Wednesday, November 09, 2005

How's the war going?

How's the war on terror going? Another terror attack this time in Jordan where at least 18 dead and 100 injured. Nice job W.

10 comments:

Robert E Wilson said...

Of course, none of this stuff ever happened before the Bush administration. In fact, didn't Bush invent the term "terrorism".

Erik said...

No he didn't and I never said that. But again these are happening under his watch we are torturing people to get information and nothing has been won in this war. That's why I'm blaming W. And I'm saying this all along as well the war on terror is against Bin Laden and Al Queda which is who attacked Jordan more then likely as the reports indicate. So I would say the war on terror as well as the war in Iraq are failing AS OF NOW. Now that's not saying that can't change but as of not they are both miserable failures for W.

Erik said...

and if Bush didn't claim how much we were making a dent in terror plots there would be no comment from me. But he has.

Robert E Wilson said...

So, now Bush is responsible for the security of Jordan? Does that mean the rest of the world too? Boy, you sure like to give power to the president. It sounds like you feel he is president of the world.

But wait a minute! Anti-terrorist forces made a major coup two days ago in finding a large bomb-making factory in Australia. A large-scale terrorist attack against Sydney and Melbourne was thwarted. Shouldn't Bush get credit for this too? Or does he only get blamed for when bad things happen?

It's not just you. This major victory against terrorism was hardly mentioned in the L.A. Times yesterday. Instead, the Times has devoted a huge amount of its front page coverage the past two days in both the main section and the California section to gleefully report that Gov. Schwarzeneggar's initiatives were shot down.

Erik said...

I'm saying if the war on terror is a success yesterday wouldn't have happened I'm also pointing out something you said recently that Iraq was a threat to Israel when we are talking about that and that had something to do with that war like Israel couldn't defend themselves

Robert E Wilson said...

Huh? I've read your statement 5 times and I can't understand what you are trying to say.

Erik said...

I am trying to say that since Bush has failed miserably to catch Bin Laden and in fact instead of hurting them he has helped them in recruiting he is responsible for every terror attack cause of his lack of foreign policy and his shoot first ask question later

Robert E Wilson said...

Again, your suggesting that terrorism didn't exist before Bush. It was alive and well. Because of 9/11, terrorist attacks make more headlines these days but make no mistake, terrorism has been a major problem in many parts of the world before Bush.

Erik said...

If I recall when President Clinton wanted to go after terrorists the right ridiculed him so much. So remember that.

Erik said...

I state Bush is responsible for the following reasons:

Bush wanted to take the war to them. Hasn't worked

Bush has forgotten who is responsible for 9/11 (Osama Bin Laden and Saudi Arabia) and since he has forgotten and invaded Iraq he has created more terrorists after all how many times has he said Iraq is now the central front on the war on terror.