If Kerry were prez everyone in the US would already be under foreign occupation
2007-09-29 13:03:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Greetings. Where did you get the information that the U.S. was attacked by those harbored in Afghanistan? don't tell me you still believe the government fairy tail about a ghost passenger plane that rammed the world trade center and the burning jet fuel (kerosene) caused the building to melt and fall straight down, killing the police and firemen and EMS people kept in the lobby? Has never been any proof or evidence that the attack was carried out by any foreign force. no investigation was even allowed to try to find out who was responsible. 3,000? no, more like 2,000 now. and over 40,000 people were supposed to be working in those towers when they were hit. where did they go? didn't leave the building, police were there to keep people from leaving. didn't you watch the constant television coverage of the event? should have. it was excellent comedy of the blackest sort. And if you are interested in why they do not talk about the Afghanistani being the ones responsible for 9/11, it is mainly the amount of evidence being gathered by independant groups that show without a doubt that the attack was not staged as washington has been telling us all these years now. it was a inside job. Check for yourself and quit with the believing all the propaganda the government passes out these days.
2007-09-29 13:03:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by Rich M 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I guess he was right. Just look at the answers. Instead of addressing the question most people choose to attack John Kerry. No one has mentioned the fact that Osama Bin Laden financed and trained terrorist to attack the US. No one in Iraq has yet to attack the US like Osama Bin Laden has. We have not gone after him. Osama Bin laden must be one bad dude. It appears to me that someone is afraid of him. Must be no one has gone after him. It's a simple fact Osama Bin laden attacked the US and has gotten away with it. Meanwhile the people of Iraq and the people of the US continue to face deaths and casalties every day. meanwhile Osama Bin Laden has not had a missile or bullet shot at him. Nor has anybody even tried to throw a rock at him. Can you imagine what would happen if the Japanese would have waited until now to bomb Pearl Harbor Hawaii. The current thinking we have us attacking China , the Phillipines or even Somoa. But back to your question I would say John Kerry is right. Attacking Iraq has distracted a lot of people from thinking about the real question. Why is the US not going after Osama Bin Laden? How come no one wants his name brought up? People wake up he attacked the US. He has not even be shot at. He is more dangerous than a schoolyard bully. If nothing happens to them they keep doing it. He does pretty smug on those tapes doesn't he? I think he knows he got away with murder in the worse way. He attacked the US and has not faced any consequences. What a shame.
2007-09-29 13:12:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nathan 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes. Kerry and others were right in making that statement.
I feel for the soldiers in Afghanistan who are suffering the same violence, stress, and homesickness that the soldiers in Iraq also face.
Most of the attackers were Saudis. I will never stop asking: Why didn't the U.S. attack and start murdering innocent Saudi civilans instead of REALLY innocent Iraqi civilians.
By the way, Saddam Hussein agreed to leave Iraq and seek asylum in Turkey if the U.S. would spare his country. You didn't hear much about that in the MSM, did you? "w" had his agenda and that was it. And now our men and women are dying and being terribly wounded for...what?
2007-09-29 13:09:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, I believe Kerry was right.
My guess is we don't hear about the war in Afghanistan because there is little controversy about our GIs being there, & there is almost no coverage of that war in our media (& there should be).
To Bush, the Afghan war is a distraction from Iraq.
2007-09-29 12:58:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by bob h 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Not at all. Most of the questions posed here that deal with Iraq, GWB, Afghanistan, so on and so forth are put forth by propagandists like you.
2007-09-29 12:59:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by vegaswoman 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
No, Afganistan is essentially won.
The only thing left in Afganistan is Al Quaeda and the Taliban that have retreated to Pakistan and are regrouping.
The only way we will truely get rid of them all is to have Pakistan allow us to enter their borders or have Musharrif take them out, but since many of his people are Taliban and Al Queada sumpathizers we are kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place since Pakistan has Nuclear weapons and if Musharrif falls we cannot risk Al Queada getting a nuclear weapon and Pakistan won't get rid of their nuclear weapons due to their unstable treaty with India.
2007-09-29 12:58:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by WCSteel 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
Kerry is a moron and a traitor who slandered a whole generation of Nam vets.
If Kerry was President...we would still be waiting to pass his Global Test on Afganistan...
2007-09-29 12:57:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by dr_methanegasman 3
·
6⤊
1⤋
Whenever mel melposty says something, you know the opposite is true.
Kerry, and Murtha were right. Petreus did indeed Betray us.
Bush appears to be protecting Bin Laden with the help of Pakistan.
2007-09-29 12:59:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Kerry was never right on anything.
2007-09-29 12:56:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by ♥ Mel 7
·
5⤊
0⤋