Right in both cases, Iraq and Afghanistan. You can not separate the two. One was a stronghold for the command and control to conduct terrorism, (Afghanistan) and the other was a training ground and harbored the conductors of the terrorist action. To pick one to target would have been worthless, because they would just hide in the other one until hostilities died down, but to attack them where they live, breath, train, and try to get funding has had a profound impact on their ability to further conduct terrorist operations. The plan is working, but you need to understand, that as far back as 1990 we knew that it would be a long arduous journey to complete this task.
2007-12-07 01:11:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by libsticker 7
·
1⤊
4⤋
The War in Afghanistan was and is correct. It is necessary. The war in Iraq never was necessary, all US efforts should have been concentrated in Afghanistan because it has a reputation and a history as being unconquerable, mainly because of the terrain--a difficult enough nut to crack under the best of circumstances, and impossible if you are wasting your resources tied down in an unnecessary war in Iraq. Afghanistan did attack the US, it promoted the 9-11 attacks, it needs to be liquidated. Frankly, I admire Mr. Bush's restraint in dealing with Afghanistan. If I had been President on 9-11 that country would have long since been vaporized, I do admire Mr. Bush's restraint, I would not have held back vengeance.
2007-12-07 09:05:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by jxt299 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
This is an abused question. This is like voting 29 times until you get an answer you like. Bush wasn't wrong in going to Afghanistan . As for Iraq, if you weren't listening to Hussein,I can see where you wouldn't be informed.Hussein expel ed the UN personnel from Iraq to keep them from investigating arms production or storage. He also steadily threatened the west with destruction with the weapons he had .How many times do you have to be slapped in the face before you take action? The US had just been attacked recently and this could have bolstered this dictators resolve. Things have recently changed for the better in Baghdad as the populace is helping to slow down insurgents from operations, these people are tired of disruption of the good being done there
2007-12-07 09:23:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
We had a right to invade Afghanistan. But we botched the war. We used Clinton's CIA plan (which Gore wanted to start before 9/11) to use the Northern Alliance forces to overthrow the Taliban. This let the people see us working with them and the loved us.
But we then abandoned them by taking the vast majority of troops and money and going to Iraq. We did exactly what Bin Ladin told them we would, invade, destroy and then leave without with out helping.
That is why 1/3 of Afghanistan is now in Taliban hands again. We should have caught Bin Ladin and helped rebuild the country, They could possibly have been the "shining Islamic democracy" Bush keeps hoping for in Iraq.
2007-12-07 09:06:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Since the Taliban who ruled Afghanistan were hosting and protecting Al-Quaida, who conducted the 9/11 attacks on the US, Bush was right to remove this threat by invading Afghanistan.
Take care
Dana
2007-12-07 09:02:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dana A 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Let me explain the reasons behind why the move into Afghanistan was made. Probably most importantly they wanted to establish an oil pipeline to the Caspian Sea, under which the centralized bank will control the profit from. Also, opium production has increased at least 4-fold since United States has been there, why? Because the CIA is the main unit that brings narcotics into the United States. Bush Sr. helped to start this back with Zapata oil before he became CIA director. The same group of people who bankrupted the United States with the Federal Reserve are also the same people who established the central bank of Afghanistan. You can throw in also that it's a great place to add more military bases & such as well. Also, since the United States created a false flag terror attack & used Usama bin Laden as the scapegoat, they had to go on the hunt for him in the public's eye. It's a complete scam & joke! Usama bin Laden has been dead since December 2001. If people would do research on their own & not listen to the controlled mass media on the 6' oclock news they would understand things better. The al-qaeda threat is fabricated, & the war on terror is an illusion created by the people who control our banking systems. They talk about this before it happens, to quote an elite insider & former president Franklin D. Roosevelt "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way. "
2007-12-07 09:09:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by "Downtown" 2
·
1⤊
4⤋
i think the war in Afghanistan is right since that is where the base for Binladen and Taliban was. and they were responsible for the attacks on united states. however i thought the war in Iraq was just bad leadership and the results have proven that it wasn't the right thing to do at this time. they should have delayed the war in Iraq at least by a couple of years after Afghanistan after some form of stability was established in one country. i understand why they invaded both countries at the same time, Binladen would have another place to hide in.
2007-12-07 09:05:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I'm on the fence with this one but dint you think its odd that there is not as many "insurgents" and not the near the level of "civil" unrest in Afghanistan as compared to Iraq? That its become a kind of forgotten war by both sides? Why isn't the Muslim world reacting to Afghanistan being invaded by the infidels as they are to Iraq? I know it has a lot to do with the different "religious" factors in both countries, but why not a jihad in Afghanistan too?
2007-12-07 09:14:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
War in Afghanistan was a neccesary evil. Unfortunately, once Iraq started, we stopped worrying about the real problem. The president say we don't care about OBL anymore. Had we finished that job, it is highly likely that Al Queda would never have been in Iraq, since they weren't there before the war.
By changing our focus, we emboldened our enemies.
2007-12-07 10:30:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Charlie S 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Right to go after Al Qaeda where they lived in Afghanistan; Wrong to put the bulk of our forces in Iraq and allow Al Qaeda to regroup in Afghanistan. But don't tell that to all to Dumbfuckistanis thumbing down the anti-Iraq answers here...
2007-12-07 09:44:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
If we are talking about the war in Afghanistan, then I was all for it. We had proof that the Taliban was supporting Al-Quada (those that were responsible for 9/11). As for the war in Iraq. We had proof that Al-Quada and Saddam hated each other. As a matter of fact, I am sure that the loudest applause over the hanging of Saddam was Al-Quada members.
2007-12-07 09:29:33
·
answer #11
·
answered by White Star 4
·
0⤊
1⤋