy, or stop protecting our borders before the job is done, then I will assure you that the attacks will once again continue and that is called being 'Stupid'
2007-05-10 11:50:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Thoughtfull 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Obviously they didn't and the very notion that they may have is beyond dreaming . But to play devil's advocate, I'll ask you. . . .would you rather fight them in front of your house, your parents house, your friends, your loved ones , etc ?
You cannot grasp the fact that it is Al Queda that is bogged down and not us . Keeping them occupied over there does help stop them from hitting us here , but don't take anything for granted . They're trying to hit us here and apparently you've missed the news for the last few years, when you could've easily seen that we've stopped many attacks before they ever happened .
2007-05-10 11:14:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Forget about analyzing the Bush administration as it relates to your theory... Understanding the basic mindset of these jihadists disproves it.
I hardly think that islamic radicals would make "deals" with "infidels," particularly deals that would limit their call to jihad, which basically states that they are to kill anything and anyone that is in their path to total world takeover.
Remember, their goal is to "CLEANSE THE PLANET OF INFIDELS" they aren't going to be content to keep their holy war in one tiny little place. They would never agree to that.
2007-05-10 11:11:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by SelfnoSelf 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yeah, what else would be keeping Al Qaeda terrorists just in Iraq?
2007-05-10 11:05:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by ck4829 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Bin Laden must have some heavy stuff on the Bush's, to manage to persuad them to depose his arch enemy Saddam on his behalf.
Wonder what he knows?
2007-05-10 11:08:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by toowit2wu 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
that explanation makes perfect sense. ALL of the world's terrorists have also agreed with GWB that they will ONLY fight in Iraq. We should thank GWB for his great leadership.
source = sarcasm
2007-05-10 11:06:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by truth seeker 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
yes - they did it over tea and crumpets (you are a 'tard) in France. It's called Treaty of Versailles. Oh wait, something else happened there - something real happened there not made up
2007-05-10 11:05:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by brett611 2
·
1⤊
1⤋