If one would take a look at our foreign policy and what we have done in the past, then yes. For example, in the 1950s we installed the Shah in Iran. The Shah went on to kill thousands of innocents, and his police who carried out these acts was trained by our CIA. The result was the Shah being overthrown and hostages being taken in the 1970s. This would not be the first time either. We replaced democracies with dictatorships in Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic. We did this to benefit ourselves. So, basically we are setting up dictatorships in our name after overthrowing other country's governments. Ever wonder who created Bin Laden and Al Quada? We did. We wanted to get rid of the Soviet Union so we would be the only super power. So, we help fund Muslim extremists to help during the Afghan War. One of those was Bin Laden. It was the U.S. who created these extremists groups, who would later attack us for interfering in the Middle East. Most people think we are the victims, however if one takes a look at what we have done we are not. We are the instigators. And anyone who says that they hate us for our freedom and wealth is not doing their homework, and is the kind of ignorance that our government and politicians play off of to cover up what they have done.
2007-09-11 04:35:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by j 4
·
5⤊
1⤋
I think it is not safe to say at all. There is a reason these nut jobs are wanting to kill us and noone else does (or at least did before this war debacle). I think it is safe to say that these people are crazy and that crazy people unfortunatetly cannot always be stopped. Look at the Virginia Tech shooter, no matter what is done to stop that kind of thing it won't happen. You will never be completely safe and its time people figured that out.
Its also time for people to realize that radical muslims are always looking for someone outside of themselves for the reason they are in the situations they are in. They have no food, or water or roads or schools, well that simply must be the United States fault. They have the richest oil reserves in the world and their leaders have made billions upon billions of dollars, and yet none is put into infrastructure for their countries, none is put into education and schooling. But of course they could not look at their own leaders because they are other Muslims. They must look at the infidels and bomb them because they like to turn attention away from the real problems.
2007-09-11 04:26:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
it is not in basic terms liberals, anybody with a strategies hates Bush. He had between the utmost approval scores in historic past after 9/11, yet as a substitute of utilising a united usa to acheive sturdy, he bega taking off on his very own own schedule: tax cuts for the wealthy, checklist-breaking oil income, and the war in Iraq. upload the reality that the federal government tousled the Katrina reaction (definite, the states deserve some blame too), he's out in direction of the sea with in basic terms a raft.
2016-12-31 19:36:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i was watching the news a week before it happend and realised that WE WERE picking on those folks an awefull lot and that something was gonna happen if they had any backbone whatsoever. and it did. i realise that we were probly picking on them for alot longer then a week tho. but yeah we are bullies when we wanna be and with certian ppl. the real reasons are unknown to the general public, i will admit that i do not know why and probly never will and almost everyone probly does not know why, except the few in the immediate circle of the actual start of the decision.
2007-09-11 06:26:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by curvy_chick000 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
It depends on how you want to look at it. Most Americans will say no, but if you look at our foreign policies over the years regarding the Middle East you could say that we brought this on ourselves. Mind you, the American public was mostly ignorant of this and that is why they will get defensive about the attack, but many Arabs and Muslims grew up seeing America back dictatorial regimes in their country for either oil or to keep that country from siding with the Soviets.
Americans can choose to believe that we are the victim, but there are other sides that need to be addressed on the issue.
2007-09-11 04:22:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by panzerfahrer81 3
·
7⤊
2⤋
How did our policy bring about 9/11? Our good relations with Saudi Arabia. Our attempt to deal with the Taliban prior to 9/11 to build a pipeline in Afghanistan? Our response to a call for help from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia during the first gulf war...that ultimately led to the bases in the "holy land" that Bin Laden cited for attacking the US. Being the number one aid contributor to the world.. including the middle east? Why can't you blame Islam for the total lack of advancement and the total failure of it to provide anything for its people since the seventh century? A religion designed by a caravan raider to raise an army so that he could conquer Mecca and Medina after his banishment. Maybe that is the problem.
2007-09-11 04:25:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by JJ P 3
·
1⤊
4⤋
You are safe to say it, because you are in a free country. Doesn't make it true though. Bin Ladin stated the main reason for the attack was the US (and Allies) setting up bases in Saudi Arabia ( his homeland) to fight in the Gulf War. As you will recall, Saddam started that when he invaded Kuwait, and the US and 56 other nations came to Kuwaits defense.
2007-09-11 04:15:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by booman17 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
Hmm yea there is this feeling that America is entitled to own the Middle East like a piece of property for its own interests
2007-09-11 04:44:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I think it's safe to say that you should be very thankful that you live in this country that you seem to hate. Any where else, and you might be slaughtered or locked away for making that comment. If you all put half the energy into supporting your country and the troops as you do running your mouths, the war might already be over!
2007-09-11 04:25:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by rosi l 5
·
1⤊
4⤋
It is safe to say that the President didn't act on information given.
2007-09-11 04:25:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by St. Bastard 4
·
2⤊
1⤋