.....it "doesn't exist' (the war on terror).
Would you agree that he insulted the troops in this statement? I mean, I wonder how many "Bumper Stickers" it takes to blow up a Humvee or how many soldiers have been killed by bumper stickers by non-existent terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan so far.
As a Disabled Veteran, this makes me angry. How about you?
2007-05-23 15:52:16 · 15 answers · asked by The Sylvan Wizard 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Well, "Maybe" the War on Terror is an "idea', but, terror had a face on 9/11 and to the average pie eating, flag waving American citizen, it is real, and I think Edwards did insult many and their preceptions.
2007-05-23 16:00:26 · update #1
That moron insulted everyone with a brain.
2007-05-23 15:55:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
This "war" has created far more global danger for now and in the future generations right here in the states. Even American Muslim children seem to think its ok to strap a on a bomb and kill in some circumstances.
We need to be sure this type of teaching is not going on in the U.S. If Muslims in the U.S. are teaching this to the children, they should be arrested as enemy combatants. If these children are just picking it up from television, why isn't the non-radical Muslim community addressing it and speaking out strongly against radical Islam. Are they doing that? Does anybody know?
I firmly believe this "war on terror" has enormously worsened an already bad situation and the only way Bush can think to deal with it is to kill them all. Do you, in all honesty, think that's going to happen? Pick them out from among the rest of the Arab world and destroy them while multiplying their numbers at the same time. I have no words to describe how I feel about the way this has been handled.
2007-05-23 23:31:52 · answer #2 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope. I was actually very impressed with Edwards for saying that. I used to think of Edwards as just another politician, but now, I must admit hes got a bit of my respect.
Hes right. And my candidate, Mike Gravel, who said the same thing first, is also right.
You misunderstand what theyre saying. There is no "war on terror". Terrorism is a tactic, and you cant wage a war against a tactic!! Its like saying "I'm waging a war on guerilla warfare!" Edwards isnt saying that there arent any terrorists, hes saying that you cant fight a war on terrorism because terrorism isnt something you can fight! Terrorism is a tool, thats used by people to make a point or achieve some goal. Osama Bin Laden and Al-Queda have stated reasons for using terrorism. Terrorism is their tool, its not them.
If you want to fight Al-Queda, fine, I'm all for it. But you cant fight them with a "war". It has to be done with intelligence, not with troops in the field. Bin Laden has stated already that his goal was to drag the US into a war that would "bleed us dry". We need to organize the worlds intelligence organizations and cooperate with them to track and take out terrorist cells. But invading countries just makes things worse, not better. And thats what Edwards is trying to say.
Make sense? Hes not insulting the troops, hes pointing out that Bush is manipulating everyone with this "war on terror" nonsense.
2007-05-23 23:04:45 · answer #3 · answered by Jesus W. 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Terror does not have a face, there is no single leader, there is no organization, it is an idea.
You say that terror had a face on 9-11, yes it did, that face is Osama Bin Laden, we should be seeking him out not losing our boys (and girls) in Iraq. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until we invaded and opened the country up to invasion of terrorists.
2007-05-23 23:04:15 · answer #4 · answered by Moosha 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, he didn't insult the troops. He said that Bush uses the term like a bumper sticker slogan, and that he hides every abuse of power he can behind that slogan.
He's right. It's an emotional catchphrase with very little actual meaning behind it. It's that sort of simplistic "bumper sticker" thinking that has us constantly repeating the same mistakes of the past and making things worse instead of actually looking for solutions.
He's talking about the misuse of the term, and the amount of rhetoric vs. sensible action. You're looking for an excuse to be outraged here.
2007-05-23 22:58:45 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
He is an idiot and has no clue. I wonder, if he were President, and say, a dirty bomb was set off in Chicago, what would he do??? How long would he talk to the terrorists so they can see our point.
This guy is a dangerous person and should not be President. Our troops would not and will no respect him.
I am a vet from Nam, and I for one cannot stand the people who down our troops, name call the CNC all because of party lines and policy. Whether you like Bush or not, he is still the Commander in Chief and our troops are in harms way. Support our troops.
2007-05-23 23:00:37 · answer #6 · answered by George C 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
I think John Edwards has been inhaling too much hairspray. This is absolutely a slap in the face to those serving. Someone should ask him, if there's no war on terror, why are our young men and women being murdered over there? Does he think they are just playing games? That guy is an idiot!!!
2007-05-23 23:00:04 · answer #7 · answered by Cinner 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
I think most vetarans know it's a bumper sticker phrase. It's about as ridiculous as a "war on drugs". Terror has existed for thousands of years. The "enemy" has no borders, is faceless, has no government, and has no military to fight. Much like the war on drugs, they can exist anywhere and everywhere. The only way to fight it effectively is to provide opportunities and hope that make terror (and drugs) unfashionable. With the US shooting at people, it makes it easy to hate us.
2007-05-23 22:57:15 · answer #8 · answered by Zeltar 6 · 6⤊ 3⤋
Just because the democrats chose not to go down this path when clinton was in charge doesn't mean it's not real in the here and now.
2007-05-24 00:43:28 · answer #9 · answered by dude 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
it makes me feel that edwards has a better grasp on things than george w. bush has.
bush thinks he has the ring of power and is seeking a guide mt dune to have it destroyed...
2007-05-23 23:45:25 · answer #10 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe we just heard him wrong. He might have said, he doesn't believe there is a war on hair. Since he spends $400 on hair cuts, and doesn't have to deal with split ends. He thinks we have two Americas, and he's for the one with poverty. What a joke. It's good to know that he doesn't have a snowballs chance.
2007-05-23 23:08:06 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋