Why do Left-Liberals attack the U.S. & its leaders in a time of war, but ignore our true enemy- radical Islam?

Question

The left thinks it's courageous and patriotic to attack the President, but that's not only easy, it's deeply ingrained on both sides of the political spectrum. Don't forget the '90's when the right voiced its many disagreements with President Clinton. What distinguishes the left and right, however, is that the right is not afraid to call evil what it is, and currently it is in the form of radical Islam and its Jihad. George Clooney and Michael Moore have a right to criticize President Bush and that's ok-- it's their prerogative. But in the spirit of balance how about the possibility of Mr. Moore waddling up to the leaders of CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) and asking why they won't consistently denounce Islamic violence. Is that asking too much?

Answer 1

Spot on! Radical Islam is driving Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban, and they've picked this fight. It is a fight to the death for them, and so it must be with us, if we are to see an end to the terrorism they are causing not only in Iraq, but everywhere. Their objective is to wipe us out. Bush has recognized it, the liberal left has not. All I can say is, the next administration had better be clued in as well, or we'll be fighting a lot more of this war on our own soil.

Answer 2

Another attack against the non-existant 'left' liberals'. The strawman is getting more Raggety-Anne everyday. Just for once I'd like to see these guys defend the totally bogus policies and politics of the Bush Junta without dragging the tired, old dead corpse of their favorite construct, 'THE LIBERAL' into the equation. Right behind the 'THE LIBERAL' comes Michael Moore, who has exactly 1/1000 of the exposure of 'Decider' and yet 3/4 of the American public agree with Mike and disagree with George. Strange but true. Given right wing radio on the air 24/7 and FOX Network continually workin' the room with their Happy Talk Iraq blather you'd think that there wouldn't be a murmer of opposition to the Bush Banditos 'take over the world' BS. Yet, people do see what's real and what's nonsense...which only proves Honest Abe's assessment....'You can't fool all of the people all of the time'! Hiding behind the antics of the Islamic nitwits doesn't hide the goofball antics of the Bush nitwits, no matter how hard you try to blame the non-existant liberal boogyman for all that's bad in the world! It ain't workin', bro....Bush is the enemy and the sooner this bum is gone the sooner we can actually come to grips with the 'other' enemy. No kiddin'!

Answer 3

It is patriotic and courageous to attack the bush Administration, if you believe they have done whatever they can to curtail American freedoms at home while destroying our reputation abroad. Further, it is a duty.

Defense of the Constitution and the political independence of the Supreme Court enforces that document is patriotism by definition. If one believes that the suspension of habeus corpus, the sanction of government sponsored torture and the wholesale and illegal wiretapping of millions of citizens without due process is a corruption of our democracy, then attacking the source of the corruption is patriotic.

As for challenging the American Muslim bodies, why wait for Michael Moore? Is there a piano tied to your tucchus? Good idea, and go for it!

Patriotism can be defined in many ways. I am a social progressive/fiscal conservative who admires those who defend the Constitution from the attacks of a corrupt conspiracy of a like unseen since Cato, Bibulous and Cicero conspired to obstruct the elected Consul Julius Caesar.

Patriotism, someone remarked, is the last refuge of a scoundrel. The true patriots are the ones who bring the scoundrel to justice.

Answer 4

I have criticized our leadership but not attacked our country. That you cannot tell the difference is very disturbing.
As fo radical islam being our true enemy - if that is the case why is our current administration aligned with the ultra radicals in Saudi Arabia while bringing down a secular government in Iraq? Why did they by thier own admission stop looking for the terrorists who attacked us in order to invade an unrelated country?
As for Moore asking CAIR the question you asked - he is probably not completely ignorant and so knows they would point him to thier uncategorical rejection of terrorism and all violence against innocents.
http://www.cair.com/AmericanMuslims/AntiTerrorism.aspx
That said I have never seen you uncategorically reject all right wing conservative terrorism (such as McVeigh and the Olympic Park bomber) - why not?

Answer 5

Many liberals feel that the problem of Islamic extremism is just being made worse under these policies. It is in that context that the left disagrees with the war in Iraq. To my knowledge, nobody protested the war in Afghanistan or the pursuit of OBL.

The "attack" is not on the U.S., but on the policies that will insure the problem of Islamic extremism will continue to increase for generations. You are worrying more about the president than you are the country. That is why you think liberals hate the U.S. That is completely false.

Answer 6

1. Libs dont support any type of terrorism and I don't think Cons do either.

2. This is an occupation not a war. Wars are fought between states. Have clear defined enemies and an objective.

3. If Bush did a good job with it there would be no need to attack him.


OBL and his men did this... OBL is still at large. We don't even run the operations in Afaganstan now. Its a NATO command.

Who killed more Americans?

Bush in Iraq which had nothing to do with 911?

Or OBL on 911?

Roughly 3000 Americans and 2 billion ($2,000,000,000.00) in Damages on 911

Roughly 4000 dead American Troops and 1 trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000.00) in damages.

Answer 7

Could it be that "radical Islam" would be a lot less radical if we were not invading and occupying their homeland? Their version of FOX news is probablly telling them to "fight them over there so we won't have to fight them here."

You seem to have completly bought into the notion that Islam has been sitting around patiently all these years, hating America just because we are free. And for no reason at all, they have decided to attack us and our ideals. Believe it or not, the policies we follow in different parts of the world have a lot to do with how people see the United States and how they act towards us. To believe that Islamic extreamists just decided to hate us out of the blue is unrealistic, and dangerous.

Answer 8

most on the left that I know do denounce terrorists and islamic radicals...

but, that's kind of like saying you don't like child molesters... it's blatantly obvious...

your only example is CAIR... which no one really "cares" about... I think I've ever only heard one conservative denounce them... EVER... on here or on TV?

so, hey... I'll denounce them now... so that makes TWO... AND I WATCH THE NEWS EVERY DAY... AND READ THE PAPER...

but, why don't the conservatives read the 9-11 report, and maybe actually go after those that did it... they NEVER were in Iraq, which is where we are centrally focused?

are you just blaming liberals to distract everyone from your parties failures with Osama?

Answer 9

Why do Neo Cons ignore the murderer of September 11th, Osama bin Laden? Why is he still hiding somewhere in the area of Pakistan or Afghanistan? Why is the murderer still walking free?

What is the "War on Terror"? Isn't it just inflaming Islamic hatred against the U.S., since they claim that it's a "Crusade" against Islam? Isn't that what it is?

Answer 10

Oh how blind so many are.

The Left has a plan to regain the White House. Nothing is more important than that. They have proved it this entire year with all the investigations.

And we have seen it in these questions, constantly throwing empty accusations hoping something will stick.

Remember how many times Libby was going to lead them to Cheney and Bush?

And they still haven't gotten the spending bills done due on 1 Oct. But they sure have tried to surrender in Iraq often enough.