Where would we be now if GWB had not taken the war to the terrorists?

Answer 1

"What Ifs" are always hard to answer... However in this case it is highly likely that several attacks on our soil would have taken place by now... The Islamic Jihadist attack weakness, and by not responding to the first attack we would have shown extreme weakness. Sadly this will be a long war against fanatics intent on our destruction.

Answer 2

Perhaps under foreign occupation - with the American public only concerned with the latest bimbo interviews on brain shrivel inducing network TV (oh - that's much of the population still) - all while Al Queda kept up the attacks unabated. Rock on GWB!!

Answer 3

I monitor my back yard day and night for terrorists, our President is doing such a fine job of protecting us that to date none have been found in my yard. Or maybe it's the smell of ribs smoking that keeps them away? Wake up, we have over a hundred thousand troops in Iraq and they can't tell the difference between a terrorist, an insurgent, a freedom fighter or a civilian with no connection to any of those groups of people. The only terrorists we really need to worry about are the ones in the executive branch of our government. They're killing our soldiers, creating more terrorists in the middle-east and sinking our world image. Our tax dollars would have been more wisely spent protecting our country then in Iraq. We don't have national security, we have color codes to tell us how frightened we should be about the next terrorist attack.

Answer 4

we would be pretending that everything is "grovy"
we can't win the war on terror by having a conversation with them.
only hippies still believe that war in iraq was REALLY for WMD's and terrorist but in reality it was for our global hegemony....the only regional hegemony we don't have anymore is in africa....other than that, we control the whole world including middle east...thanks to war in iraq.
hippies make another funny argument that we are creating more jihadies because of the war in iraq.....i say, so what....lets kill 'em now while we can instead of pretending that everything is grovy and not doing shiit.....by then we would need to be worrying about china....so this is time to take care of jihadies and prepare for china.
even the hippiest network of them all...CNN...is starting to use words like 'success' and 'Iraq' in same sentence.

Answer 5

We American Vets, and Con's, would be fighting THEM here ON OUR OWN SOIL, and about 90% of the lefty's would be on their hands and knees, trying to 'satisfy' the terrorists demands and 'desires'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 6

We took the "War on Terrorism" to the terrorists, then we droppped the ball and went chasing windmills in Iraq.

We'd better off if we hadn't had "Bush 'splendid little war,'" and had focused on destoying Al Qeada, and capturing, trying and executing the people actually responsible for the attack on America on September, 11, 2001.

Answer 7

When the war on terrorist stopped 4 years ago. So I guess the same spot.

He should have continued hunting Al Qaeda instead of going into nation building.

Answer 8

WE WOULD PROBABLY BE MISSING A FEW MORE LANDMARKS. I BELIEVE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ATTACKED AGAIN IF ANY OF THE WIMPS WHO ARE NOW RUNNING HAD BEEN PRESIDENT.

Answer 9

where we are now but with more rights.

by taking the war to the terrorists do you mean invading a random third country that didn't support terror??? or do you mean the hundreds of thousands of innocent people in that country that were killed thus creating more terrorists???

Answer 10

We would still be in Afganistan where the terrorists originated from. Not in a country that had no WMD's.