Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.


The release of the NIE documents that al-Qaeda and similar groups have expanded their operations and ability to carry our attacks against the U.S. It also clearly demonstrates that simply ending al-Qaeda operations in Iraq will not change the level of danger from futurte attacks on the U.S.

Below are changes we have made to help prevent another attack on the U.S.:

Increased cooperation and surveillance by domestic agencies like the FBI, NSA, and CIA.

We have substantially improved data sharing with both our own agencies and with law enforcement and intelligence agencies thought the world.

We have solicited the help of banks, communications companies and alike to track potential terrorists.


Areas where we have not done what is needed or that our actions have increased the threat of future attacks:

Failed to safeguard our borders and ports.

Failed to provide the needed funding for first responders.

Failed to destroy the al-Qaeda operations especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Diverted our resources to Iraq that has enabled al-Qaeda et al to have yet another base of operation in Iraq.

Provided a recruiting tool to radical Islam by invading and occupying Iraq.

Comments (Page 3)
5 Pages1 2 3 4 5 
on Jul 18, 2007
Actually he did destroy their operations in Afghanistan that is why they are in Pakistan now. It took them this long to regroup, no thanks to the Pakistani Gov't. But of course don't blame them for not being helpful.”

Then how has al-Qaeda reconstituted itself as the NIE states? The truth is we never finished the job in Afghanistan and not al-Qaeda is as strong as before 9/11 per out intelligence estimate.


they reconstituted themselves in Pakistan among sympathizers.
on Jul 18, 2007
“They reconstituted themselves in Pakistan among sympathizers.”

The NIE said they are in Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as Iraq. In other words the Bush war on Terrorism took al-Qaeda that was principally in Afghanistan and allowed it to expand to three countries. Great Work George!

Regardless where al-Qaeda is operating the point is that the threat from al-Qaeda is as strong as before 9/11. That after Bush attacked Iraq to fight the War on terrorism. Sounds like the Bush approach has failed because the group that was responsible for 9/11 is as dangerous as ever after 6 years of our effort, ½ Trillion dollars, thousands of dead American Military and over 26,000 injured. That is NOT what I would call a successful operation. We need to end our involvement in the Civil war in Iraq and concentrate on al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq or where ever they operate.
on Jul 18, 2007
EVERY news agency is saying the very same thing.


LOL.  New agencies are typically anti-war, and anti-Bush, so they have about as much credibility on reporting the real story as you do.


How is that possible if we have destroyed al-Qaeda?


You just don't get it do you?  Nobody said we have destroyed al-qaeda, but have certainly made them weaker, and they are certainly not walking around freely like they were before Bush.  But once again, just tell blame Bush and go on with your usual rants about Iraq.  LOL.


on Jul 18, 2007

". New agencies are typically anti-war, and anti-Bush, so they have about as much credibility on reporting the real story as you do. "

That does not mean what they report is not accurate!


"You just don't get it do you? Nobody said we have destroyed al-Qaeda, but have certainly made them weaker, and they are certainly not walking around freely like they were before Bush. But once again, just tell blame Bush and go on with your usual rants about Iraq. ."

The problem is they are as strong as before 9/11 per the NIE and now are operating in three countries. We also have Hezbollah operating in Iraq where they did not operate before Bush invaded Iraq. You refuse to understand that our invasion of Iraq has not only put us in the middle of a Civil War but allowed al-Qaeda and Hezbollah to operate in Iraq. In addition because we did not finish al-Qaeda in Afghanistan they have now spread into Pakistan. If you believe the way Bush has fought terrorism is effective you are out of your mind. This is a poor result given the 6 years we have been at this fight and given the cost in lives, injuries and dollars. What is worse we are now in just as much danger from these NUTS and that puts more pressure on our homeland security who must be right 100% of the time to prevent another 9/11 or worse!
on Jul 19, 2007
what i have been hearing is that al quida and the taliban are attacking out of pakistan.

so yes they are in afghanistan but only during a short time everyday and then they run back to pakistan.

we have been in just as much danger from these nuts since the 1990s.

no according to the nie they are as strong since 9/11

on Jul 19, 2007
I said prove it is not true. Bush spend 5 years after 9/11 not enforcing existing laws and did not request the funding from the GOP controlled Congress for the manpower or fence/equipment.


That's funny, I thought I did. Here's the web page. See for yourself. You blamed Bush but in reality it was the Democrats.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,244264,00.html

Here's what it said:

The law passed last year says Congress, now in control of Democrats who generally oppose the fence, don't have to release money to build it until they approve of how the fence will be built.


House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said this week Democrats still want to secure the border but want "the best possible way to do it."

Hoyer voted against the fence last year, along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Thompson and 128 other Democrats in the House. In the Senate, 26 Democrats voted for the fence law, including Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who chairs the Appropriations Committee. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada voted against the fence.


YOu blamed Bush but in reality it was the Dems. Want more?

Then how has al-Qaeda reconstituted itself as the NIE states? The truth is we never finished the job in Afghanistan and not al-Qaeda is as strong as before 9/11 per out intelligence estimate.


I guess I'll take a tip from your own rule book and repeat myself again to you. Al-qaeda is not an organization that is sitting in an office conducting terrorist attacks like a business. Al-qaeda is spread all across the world. It is what makes it difficult to destroy them. Al-qaeda can not be destroyed regardless of what Bush says. But they can be slowed down and sent hiding which is what we did. The report says they are getting stronger, well what did you expect? They are determined to destroy the US. You didn't really think they would just go away once we entered Afghanistan and removed the corrupt Gov't and disrupt their training camps. You really are ignorant. And they may be growing but they are not capable of coordinating a large enough of an attack because we have them on the run. What you are talking about are what are being called Al-qaeda wanna-be's. People who are inspired by Al-qaeda and using the name to attempt attacks that have not worked. Which to me would say we are doing good. Of course you are too stupid to see that.

The NIE clearly said the Iraq war was the main reason al-Qaeda was an able to recruit new converts that are willing to attack the U.S.


Really? Then tell me how did they recruit people before 9/11? Tell me how Al-qaeda was what it was before we went to Iraq? These people may be willing to attack us, but they can't. You, Sir, are a coward. You fear Al-qaeda, you fear we are nothing but an incompetent country that can not defend itself. If you are so afraid maybe it's time for you to leave the country. Move to somewhere where Al-qaeda will scare you no more. If you too afraid to stand up to them, get the fuck out then.

You have just shown you can not disprove any of the points I made.


That's an opinion. I did a good job disproving most of your points, except 1 and I admitted that from the beginning. You are a coward that's all that is to it.
on Jul 19, 2007
That does not mean what they report is not accurate!


Actually it does.  The media in this country take a one-sided view of Iraq and rarely, if every, report progress and good news, and have been caught many times reporting false stories related to Iraq.  Something you should be familiar with.


on Jul 19, 2007
Reply | Edit | Delete




Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, July 19, 2007
What I have been hearing is that al Qaeda and the Taliban are attacking out of Pakistan.

So yes they are in Afghanistan but only during a short time everyday and then they run back to Pakistan.

We have been in just as much danger from these nuts since the 1990s.

no according to the NIE they are as strong since 9/11

YES the NIE does say al-Qaeda is AS STRONG AS 9/11. After 6 Years of trying to destroy al-Qaeda to conclude they are as strong as when we stared shows the Bush Fight On Terrorism is NOT WORKING!!!!!

\Bush wants us to believe we are in Iraq and must WIN as he puts it because of al-Qaeda and like groups. EVERY senior Military leader past and present has acknowledged :

85-90% of the fighting is between the factions within Iraq NOT al-Qaeda.

They have acknowledged we can not militarily win a Civil conflict between the Iraqi factions. ONLY by political accommodations can the sectarian violence end. That is what is NOT taking pace and so this surge is like "Whack -a- Mole” In those areas where we have sent added force the violence is down. In areas that have been stable for YEARAS the violence is out of control. When we remove the added forces from the areas where the fighting has been reduced the is almost 100% chance the fighting will return. The reason for this the surge has not and CAN NOT work is because it can NOT resolve the reason for MOST of the fighting which for control of Iraq!
on Jul 19, 2007
ONLY by political accommodations can the sectarian violence end.


yes but that is not our work that is the work of their government.

really i thought i heard on the news that the tribal leaders in anbar have switched to our side. and tribal leaders in another area are also starting to change sides.
on Jul 19, 2007
“yes but that is not our work that is the work of their government.”

Correct and we were to provide then the time to accomplish that. However it is NOT taking place and now they are going on recess while our military continues to die giving them a chance to NOT ACT. That is BS. Time to GET OUT. I told my Senators and Congressman in no event do I want them to vote for the Defense funding Bill without a timetable to pull out of Iraq! If Bush vetoes that then HE will be the reason the troops have no funding!
on Jul 19, 2007
no your demo buddies will be at fualt for trying to tie his hands
on Jul 19, 2007
if someone held a gun to your head and told you to rape someone. he is the one at fault not you.

this is what you want the congress to do with the president. no timetable no money that is the same thing
on Jul 19, 2007

Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, July 19, 2007
No your demo buddies will be at fault for trying to tie his hands


WORNG Again. Congress has the authority under our Constitution to appropriate money and define how it is spent! There is no requirement to follow what the President would like when it comes to the Budget! If Bush defies the legislation and vetoes the bills it will be Bush that will prevent the funding of the troops.
on Jul 19, 2007
“This is what you want the congress to do with the president. No timetable no money that is the same thing”

Congress has the power to declare war not the President. They in essence did that with the Iraq War Resolution. They could revoke that prior law or just say the war is over and therefore the funding will end.
on Jul 19, 2007
I have yet to see an answer as to WHY should the U.S. continue to fight in Iraq after the Iraqi PM said that HIS military and police can defend Iraq?

WHO wants to Field that question?
5 Pages1 2 3 4 5