There has to be a reason behind it, we’re just trying to figure it out.
By the way it’s not a “someone”, although “someone” can certainly make things worse for us.
If you seriously want the answers, read the book Ghost Wars. Bear in mind that the first attack happened just after Clinton’s inaugration, so you’d be more honest if you asked what during Bush I and Reagan’s administrations brought these attacks upon us.
And if you want to know what I propose?
Kill Bin Laden and the Al Qaeda leadership, a task that seemed not to interest Bush II. In 2002, not even 6 months after 9/11, Bush said that he was not going to pursue bin Laden. Instead, he started a war with a dictatorship, that while thoroughly nasty, had no relationship to Al Qaeda and was not in any way responsible for 9/11. Instead of scotching terrorism, Bush has created a new haven for terrorism. How the fuck does that make our country safer?
The sad thing is that we know where bin Laden is, in Northwest Pakistan. But we can’t go after him because an American military operation in Pakistan’s borders would destabilize Musharraf’s government and likely cause a new government that would be hotile to the US to arise there.
Until you have the honesty to admit the truth that Bush has fucked up the war, there’s not much point in further discussion with you.
57% of my state is composed of ignorant bigots. History has repeatedly shown that bigots exist in large numbers, often making up a majority. 2004 is no different. To believe that we’ve somehow overcome all of our irrational prejudices and only the prejudices of yesteryear are the bad ones, is hopelessly naive thinking on the conservatives part.
Mark my words, 30 years from now our country will be ashamed that those initiatives passed. I know this, just like I knew for a fact that the WMDs in Iraq were made up bullshit even when 70% of the country believed they existed. I’m right, and time will prove me right.
Look to our past and current foreign policy and events surrounding Gulf War I/II, and I htink with a little objectivity you’ll have your answer.
Sam
Also keep in mind SH was our boy (holds up picture of Rummy shaking hands). Osama was our boy too.
I wonder if Musharref will be a head ache 20 years from now.
Or maybe Allawi if he’s alive…
Can’t agree. There were times equivalent to or worse than this.
I seem to recall a sitting American president, on a state visit to France, being met with massive and violent street demonstrations in the streets of Paris. Said president was Jimmy Carter.
I also recall tons of anti-American sentiment abroad during the Reagan Administration. Yet that administration left us with more allies than we had when we started.
Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia and Slovenia are all NATO countries now. Amazing, after a period of such strident anti-Americanism.
Maybe, though, you’re referring to things like protests as an expression of national will. If that were so, Bush wouldn’t have stood a chance after large protests like were seen in Seattle and Washington.
The war, gobear, has had its ups and downs. In this, it is remarkably similar to most wars in history.
Fallujah will soon be cleaned out of insurgents, though, and Najaf has been quieted. This can only be seen as progress.
Lol he’s right in my face and I forgot about him.
Shocking. You’re forgetting lots of things lately.
Wanna bet? My money is that after announcing an offensive for weeks, the insurgents put down their AK47s and blended into the populace. Once we’re out, we’ll be right back we’re we started.
Quieting down? I don’t know what you mean but see above.
Ok, don’t agree. It’s your prerogative.
I guess “long time” is relative…
And they’re HUGE allies now. I can see that all of our NATO brothers and sisters are just DYING to send their sons and daughters into Iraq and “DEFEND FREEDOM”. Some allies.
Huh? WTF are you talking about? What does national will have to do with international opinions of Americans in general and how they react to our moronic policies?
Hah!
I mentioned that only because you seem to be measuring anti-Americanism abroad on protests and “street” opinion.
No, you mentioned that because you either assumed incorrectly where my opinion comes from, or you were just being an ass again. My guess is some combination of both is closer to the truth.
And please begin using quotes, for fuck’s sake. It’s hard enough reading the filth you spew without having to go over entire previous posts to see what it is you’re going on about.
Sam
No, it’s true. Not all of our NATO allies provided troops.
However, all of the formerly Communist members of NATO, those countries that I mentioned, did in fact send troops.
Every single last one of them.
You might want to check these things out before you post.
I know they sent troops, but how fucking many, Moto? 300 apiece? Did Poland send like 3000 or something? I’d say it was another limp-dicked attempt to “prove” to the world that the US was right because our “Coalition of the willing”(Hah!), sent troops to aid us in the “battle for freedom”.
I knew this all before I posted, I simply don’t consider the commitment made to us by our allies much of a commitment at all.
Sam
Nice hijack but it’s gone on long enoug - let’s get back to one itsy bitsy question -
What great wisdom do we blue staters need to learn from the red staters?
That it takes 270 to win.
That people in said red states shouldn’t be written off.
The importance of not using com-pli-ca-ted words when explaining our politics?
Usually, people have something to show for their smarts. I suggest your party filibuster while it can.