English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why is it this war is still going on, was it not because of 9/11 they went to the middle east?

2007-12-16 14:45:08 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

14 answers

He is #1 on the FBI most wanted list. He is wanted. But Bush said he's "not concerned" about him.

His words. Not mine.

2007-12-16 18:48:53 · answer #1 · answered by Toodeemo 7 · 1 0

Ever watched Tom & Jerry, there are few good parts where they both get along Very well and play "Buddy, Buddy", but in most of the episodes they beatup with each other, so this is the relationship between Bin Laden & Bush.
Secondly for the war, well they both want population of the world to be scared of them, :) where then the B-Admin can draw or have complete control over the Oil Fields countries setting up out stations of army and show is "Big Bro" nature of behaviour against the stupid population.

2007-12-16 16:26:51 · answer #2 · answered by Stupid H 1 · 2 1

If 9/11 were the end of it, the US wouldn't have gone to war in Afghanistan or the Middle East. Of course bin Laden is still wanted. But that's not the whole picture by a long shot.
The 9/11 attacks made it painfully clear to us (in light of plenty of other evidence) that there is a big and strong movement against the West, not excluding the US, by extreme Islamist terrorists. These are mostly located in predominantly Muslim countries, notably Afghanistan and Iraq, among others.
This is why the US went into that region. Not just to bring bin Laden to justice, as satisfying as that might be. But for our own preservation.

2007-12-16 15:50:34 · answer #3 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 3 3

Because the war is not about Bin Laden. Bush lied to gain support for a war. He is not concerned about finding Bin Laden. He is more interested in oil and war contracts to make money. It is very sad that the culprit of 9/11 is not sought and is very questionable of the Bush administration.

2007-12-16 15:05:21 · answer #4 · answered by yourmtgbanker 5 · 3 2

Because Bush was planning on starting this war at his first cabinet meeting in January, 2001.

That was months before 9/11.

Cheney had the Iraqi oilfield maps at his Energy Summit in early 2001, too.

Bush's war in Iraq has nothing to do with Bin Laden.

Bush even let Osama go at Tora Bora so he could start his war in Iraq.

Bush has let Osama live in peace in Pakistan so he can focus on his war in Iraq.

2007-12-16 16:13:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

9/11 is why we went into Afganistan to catch Bin Laden. We went into Iraq because congress and the president felt Saddam was not meeting the requirements of the Gulf War cease fire Saddam signed.

Read Public law 107-243 signed by congress in Oct 2002.

2007-12-16 16:13:59 · answer #6 · answered by Homeless in Phoenix 6 · 2 3

From me, a veteran of Gulf War 1 in 91, and 18 years of service!

Bin Laden still is wanted for what he did...master mind of the attacks of 9/11, that is why we went into Afghanistan,
....but could not catch him there, he escaped into Pakistan after the fight in the mountains,
....but we can not go into Pakistan after him, because if we did it would give an excuse to the extremist in Pakistan to raise up against the Pakistani goverment and destroy it, placing a Taliban regime in its place instead.

Osama will be killed...it is just a matter of time!


On Iraq, Bush had all intentions to take Saddam out from the beginning, off course! because he had plenty of reasons to do that...read on:

Iraq was a war that started in 1991, with the invasion of Saddam into kuwait.
...after we kicked him out of Kuwait war was stopped under a "Cease Fire", NOT a "Peace Treaty"!
....a "Cease Fire" in war is like hitting the "pause" button in your remote control for a tv show, it is still on but stopped...!
...same thing in this case, under the "Cease Fire" of 1991, Saddam was told that he had to comply with all the UN resolutions and respect the "No Fly Zones" or the war could be resumed any minute if he violated ANY of those requirements, like having the weapons inspectors in his country looking at his weapon porgrams, etc

in 1998, he violated those requirements BIG TIME, we almost when to war with him htne! I was in a Navy task force in Dubaih awaiting oders to attack him, but at the last minute the Clinto administration pulled us back.
...we should had taken him out then, remember he was under a "Cease Fire" agreement (or Probation), and just like any criminal violating their probation, they go back to jail, same thing should have happened to Saddam...

...but it took until Bush came into office that the US had someone in theWhite house that was going to hold Saddam accountable for viuolating those "Cease Fire" agreements, and been taken out!

Saddam was due since the 90's!, people just iether are ignorant of ALL the facts or chose to forget!

2007-12-16 16:52:32 · answer #7 · answered by Krytox1a 6 · 1 3

It is all about the money. Heaps of it. No bid contracts.
Poor accounting. Slush funds. Worse. It is about loans
and trade agreements that finance war that exists to
profite elite corporate interests and heads of state. It is
about looting public resources, their liberties, and middle
class lifestyle. It is capitalism run amok. It is a revolution
and reminder that winners write history. It is about blame
control, spin, or whatever political hacks spew.

2007-12-16 15:07:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5 2

Too many people would lose money if the war stopped. The ones who are making all the money are the Americans.

2007-12-16 18:36:26 · answer #9 · answered by the old dog 7 · 2 2

They went to Aghanistan for 9/11. Irak war was for stopping Irak using weapons of mass destruction.

2007-12-16 15:22:42 · answer #10 · answered by Cedarאלי 10452 3 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers