"We are fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them?

Question

here. There have been no terrorist attacks in the USA since Bush invaded Iraq."

Assuming that this stament is correct, and shouldn't be completly tossed out for lack of sound logical sense, What would explain why there were no attacks after 9/11, and prior to the invasion of Iraq, that started on March 20, 2003?

Neo Pirate read the question much slower.

nice try Spock (rhp), but that was almost a 2 year span.

hmm i see so they were so disorganized with fear after bombing Afghanistan, that the JFK airport threat, and the transatlantic threat were just hoaxes huh?

true ZardoZ, or if our "allies" don't sell them a ticket.
http://www.cbsnews.com/elements/2006/08/10/in_depth_world/interactivehomemenu1884471.shtml

imagine that Studbolt is a P8riot, and still not one "non-terrorist" apprehended and charged for the anthrax "non-terrorist" scare.
great points!

Answer 1

Those that dismiss the anthrax mailings as not "terrorist attacks" must suspect like I do that the US government perpetuated that fear deliberately. DC snipers not terrorist attacks? Multiple arrests around the US for terrorism? And of course US facilities and personnel targeted all over the world. I'm not sure what people mean by "no more terrorist attacks". If they mean no more attacks by Iraqis in the US well that never happened in the first place. If they mean the "war on terror" is successful then they are in denial.

Answer 2

The attack on 9-11 was carried out by Saudi Arabians. Only two were not Saudis. The leader of the group and the man still free, is a distant relative of the Saudi Royal family.

The Saudi family and the Bush family are very close friends and it is my belief that the Bush family asked the Saudis to stage the attack to give The United States a reason, just cause for an attack on Iraq,which the Bush family wanted even before taking office.

The line about fighting them over there is just so much b.s. to get the gullible people of the USA to swallow the whole thing. And it seems to have worked.

There were no more attacks on us after 9-11 because there didn't have to be. The President got what he wanted, a reason, however thin, to attack Iraq.

There may be another orchestrated attack on US soil to give
the country a reason to attack Iran. So watch for that one. It will probably come during the President's last year in office.

Answer 3

I think it is a matter of planning and time. I believe that as long as Bin Laden is still out there, what is to stop him from planning another attack? Obviously 9/11 was planned for a LONG time, and those responsible are still free. I don't feel any safer or protected. I ask those who always use the "we haven't been attacked since then" phrase....why wasn't the attack on 9/11 prevented or the warnings even taken seriously by our government?

Answer 4

The statement is not correct,the US is fighting a selective war on terror. Domestic terrorism is not included in the stats and is treated differently. We have had terrorists attacks in the US since 9/11

Answer 5

I absolutely HATE that saying.

Seeing as how it was US who trained these PAKI'S to fly planes, that statement makes no sense. If terrorists were to come over here and try to actually INVADE us, do you know how far they'd get? Not very.

We are in Iraq for reasons not related to terrorism. All of the reasons are bologna too, but don't tell Mr. Bush that. Give Al-Queda some time, I am sure they are just patiently waiting for a perfect time and somehow, someway, we are probably training them, again, here in our OWN country.

Answer 6

Over there is such a vague term. Over there could mean Iraq, could mean across the room, or could mean the Middle East. I'm going to go with Middle East. Since we WERE in Afghanistan almost directly after 9/11. So the "there" in this case is the Middle East. Most libs forget we started this in Afghanistan and they were just as eager to kill the Taliban as any warmonger was.

Answer 7

Because there was talk of war at this time, I don't think they expected much of a reaction, after all they hit time after time ad barely got a slap on the wrist. When 9/11 happened they got more of a reaction than they expected so I think they backed off.

Answer 8

You forgot about Afghanistan. We hit them back on October 7, 2001.

Answer 9

Remember Afghanistan. Be blew it to high heaven. It scared the crap out of the terrorist.

It really does amaze me that so few people really understand that Afghanistan was the start. All we hear about is Iraq but people are so narrow minded that they don't know that we have troop deployed in hot spots all over the world. wake up

Answer 10

That argument, "We are fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them here", makes my head hurt. That logic leads to : open a new front (Iran), and we will be even safer at home.