WHY IS THE "WAR AGAINST TERRORISM" AGAINST IRAQ IF OSAMA IS FROM AFGANISTAN? DO WE, AMERICANS, REALLY SEE THOSE COUNTRIES AS DIFFERENT OR DO WE SEE THEM AS ONE? IT JUST AMAZES ME HOW THE PRESIDENT TURNED AWAY FROM AFGANISTAN AND FOCUSED ON IRAQ AND THEIR "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION",WHEN THEY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. I GUESS HE DIDNT WANT HIS FAMILY FRIENDS TO GO TO WAR WITH HIM. AFTER ALL ARENT THEY (BUSH AND BIN LADEN FAMILIES) STILL IN CAHOOTS ABOUT OIL COMPANIES AND EXPANSION? I JUST NEED SOME MORE CONVINSING INFORMATION ON WHY WE ARE IN IRAQ AND WHY OSAMA BIN LADEN STILL HASNT BEEN FOUND......
Bookmark/Search this post with:
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The war on terrorism wasn't a war on Osama. It was a war on terrorism and those who fund and support it.
Iraq has clear ties to terrorist groups that were detailed way back in the 1990's when President Clinton launched some missles against Saddam and sought to bring sanctions against Iraq (which didn't work.)
When we talked about fighting in Afghanistan, the original response from the left was "Why fight there? Iraq is the problem!" Then we went to Iraq and then they said "Why fight in Iraq? Iran is the problem!" Now we're contemplating fighting in Iran and they're complaining because we can't caught Osama yet (assuming that he is still alive, which it appears to be)
He is hiding, most sources say, in the mountains in Pakistan, sheltered by a series of anti-american groups.
We'll find him. The question I have is, when we capture or kill Osama, what will the left have to say about continuing the war against terrorism?
You are blaming the left for wanting to go to war with Iraq? Were they really the ones shouting the loudest about ties to 9/11 and WMDs? I don't think so, and it definitely isn't the left wanting us to go to Iran, all you have to do is look as far as the Democratic Debates to see that the people who did vote to go to war (Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, and others) are trying to make amends for voting for the war in the first place. If they are criticizing themselves for voting for the Iraq war you can be pretty sure they aren't going to vote to invade Iran or even be an advocate for it.
back during the Clinton Adminsitration, everyone on the left was talking about the clear threat that Saddam was, and how intel shows that he has and has used WMDs on people within his country (100k Kurds killed by gas) and that he needs to stop his oppression of the poor and his ties to people who support terrorism.
President Clinton supported and pushed for sanctions against Saddam, and even at one point launched cruise missles against Iraq.
Hillary Clinton (then the First Lady) also agreed that he was a great threat. All of the Dems in congress that now are opposed to the war, praised President Clinton for his actions.
Do I blame the left for the war? No. I mearly suggest that they are being incredibly hypocritical in their support for the war and are more motivated by politics than the safety and security of the United States.
This also applies to many on the Republican side (note i said Republican and not Right . . . there are too many liberal republicans) who opposed Clinton's fighting of Saddam out of political reasons.
Don't forget that Saddam put out word that he would fund any suicide bomber's family the equivalant of 25,000 american dollars as an incentive for people to strap bombs to themselves, run into public places and blow themselves up (on the off chance of catching a US soldier or, in Israel, of killing a Jew.)
Don't forget who allowed Saddam to come to power to begin with. Also there is a difference between being hypocritical and thinking that at the time they were voting for a good thing. They (the left) along with the rest of the American people and world were misled about the war in Iraq. Yes, they voted for it, but they also regret that decision, which they should be allowed to do without it being called hypocrisy.