Why we are in a war against terrorism and why Bush was right and Obama wrong

I was reading a Clive Cussler book called Corsair.

In the book it mentions how almost all states paid tribute to the barbary pirates, except one, the US. Thomas Jefferson declared war on them. It draws a parrell to the present war on terrorism.

It expresses the reasons for the war of terrorism so well I am inspired to transcribe it here.

From page 213...

"...Thomas Jefferson decided the US would no longer pay tribute. For the first time in their history, the pirates were facing a first-class navy that was willing to fight rather than hand over money...Jefferson's unilateral decleration of war against piracy was the beginning of the end for them. One nation had taken a stance against their form of savagery despite the rest of the world continuing to cower.

Even as she said it, the parallels to the present struggle against terrorism sent a chill down her spine. Europe had spend the latter part of the 20th century living under the constant threat of terrorism. There'd been bombings in nightclubs, kidnappings, assassinations, and hijackings all over the continent, with very little response from the authorities.

..The US has taken a similar route following the first attack on the WTC. The government had treated it as a criminal act rather than what it truely was the opening salvo in a war. The perpetrators had been duly arrested and sent to prison, and the matter was forgotten until 9/11.

Rather than ignore the truth for a second time,the government had responded to the 2001 attack by taking the fight back to any and all who had supported terrorism in its many forms. Like it had chosen two hundred years earlier. America had proclaimed to the world that it would rather fight than live in fear."

 

How off the mark can you get? The Bush years were all about making the American people "live in fear" so they could get them behind their unjust wars and their unjust domestic policies.

 

So what does this statement have anything to do with what you posted?

" Why we are in a war against terrorism and why Bush was right and Obama wrong "​

Has Obama not responded to an act of terrorism? Has he ceased going after the perpetrators of 9-11?

 

lol he's from militia-land.

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

No. The attack on 911 created the fear.

Instead of cower llike the rest of the world has done to the terrorists he fought.

He took the fight to the terrorists something not done before.

Obama is weakening the fight by turning it back into a criminal matter instead of a war.

 

1. 9/11 may have created the fear but it was the Bush admin. that used and abused that fear to get the American people to go along with a war that they would not have accepted other wise (Iraq.) And which we know had nothing to do with terrorism.

2. His response was worse than the initial attack. More people have died because of George W. Bush's decision to start this misguided so called "War on Terror" than because of 9/11 itself.

3. He made the mistake of thinking he was fighting a country (or more accurately, an entire region) rather than a criminal organization. Furthermore you could make a very strong argument that we have been "taking the fight" to the terrorists for a very long time by involving ourselves so heavily in the Middle East for so long. Look into the concept of "Blowback." Our actions have essentially created these terrorist organizations in the first place.

4. Nonsense. Thus far Obama has actually doubled the troop level in Afghanistan and he's probably going to end up sending even more troops there. Now I don't agree with this strategy, I personally think he SHOULD be treating it like a criminal act. We should be doing a very pinpointed intelligence operation instead of making this huge mistake of thinking we are fighting countries and armies. But no, this is not what Obama has done thus far - He has actually escalated the war in Afghanistan - so how can you make this claim? It's absurd. It's Bush who mostly ignored Afghanistan so he could fight a war in Iraq that had nothing to do with terrorism!

It's just unimaginable that your "points" could be any more wrong than they are.

 

Ah yes, we are to blame for the Islamic terrorist trying to kill us in the name of Allah. If only we didn't help Israel all would be good.

Damn you are naive Zibblu.

 

Yes and the CIA is "naive" too. They are well aware of the issue with "blowback." Why do you think these people have singled us out? It's sure as hell not because they "hate us for our freedom" - it's because we've been meddling in their neck of the world for years.

It's you that is naive by buying into the neocon talking points. The entire "War on Terror" is a sham built upon lies.

 

There are a lot of criminals who think that police, prosecutors, and Judges and the like are responsible for them being in jail. I guess we should stop locking them up for fear of blowback.

Just because the scum threaten you is no reason to capitulate. You really need to read some history. You might want to read about appeasement.

 

Actually, this is a good issue to bring up.

There are way too many people being put in jail in this country for senseless reasons. We have a much higher rate of incarceration compared to all other civilized countries.

Why is that? Because politicians run "tough on crime" campaigns and implement such "tough on crime" policies to appeal to ignorant voters and because our prison systems have become privatized over the last 30 years which actually creates a profit motive for putting people in jail.

As far as the nonsense about "appeasement" --- No one is saying that we shouldn't respond to the 9/11 attack - what those of us who like to really think about such issues rather than just reacting to them are saying is that we should respond in a pinpointed fashion so that we do not create more terrorists in the future. You have to understand that your actions have consequences. This is basic stuff really.

 

You know it why? CNN told you?

a) Iraq was on the official state sponsor of terrorism list

b) Iraq was the HQ of the Abu Nidhal group

c) According to the CIA and DOD Iraq and Al Qaida had ties that went back a decade. The DIA said they had a "mature, symbiotic, relationship".

At least those killed weren't more american civilians.

What did Pres. Bush accomplish

a) He protected the US from further terrorist attacks. It wasn't because of lack of trying. There were over 10 terrorist attempted attacks within the US foiled because of Pres. Bush.

b) More than 2/3rds of the Al Qaida leadership are dead or captured.

c) Bin Laden is hiding in a cave in the middle of nowhere using his chamber pot rather than leading parades.

That's the main point. Al Qaida wants to give the foreign terrorist rights and put them on trial. Hello?? Where is he going to bring the witnesses from? In a trial almost everything is disclosed. That information that could be disclosed could help stop further terrorist attacks if it wasn't disclosed.

Law enforcement normally deals with crimes after they occurred. What Pres. Bush has changed the fight against terrorism into preventing attacks, and not prosecuting offenders after attacks occurred.

That is a rediculous argument. America should never tailor it's foreign policy based on whether it makes terrorists angry or not. America should base it's foreign policy based on its interests.

American foreign policy should never be based on what the terrorists think. That is nuts.

Based on what information have troops been doubled in Afghanistan.

Pres. Bush never ignored Afghanistan. He is the one who eliminated the Taliban from power.

However, Hussein was a major sponsor of terrorism. It's not just about one state sponsor of terrorism. There are several. Hussein was a major one and he had to go too.

I would much rather the fronts in the war in terrorsm be in Iraq and Afghanistan, than NYC, Florida, and CA.

Pres. Bush has kept the couldn't safe from further terrorist attacks. Rather than cower like what was done in the previous attack on WTC, he took the fight to the terrorists.

Impotent responses like bill clinton's firing of cruise missiles into empty tents and dropping bombs on aspiran factories only encouraged the terrorists to attack the US.

Pres. Bush is a hero. He is the greatest president in my lifetime.

Obama is an idiot, he is undoing what has kept this country safe for the past 8 years and putting our country in jeopardy. He cares more about giving terrorists rights and keeping them from attacking this country.

 

Because we exist. Because we don't live the way they want us to live. Because we are not ruled by a caliph.

It doesn't matter.

We don't base our foreign policies based on the feelings of the terrorists.

 

"Pres. Bush is a hero. He is the greatest president in my lifetime."

HA!

I'm not going to waste anymore time on this nonsense. You're clearly living in some sort of alternate reality that has nothing to do with this world.

OK... one more:

HA!!! NO! Jesus H. Christ! Missing the point much? No that is exactly WRONG again. They have attacked us because of our foreign policy not because of the way we live or any of that other nonsense. That's a variation on the "they hate us for our freedom" BS.

Our actions have consequences.

 

You just answered your own question

 

Well by all means lets change our foreign policy from one that benefits the United States to one that benefits terrorists threatening us. I am sure that will make us safe.

 

Actually Obama has been ignoring the commander's pleas for more troops in Afghanistan.

http://www.rr.com/news/topic/articl...te_House_nixes_Cheneys_charges_on_Afghanistan

"Obama is nearing a decision on whether to significantly expand the U.S. war posture in Afghanistan by honoring a military request for thousands of additional forces. The decision had been expected as early as mid-August, when Obama's new war commander prepared a harsh assessment of deteriorating conditions in the 8-year-old conflict."

 

This brings us full circle to my original post.

In the book I was reading it referred to the Barbary pirates at that time. Country after country paid tribute to the pirates so they not be disturbed or harassed.

Thomas Jefferson did something different, he declared war on them, rather allow them to dictate to the US their terms, and the US cower in fear.

Terrorists have no right to dictate to the US our foreign policy.

This is similar to standing up to a bully rather than giving that bully your lunch money.

I don't care if US foreign policy upsets terrorists. In fact, if US foreign policy upsets terrorists it's probably a good foreign policy.

What do we have now? A president who cares more about apologizing to the world for the US, and giving in to the terrorists. He actually cares more about the rights of terrorists than of protecting american civilians.

Obama is making it harder for america's mighty forces to combat terrorists, and easier for terrorists to strike america again.

This is what the US gets for electing such a moron as president of the US.

 

Are you saying that when fight in Afganistan is over, it will be easier for terrorist to attack america?

 

What I am saying is that making the war against terrorism a criminal/law enforcement matter rather than a war makes it easier for terrorists to attack america.

Foreign terrorists don't need aclu lawyers, and trials. They need to be destroyed before they attack again.

 

the war on terror is continous, the war in Afganistan is not