I was against this war, at least the timing of it, and the way it was carried out. I am in favor of pulling our troops out of Saudi Arabia. I'm not in favor of it because the terrorists want it that way, but because we don't need them over there. That's an instance where we don't need to meddle. I'm also in favor of cutting support for Israel and Palestine and helping them to get their acts together. I'm not in favor of it because the terrorists want the U.S. to stop supporting ISrael, but because I believe it's the right thing to do.
We get enough world hatred because of our complete support of Israel. If we take over Saudi Arabia, we will become Israel in terms of the lack of peace. I don't want to see that.
I agree with you 100%. It makes no sense to keep troops in Saudi when we have them in Iraq. I'm not saying that's wrong just that Saudi was and is the real culprit in the region. We wouldn't have to mislead or "emphasize" anything to get support to attack Saudi Arabia. The Saudi regime is dirty as hell when it comes to 9/11 and Al-Qaeda.
I will agree with Timing here in the sense that Iraq, while certainly not benevolent, had nothing to do with 9/11 (funding or personnel). We let people believe this, though. And we have made a huge fuss about WMD as well. Not to condone WMD in the hands of any nation, but who doesn't have WMD of some sort or another? And Iraq is fairly embryonic in this regard, while Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (the latter already having nukes) are the two countries we really need to keep an eye on. I do wonder if our pulling out of there means anything, er, militarily. Didn't people close to the administration just yesterday start leaking info that terrorism/WMD were simply points that were emphasized to help justify our invasion? Because we went in to Iraq with the idea of scaring other Arab nations into submission, whether or not the administration will say so. We certainly didn't go in there to "free" anybody. If the Iraqis were free, whom would they elect to run the country? Anti-American fundamentalists. Right or wrong, the U.S. won't let that happen.
Richard Reid (sp?), the shoe bomber, was a citizen of Great Britain. I guess by your logic Great Britain is a sponsor of anti-American, radical Islamic terrorism.
So I guess by your logic, we should bomb every country who we claim is going to put their supposed WMD on a raft and float it across the Atlantic because they have no other means to deliver their mythical weapons.
If you have any links to back up your thesis other than referring to the hijacker's origin of birth I'm all ears.
Well I'm also in favor of getting the troops out of Iraq asap. The only way I would like to see troops there is if they are part of a UN force helping the new Iraqi govt. at the request of that govt.
This is one of the reasons that the war was a good thing. It removed the need for a continued military presence in Saudi.
It is meaningless to debate this topic with you, because you clearly don't even read a newspaper. The link was proven by Iraqi intelligence papers found by the British.
I'm sorry but that made absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. People use the fact that most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia therefor Saudi Arabia is responsible. If that's the case then shouldn't that logic extend to the Shoe Bomber as well? How did your response relate to that? Please explain.
My response was sarcastic as your shoe bomber response was. The point I was making was that there are people out there who are still using the terrorist connection reasoning as well as the WMD reasoning for the war on Iraq. What's more of a stretch, claiming Saudi Arabia had a connection to Al Queda or Iraq. And furthermore, I never claimed Saudi Arabia's government was connected to Al Queda.
