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

they have both form their direct actions resulted in the deaths of many, (one more than the other if u ask me), and if bin laden was president of a powerful country and said he didn't like how we weasterners lived our lives or our leaders and invaded would that be justified (am just asking a question so i don't need insults from nobody)

2007-08-18 12:58:44 · 16 answers · asked by Rodman 2 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

16 answers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sstDwKTCpM&mode=related&search=

2007-08-18 13:16:44 · answer #1 · answered by Jose R 6 · 0 0

A very interesting question this! And some very interesting answers.

On balance I think Bin Laden is the baddy though. He may not have liked the western policies in the middle east but surely he lost any right to sympathy from east or west alike when he set up the attacks on the twin towers and subsequent terrorist attacks on the western world and come to that the eastern world.

As for the wests interference in Afghanistan and Iraq, if the majority of the people in those countries were truly unhappy with the intervention the troops would all be out by now and back home. Remember when the Russians tried to invade Afghanistan, the majority of the people clearly did not want that and the Russians were sent packing with their tail between their legs so to speak; although they committed huge resources to the invasion, they did not win. The truth is that the majority of the people are happy to have the repression lifted. Their elected leaders still want the support thus our men are still out there.

In east and west alike, most of us want to live in peace but unfortunately there are some people out there on both sides who just don't want peace - they want to dominate!

It is very sad for us all!!

2007-08-19 05:55:57 · answer #2 · answered by Angel A 3 · 0 0

Bin Laden supposedly killed 3000 Americans. Keep in mind that Bin Laden denied the attacks of September 11 and the "confession video" of Bin Laden is widely known to be a fake.

Bush 41 and BushFraud are resposible for the deaths of over 2,000,000 Iraqis, many of them children, due to over ten years of sanctions, bombings and sectarian violence.

2007-08-18 13:56:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

well, if i'm not mistaken, Bin Laden attacked the US from the moment on it became clear that they wouldn't withdraw their troops stationed on Holy Land after GW I. It is clearly stated in the Coran that infidels can not step onto the holy land with arms.
Until 911, he kept himself busy with some rocket and minor explosives attacks on US targets far from the US, and everytime he claimes them publicly.
In these days, if BL would've set foot in Iraq, he'd be arrested, tortured and extradited back to Saudi-Arabia, for Saddam wasn't too keen on integrists (ask the extremist shi'ite leaders, or the stubborn high treasoning iran allied Kurds).
911 happens, and all of a sudden Wolfowitz (we all saw his real face now) and the DC Hawks think Saddam and BL are the worst enemies of mankind..
The worst part bout this.. we all believed it. Yep, reasoning takes time and energy, and not all of us are ready to invest so much in ourselves.

2007-08-19 10:08:06 · answer #4 · answered by jayoftee 3 · 0 0

You've said it already - IF Bin Laden was a president - he's not so until then, when he's busy killing and maiming innocents for his cause he's a terrorist.

Bin Laden and co sneak around and bomb and kill without warning - George Bush sends in armies who fight against the legit army and/or insurgents/terrorists. They don't deliberately sneak about planning to kill as many civilians as they can by planting carbombs in nightclubs or flying planes into buildings full of innocent people.

This is the fine line that separate the two!

2007-08-18 13:07:04 · answer #5 · answered by Banshee Babe 3 · 4 2

Both as bad neither has respect for Human life And the same goes for the new "Peace envoy" the Right Honourable mass murderer Blair
I think Americans would see things a bit different if they woke up one morning to planes dropping bombs on their homes and killing their kids in revenge for what a country with nothing to do with them had done
Lets just hope China and Russias war games are nothing more than games

2007-08-18 14:05:57 · answer #6 · answered by keny 6 · 1 1

with that kind of choices I would really go all the way with Homer Simpson .... I won't say anything about Bin laden (it's all said) ... and about Bush, well he is one of the most ignorantts fuccking basstards I have never heard about, what a usseless fuccking finnean!

2007-08-19 06:11:28 · answer #7 · answered by jljimenezs30 4 · 1 0

Any leader will try and justify war !! Bin Laden already says that about us !! He thinks we are Unholy!! Bush wants to change their belief system which they have had before the America as we know it ever existed !! You can't just go to another country and tell them what to do without conflict!!

2007-08-18 13:13:35 · answer #8 · answered by Polar Molar 7 · 2 3

bin laden invaded when he ordered 9-11. and b4 that when clinton was president he ordered the destruction of the u.s.s cole. so no matter what bin laden is coming after the free world.

2007-08-18 13:07:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Being an Aussie, tts been super listening to all facets of this tale. the government and police suggested they did a brilliant pastime simply by fact they caught him and his 10 acquaintances - they fail to show while conversing how they have been given previous 2 protection posts and in basic terms have been given stopped at 0.33 while he have been given out of the automobile. listening to those that paintings on the television Station which the teach airs on, they have come out and suggested that the sole reason they have been given caught is with the help of the fact they scared themselves with how close they have been given to the inn and that they actually circled so he ought to get out of the automobile and get caught. it could have been quite frightening in the event that they weren't comedians, yet authentic terrorists who quite meant to do something risky - and its not in basic terms the Aussie police with egg on their face, yet additionally the government who've stated how intense tech the protection is, how properly its working and that its doing its pastime and that they are going to all be risk-free. as much as i don't watch that teach, I applaud them for what they did reason it does teach in simple terms how lack luster issues are there at APEC and what a waste of money they have spent on "protection".

2016-11-12 20:55:08 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

No, and I would be doing just what the Iraqi's are doing, I would be making as many IE D's as I could and enlist any support that I could to drive them from our shores. It didn't work with the British, and It is not going to work for us in Iraq!

Quite frankly, if someone was doing the same as we are doing in Iraq here, I would see how many I could take out!

And that includes if Bush tries to declare Martial Law, which I suspect he is going to try. They didn't build all those concentration camps in America for illegals!!

2007-08-18 13:07:25 · answer #11 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers