While America toils over Iraq, America knows where terror`s "war on the west" truly originates today...... Why fight radical islam if you are afraid to touch Iran, Syria, and go into Pakistan ? Why fight a "limited war" again ? Don`t forget the last time America fought an "unlimited war"...and it was won in `45.
2007-09-10 08:25:48 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Saudi Arabia is the source of it all.
2007-09-10 08:29:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, the US is still being somewhat rational by not attacking additional countries which have not attacked it or which are not an imminent danger to the United States. The "limited war" concept was Rumsfeld's. He wanted to fight the war in Iraq with the smallest number of men possible and disprove the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force.
2007-09-10 08:32:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
uncertain what your asking yet by the responses it form of feels you're seeing the top of the iceberg. He as maximum criminal experts (who're prohibited from conserving place of work as they have an allegiance to a distant places entity) are in accordance to the congressional checklist... Communists! For the idiots who like or help him that's obtrusive that they too are communists even although they don;t comprehend it and that they watch FOX for their indoctrination. Having been interior the defense force with secret clearance and maximum if no longer all so called "terrorists" are created by the CIA or different black ops for the explicit purpose to reason disruption so as that the defense force can pass right into a distant places united states and blow it up, kill human beings and wager what the 1st difficulty that's instituted? A economic business enterprise... pass discern. So once you right here that O-bama is a "banker boy" you will understand what's being stated. additionally, inspect what proportion situations they "killed" O-sama before this final time and as significant as DNA could be and view they did what they did in enormous apple with the information, bumped off it right away so it may't be analyzed and detect he has been on ice for roughly 5 years... Do you no longer understand that he substitute into recruited by the CIA and on the pay roll for some years?? Yelling "terrorists" is yet an act of terror themselves designed to maintain you in concern and servitude for "secure practices" from the boogie guy. Kinda like the protection employer that had a team pass into neighborhoods and rob some residences so as that they might purchase their protection device... have been given it? Create the problem furnish the answer, create the problem furnish the answer. delight on your servitude by religion interior the ****-tators... bend over, O-sama bend over Lay-den cousin to O-bama your donky...
2016-10-10 07:57:00 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
American's are too quick to use military force. They have this silly perception that you can fight a limited war. Only use surgical strikes.
It's like the guy, when confronted with a situation an pulls out a gun. If you have a gun and you pull it out you better shoot to kill or it could be used on yourself. If you are uncomfortable with that, don't own a gun.
Same with America, if you are going to go to war. GO TO WAR. War isn't pretty, it isn't surgical. There is friendly fire and deaths to innocent civilians. If you are uncomfortable with that don't send in the military.
2007-09-10 08:35:37 · answer #4 · answered by joe s 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
while its easy to Monday morning quarterback, I tend to agree , I believe we should of first won in Afghanistan, then invaded, or used threat of invasion in Saudi which is one of the sources and the primary source for funding ,Syria and Iran. Perhaps too had we used tactical nukes to get Bin Ladden and said who's next, no one would dare attack us. Ultimately lives saved us lives that is.Then change our policies towards interfering in the internal affairs of others and stop putting in tyrants who turn on us when they no longer need us, Hussein, The Shaw , Noriega, etc.
2007-09-10 09:03:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we are truly seeking to fulfill a war on terror it must be done in all Arab nations. We are fighting a very unlimited war in Iraq.
2007-09-10 08:30:50 · answer #6 · answered by cynical 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
PC?
Mass murder and torture are NOT PC.
Are you in the military?
If not, why are you so keen for other people to murder and be murdered, when you're safe at home?
Given that we can't win the wars we've already started, it would be the height of lunacy to start 3 more wars.
It's also morally repugnant to spread our policy of slaughtering people who have done nothing wrong, just so sub-human freaks can feel as though they don't have a tiny wee-wee.
Our starting 3 new wars will NOT make your wee-wee larger.
Really.
2007-09-10 12:32:00 · answer #7 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
War is not a good thing. War cost billions of dollars, war kill soldiers. We need to protect OUR country not invade others.
2007-09-10 08:53:53 · answer #8 · answered by Lindsey G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another comparison to World War II.
The Nazi goal was a much more pervasive threat to the world than secular terrorists with box-cutters. You're talking about an overreactive, aggressive military campaign as opposed to a defensive (constitutionally allowed) reaction to a pandemic ethnocentric threat that had already begun invading and taking over neighboring countries throughout an entire continent.
The terrifying but inevitable reality of current technology is that we will absolutely not be able to prevent the people who don't like us from finding and acquiring the ability to blow us all up. Our challenge is convincing our neighbors that that's a bad idea for everyone involved, rather than assuming a dominating stance over them. Intimidation is not a game we can win in modern times.
This is not 1940. Preemptively attacking any country with potential nuclear capability will not secure us our reign as the world's superpower. It will foster resentment and hatred, which will not keep us safe in the long run.
Your comparison is both depressing and amusing. You have swallowed scare-tactic media and regurgitated it for us. Congratulations.
2007-09-10 08:30:17 · answer #9 · answered by Buying is Voting 7 · 1⤊ 5⤋
The only analogy with WWII is that the US is once again occupying countries for imperialistic reasons while pretending to have an ideologically driven policy.
I don't buy it. You people are the vikings, pillaging and raping once again. Viet Nam is a good example. Why again did you murder 4M people?
You want the world to believe your good intentions? try helping people rather than murdering them. Your country is an empire and it will suffer an imperial fall.
Good Luck.
2007-09-10 08:43:24 · answer #10 · answered by Washington Irving 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yeah and it just so happens that was the last time that we went to war with a declaration of war from Congress.
al-Qaida was in Afghanistan and Pakistan. So, of course, we attacked Iraq. And now you want to attack a few other places where al-Qaida isn't? al-Qaida is also financed by Saudi Arabia, but I notice that you left them off your hit list.
2007-09-10 08:31:48 · answer #11 · answered by LittleLamb 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋