Anti-war liberals, what do you think Al Qaeda would be doing if they weren't fighting us in Iraq?

Question

Don't tell me how there weren't any Al Qaeda in Iraq before we went there, we all know that. Don't even try to say there would be no Al Qaeda if we weren't in Iraq, I've seen the planes hit the world trade center, 9/11 happened before we went into Iraq. Don't say Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror, that's not the question.

The question is, what would Al Qaeda be doing if they weren't fighting us in Iraq?

DanC,
You asked how long an I, a pro-war conservative, willing to stay in Iraq? I don't think we should ever leave. I think it would be great to have a base in Iraq, close to Iran and the other anti-american countries.

Answer 1

Trying to kill Americans in this country! If we don't do something about our borders, we will have another 9/11! To many cowards running this country!

Answer 2

How many Iraqi's were on those planes? Do you all Iraqi's are terrorists? How many Iraqi's have died because our leaders didn't and still don't have a well thought out plan when it comes to a successful invasion? You actually think they went in there after terrorists?

Do you know how the Israeli's handle terrorists? They hunt them down one by one and kill them in their sleep or blow their head off with rigged cell phones. The only problem with that is that it doesn't make any money.

I used to be a government contractor, you know how much scrutiny you go through to win a contract? They gave Haliburton a 1 billion dollar no-bid contract. No-bid means that didn't have to submit a thing or compete with anybody. How many soldiers have been killed sense 9/11? How many Iraqi's? A lot of people in this country have no idea about the value of human life. We've destabilized that country and now people are getting blown up walking to the supermarket.

Are Iraqi's pissed off? Hell yes! Wouldn't you be mad if the Chinese invaded us and told us it was for our own good. Everyday you see Chinese tanks rolling through your neighborhood, wouldn't you do something?

We're not killing terrorists in Iraq we're making more and helping them recruit more than they ever could before. You know what's going to happen when we leave? The same thing that happened in Viet Nam, the side that wants to win the most will. Oh how is Viet Nam these days? Oh that's right they're doing just fine minus the 2 million people that got killed during that conflict. At least Lyndon Johnson got richer at the expense of Vietnamese and American lives.

Answer 3

Actually, they were in Iraq before we took out the regime. Al Qaeda had 3 training camps there and all 3 were found. Upon the invasion of Iraq several of these slimy pond scum were captured including Zarkowi, who had also been in Iraq many times including at least once to be treated at a hospital for wounds. THe news channels play down these facts, because it didn't fit in with their agendas. Just like the 500 tons of enriched uranium and the artillery shells that were freshly emptied of the nerve agents. The networks played this down and gave only a brief mention and now act like it never happened. Also the nerve agents found in the Tigres and Euphrates rivers was downplayed. Who's side is the networks on? It seems they would be happy if the terrorists would succeed in their agendas. And the far left nut job wackos want to defend these murderers and call them freedom fighters. Sure, ok and Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler and Mao were all nice guys that were just misunderstood.

Answer 4

Well, as most of Al Qaeda is not in Iraq, but in Pakistan, I'd guess they'd be doing more or less what they're doing now.

Oh, and to preface your question by calling out "anti-war liberals" reduces the legitimacy of your question and reveals your biases. Most of the people I associate with who consider themselves liberal-leaning are not opposed to war per se, they are opposed to THIS war (as am I). This war has not made us one iota safer, has not eliminated our enemies, has destabilized the region (which leaves it ripe for takeover by organizations such as Al Qaeda), stretched our military to it's limit, and put the country into a debt from which it will take generations to recover (if ever).

Multiple experiences have shown that it is nearly impossible to "win" a war with guerrillas (e.g. Vietnam, etc.), because there is no mechanism for victory (who do you negotiate the surrender with? how do you enforce it via international law?), and the entire population is suspect. Instead, we will be left in the position of "occupiers" indefinitely--a position we don't want and have no right to.

So, since you are clearly a "pro-war conservative", let me ask you: How long are you willing to stay (and don't say "as long as it takes"--you're not the one getting shot at out there), and how much of our national resources are you willing to throw at an essentially unwinnable situation?

Edit--
So, Kimmy, what you are saying is that you are an imperialist? And that we should stretch our power across the globe by military means? Hmm . . . didn't we fight a really big war about sixty years ago to prevent someone else from doing that?

Answer 5

They would be a lot smaller. One of the problems with Iraq is it has been a great recuiting tool for them.

But basically the same thing they are doing right now, planning a sneak attack on us for 2009. The launch on major attack on the USA at the change of administrations, did it to Clinton and Bush.

Answer 6

through fact, in spite of the shown fact that there are various from the two factors of the political spectrum who served admirably, the GOP has a tendency to offer greater suitable than their proportion of hawks who by no skill served. Google Republican Chickenhawks for a itemizing of people who beat the conflict drum yet by no skill served an afternoon or hid on the Redneck Riviera protecting the AL bars on an identical time as others risked their lives.

Answer 7

Oh the would be putting flowers in their hair singing hippie songs, Al Queda is a peace loving organisation don't you know.
Darling, you won't get a good answer from people who use emotions to control their mouths (lib's), true evil must be destroyed even though it must be the good who will have the blood on their hands but this is necessary.

Answer 8

Do you think we are fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq? LOL Brainwashed

Answer 9

I think that A Q would be eating cheese and crackers and playing scrabble while watching Oprah. They may even answer a few questions on Yahoo and become top contributor. Who knows

Answer 10

They'd be hiding, running around like a chicken with its head cut off, and rotting in prison.

If we didn't go into Iraq...

1) We would have been able to capture or kill Bin Ladden, Zawahiri, and the final surviving Al Qaeda leadership in Afganistan more than 3 years ago, with a massive "troop surge" there, instead of outsourcing the job and letting them escape into Pakisistan.

2) Instead on bleeding billions of dollars in Iraq...
***We would have the money to fund the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agengy to properly crack down on illegal immigrants and protect the borders, both North and South. We'd have a better economy and it would prevent Al Qaeda from sneaking into this country.

***We would have enough money to triple the funding for EVERY local and state law enforcement agency. This would allow them to update their equipment and double the number of police officers on the streets. Overall crime rates would drop, and Al Qaeda needs to be fought using law enforcement "in the trenches" of every city that can provide better intel for the types of criminal operations terrorist organizations use to get funding. If you don't believe me look at Afganistan. Al Qaeda and the Taliban government that supported them got millions in funding from the opium trade. In fact the Taliban have been regaining strength because (1) we don't have enough military forces to kill those f**kers and (2) we haven't supported the Afgan government enough to stop the resurgence in opium production, which ends up getting sold all over the world, including America. THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE THAT AL QAEDA IS PROFITTING AND GAINING FUNDS THROUGH ILLEGAL OPERATIONS. We need to cripple funding by going after drug cartels, gunrunners, counterfit goods, counterfiet prescription drugs, human trafficers, and other criminal operations, THAT MEANS WE NEED MORE COPS.

3) We'd still have ALL THE ALLIES (not just Britain) from around the world that had rallied around America, gave us support, and were willing to do what it takes to fight radical terrorist hiding and operating in their country, that may be plotting against America, but now because of this Administration, all of those allies have abandoned us and basically said "You're F**king crazy! We ain't doing s#!t for you anymore." and as a result we've given Al Qaeda places to operate freely in other countries.

4) We would not be indebted to China for BILLIONS which has weakened our economy and they have used that money to steal our technology and build up their military.

5) We would not look so stupid and weak to countries like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran that have been able to capitalize on the fact that we have alienated our allies. Because of this corrupt and incompetent Adminitration and their Republican goons in the Congress and Senate, these countries have been able to turn percieved weakness into actual weakness.

So, like I said... if we were not in Iraq, Al Qaeda would be hiding, running around like a chicken with its head cut off, and rotting in prison. The majority of countries would have continued to support us and denied them a place to operate, their top leaders would all be dead or captured in Afganistan, they'd have no funding from their criminal enterprises, and they'd be in jail for breaking immigration/drug/commercial trade laws even if we can't nail them for being connected to terrorism.