and bush has actually increased the threat of terrorism. while the simple view is that they're evil and that's that, but the real view of experts is that this is blowback. terrorism came about due to the hatred we created with our manipulations and heavyhandedness in the region. the invasion of iraq has increased the number of terrorists, caused much more resentment, and destabilized the region even further.
I've heard that slander raised repeatedly by the pacifist Bush-hating left, but I've yet to see any hard evidence to support that notion. It's pure anti-Bush propaganda.
aside from the fact that people who actually study these things say the same thing. what hard evidence do you need?
What people, what evidence?
I only hear the allegation made, I see no hard numbers or evidence.
It's just liberal myth and propaganda.
i guess 9/11 wasn't hard evidence, huh?
Evidence of what? That Bill Clinton had ignored the threat of Al Qaida for 8 years, despite Mogadishu, despite the 1995 Khobar Towers bombing, despite the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, despite the U.S.S. Cole bombing in 2000, to name just a few?
9/11 demonstrated that Bush had barely been in office 8 months, and that since he didn't have enough time yet to pass, let alone implement, new policies of his own in that time, 9/11 was a situation that he inherited from Clinton, that FBI investigators said was a plot begun in
1998.
These type of attacks have been pre-emptively stopped since Bush took office. There's a lot that Bush has done wrong, but on this I support him. And if Al Qaida is "growing all the time" why are they leaving Iraq in defeat, as intercepted internal Al Qaida communications in Iraq reveal?
Yours is a partisan liar's argument, that ignores the true facts.
Your side likes the simple "they hate us for our freedom" because you don't like the concept of blowback since that involves America doing something wrong. There are many more countries that are "freer" and more liberal than we are, but we're the one that's been in there fucking about in the region for 50 years.
Great, Ray, if your patriotism belongs to these other nations, why don't you move there?
You also ignore the participation of the British, French, Russians and Chinese in Africa and the Middle East, as well as other parts of the world. Again, yours is a distorted anti-American argument, that demonizes the U.S. for what every other nation is doing, leveraging its influence for its own military and economic interests.
I again repeat what I've said often:
The U.S. has done more good and less evil than any other nation in history, with the power it has.
Mistakes yes, but also a greater good, that you choose to partisanly bury, in your rabid anti-Americanism.
The simple fact is, we haven't been attacked again since 9-11, and Al Qaida is on the retreat in Iraq.
um, aren't we fighting the terrorists in Iraq? Therefore every single death and act of violence done there is a terrorist attack. Bush made it easier to attack us by putting the soldiers there and then fucking over the Iraqi people to the point that more people hate us and have a reason to want to fight us.
Saying Bush is successful in preventing terrorism because we haven't been attacked is such a logical fallacy. That's like me saying that my shirt prevents cancer because I don't have cancer.
It's not like we were having attacks all the time and then they stopped. There have been very few attacks on American soil in the past 230 years. And the one attack on Bush's watch showed his poor leadership. He ignored warnings, sat in inaction for 7 minutes after being told about them, and then attacked the wrong country.
Wow, 7 whole minutes!
Again:
Mogadishu, 1994
Khobar Towers, 1995
Kenya and Tanzania U.S. Embassies, 1998
U.S.S. Cole, 2000
Please name for me the sucessful attacks on the U.S. since 2001.
Oh, that's right, there haven't been any.
God forbid you should give Bush credit for that.
As Hitler would have, as the Japanese would have.
Hitler had control of a large military that was capable of conquering countries and spreading across the world. Saddam could barely feed his people. He didn't have the resources to be a threat. Bin Laden didn't have a country or a military, he has a small group that is funded by his money. The key to victory would be to find his funds and freeze them.
Which is one of the things the U.S. has been doing since 9/11. But Al Qaida also receives funding from muslim charities worldwide.
Al Qaida has been estimated to be about 60,000 to 100,000 strong worldwide. With a lot of popular mon-military supporters beyond that, throughout the muslim world, and muslims in the U.S. and Europe. They don't have invading armies, but they can wage grandiose bombings such as 9/11, and as they have with Madrid trains and London subways.
With your head-in-the-sand denial motivating policy, Al Qaida would be dismissively enabled to get chemical, biological or "dirty bomb" nukes, to kill thousands more.
Stuffing our heads in the sand and abandoning our allies abroad is not the way to fight islamic expansionism.
ok, well no one is suggesting that.
No, quite the contrary, that is
exactly what you're suggesting. There's no actual threat, you say, and all the precautions to contain terrorism are just "right wing paranoia" and "fear tactics".
(And conversely, when Bush oficials prior to 9/11 didn't put the nation on yellow, orange, or red alert, you accused them of not protecting the nation. Now that they take the precautions and cover themselves by taking maximum precautions, you accuse them of "fearmongering". Well, which is it? You can't have it both ways. The only consistency in your views is a partisan hatred of Bush.)
these terrorists aren't the nazi troops storming across the globe. they're a religious fundamental group that is fighting for their homeland and then trying to stop...LIBERALS...in their own countries from creating reform. these conservative villains can't be fought by some big war by bombing some city. unfortunately our conservative villains want a big show to scare people into following their own religious views.
In spite of your distorted hatred of your own country, the
truth is, these muslim fanatics kill a lot of innocent people, utilizing terror to intimidate opposition, in tactics that are comparable to the nazis.
You paint these Al Qaida terrorists, who cut the heads off innocent men and women --who in no uncertain terms engage in ethnic cleansing-- as freedom fighters fighting for their homeland, against evil Americans.
Whereas the truth is, Americans are trying to keep these people (Sunnis, Shi'a and Kurds) from killing each other, to build a democratic Iraq where they can all live in freedom, and grow economically.
