Mr. BinLadin is an important, wealthy man, from an important wealthy family that is a friend and ally of our President Bush.
Always remember, Iraq attacked America on 9/11. Osama Bin Laden is dead and of no importance anymore.
2007-09-21 03:04:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋
I don't agree Iraq is just Bush's war. It is Americas hope to attain some peace, keep waring factions in their own neighborhoods if we can not solve their issues and our role in the world to provide freedom for all including setting examples. Speak to our brave soldiers. Most feel that it is OUR war. You really can try but the blame does not lie solely on President Bush's head. He had some help voting in authority and military advise. Some good, some not so good. Flip flopping is convenient during a Presidential election season. Degrade the party and the leader since he is from the opposing team. Had Gore won and went to war would the emphasis be so strong against policy? And why have the Dim's not provided solution's to end the war making them strong enough to pass thru a Bush veto? Like this moveon.org vote thing. Some are not available for any comment. So much for boasting & bravery. That lies with each and every man & woman defending our freedoms in Iraq & Afganistan. Not in the Senate. Thank you.
** Bin Laden was found before and other Presidents failed to take him out, if they had could 9/11 have been prevented?
2007-09-21 03:48:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mele Kai 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
No, it's not about party above principle. It's about picking the party that's closest to my principles out of the choices available.
We ARE looking for bin Laden.
And no one claimed that Iraq was behind 9/11, except the leftists who try to put those words into Bush's mouth.
Iraq was attacked to address the risk of future attacks, and "connect the dots" to prevent them - as many Bush opponents criticized Bush for not doing before 9/11.
People should ask themselves: if it was negligent not to do more to prevent the relatively unarmed al-Qaeda from attacking us because of "complacency," then how irresponsible would it have been AFTER we had already been awakened to these type of threats to just let Iraq go unaddressed?
I believe the joint resolution of Congress approving the use of force lays out these arguments fairly clearly, whether people agree with them or not:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
2007-09-21 03:09:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
Why can't liberals understand that terrorism is bigger than one man? It's like a hydra, with Osama Bin Laden as its head. Sure, we can cut off that head anytime we like, but what will happen if the BODY is not destroyed? It will just grow two more heads as vicious as the first.
It's a very simple concept. What Osama did was terrible, but capturing and/or killing him would be for nothing if we do not first destroy his base. That's exactly what we're doing now. We're eroding his support. We did so in Iraq. We did so in Afghanistan.
It's belived that he's hanging out with sympathizers in Pakistan. Would you suggest invading a country that is currently our ally? Do you even realize how much propaganda the terrorists would gain?
And here's another question: After OBL is dead, will you consider the war on terror over?
2007-09-21 03:04:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Firestorm 6
·
3⤊
3⤋
Because if you read and sought info instead of relying on the drivel that spews from the mouths of the Leftist hate America "leaders" you would know that OBL is a small fry in the bigger picture:
Homeland Security Implications of the Holy Land Foundation Trial -
The on-going Holy Land Foundation trial has established important facts about the resident domestic Islamic jihad threat inside the United States. Although evidence brought forward in documents and testimony has explosive implications for US Homeland Security, the intelligence community, and every American citizen, relatively little media attention has been paid to it.
This information also has serious implications for professionals, military and civilian, involved in homeland security, DoD plans and strategy as well as national agency intelligence analysts and local law enforcement. The raw documents outlining the strategic goals and activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, now exposed for public view, are substantiating the concerns and information long raised by various private sector counterterrorism think-tanks, organizations and blogs such as Stephen Emerson's Investigative Project and Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch among others.
2007-09-21 03:05:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
You do realize they are still looking for him. Several friends of mine are in Afghanistan, and they make weekly patrols through the Torah Bora region near Pakistan's border. It's a large amount of territory, and bin Laden has probably been prepared to hide their for some time.
2007-09-21 03:17:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
There are people in Afghanistan right now looking for Osama. They have been there since 9/11. But you wouldn't know anything about that (or care) now would you. It just doesn't fit your political arguments or your hatred for our President.
2007-09-21 03:09:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by TRUE PATRIOT 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Out troops are still in Afghanistan, and are still working on it. If you are trying to catch someone who is hiding, then it needs to be done quietly. What do you want, a map on the front page of the paper showing where they have or haven't looked? Have faith in their efforts.
Think about this - the last Bin Laden tape ended up in the U.S. governments' hands before it was even released on their websites. Suddenly all of the sites that are used by Al Queda to funnel info shut down. That tells me that there is someone on the inside, and I think that Al Queda shut down their own sites to find the leak. I see it as promising.
2007-09-21 03:04:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by steddy voter 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
We're STILL trying to find Osama Bin Laden, and fighting terrorism in Iraq is NOT "fighting the war in the wrong country," as you put it. It's just fighting another terrorist supporter, in this case one who happened to support both secular AND Islamic terrorist groups, INCLUDING part of Al-Qaida.
2007-09-21 03:04:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by ddey65 4
·
4⤊
3⤋
Impeachment is a political process through which the nation is cleansed of the toxins the Congress normally would flush out. It is generally used when the executive branch no longer functions properly. This can be a result of neo-conservative disease, long-term fascist tendencies, liberal inaction, and other destruction of the U.S. Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights.
2007-09-21 03:00:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋