Why is President Bush losing the war on terror?
916575
Sun Tzu said in "The Art of War" in 500 BC that engaging in a protracted campaign on foreign soil would eventually lead to failure.  I think that the problem has been a lack of planning and a lack of definition regarding our strategic goals.  I think that we entered this conflict for the wrong reasons, without a plan, and without measurable goals. Then, we tried to create a plan and strategic objectives on the fly. This is a national embarrassment of monumental proportions, and an act that will change the course of history against the United States. I only hope that somthing can be salvaged from this debacle, but it will take a level of cooperation and compromise that seems unlikely until bush leaves office.
465371
The reason Bush would be against the 9/11 commission is because he feared America’s and the terrorists’ knowledge of what the report revealed.  There were huge gaps in our intelligence agencies, he ignored warnings which might have prevented the attack, and our country is virtually as vulnerable as we were the days before the attack.\n\nA few of good question would be, why haven’t our schools, hospitals and infrastructure been secured from terrorist attacks and if the response to Katrina was the best America has to offer, what would happen in the event of another well thought out bigger attack on America using dirty bombs? Why hasn’t the Bush administration enacted many if any of the report's recommendations?
1042789
The President went to Iraq in order to boost his poor ratings in the polls. I doubt the CIA is failing him. Bush is a decider of what is a fact and what is not. He has decided that the occupation is worth it no matter how much blood is spilled. He has decided to call the puppet government a democracy.
1167011
This is actually a pretty good question. The answer is complex, and not emotional. The Democratic base is a far left-wing anti-American socialist-communist group. The repeated appeal towards this base is more for lining their pockets during campaign season than anything else. It's a good front, but at the base of the argument EVERYONE agrees that unless we win the war on terror, we all lose. The debate is, of course, HOW we win.\n\nOsama bin laden is a cunning animal. He (it) is going to be anti-American. He always was, even before his fatwa against the United States in 98. He is smart enough to realize that the Democrats are in opposition to the president. It's no surprise (or shouldn't be) that he has chosen to use the lines of the democrats against the President. The only way they can win the war is to defeat America from within. How better than to incite the Vietnam-era-style protests. This war cannot be won on the court of public opinion, but it sure as hell can be lost there. That's why they sound amazingly alike...
1051093
NOPE. i dont think we will ever be able to "win the war on terror" its stupid. the president is stupid!
116522
The War on Terror is a different war than ever fought, and that's why it is so difficult to win. What people don't realize is that these terrorists or freedom fighters are fighting for what they so deeply believe in, and they are not part of an organized military. They can be anyone from Joe down the street, or Al-Mohhomed in Afghanastan. No one knows. The rest of the world is begining to realize that yes, this is a serious threat, and it harms more than the United Staes. Take the U.K bombings, and hotel bombing in Jordan. Al-Quida is terrorising people of the same faith. With this war there are no borders. I do not agree with George Bush, but I will say that he is correct in one aspect. We must stay the course until victory is ours. If we back down to people who threaten us, then that puts us and the rest of the world into a submissive situation, and then those people will begin to walk all over us. Once a victory is achieved by someone, that person wants more, and becomes power hungry. That is the situation with terrorists. The war on terrorism is a bitter stale-mate.
600416
Bush administration is following wrong policies.\nThey may not be on a crusade but all their present targets are unfortunately Muslims who are rich in natural resources but far behind in technology, hence an easy prey.\nIn the ultimate analysis/conclusion USA will never win since their stance is based on in-justice, inequality and double standards.
923445
President Bush wanted to invade Iraq since before he became President. When he decided to run he made it clear to his staff that one of his main objectives as President would be to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein. When we were attacked on September 11th President Bush saw his opportunity to accomplish what he had been dreaming about. He used the fear the American people had of another Terrorist Attack and said and found anyone who would say Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction, no matter how shaky or non-existent their evidence was. He than told the American people over and over again that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and was working with Al Qaeda. Well everyone in America was so terrified of the prospect of Saddam Hussein giving a WMD to Terrorists that have already attacked us once that most supported the invasion. President Bush new he needed alot of troops to invade Iraq, so he sent the bare minimum to Afghanistan relying on international support to fight that war and sent 150,000 troops to Iraq. If you send 150,000 troops to one war and 2,000 to another, which do you think is going to work faster? President Bush clearly doesn't care about our National Security or punishing those that are responsible for killing 3,000 Americans. He is only concerned with getting revenge on Saddam Hussein and winning elections.
824503
Listen up. There "is" no losing or winning. It's impossible to win a war against terrorism. It "is" possible to prevent people from doing terrorist acts, but it's impossible to stop them trying.\n\nSo i would have to say we'll never win, nor lose.\n\n(For everyone who jumps on me because i said it was a war on terrorism and not oil, you need to get your facts straight. The war began in afganistan. We drove Osama out, making him hide in a dark hole in Pakistan. They attacked Saddam to make sure he didn't have anymore weapons of mass destruction left over from the times of the Kurds that he could sell to Osama.)
134984
Bush is probably hiding him out to drag out the war on terror and take away more of our freedom in laws like the patriat act....
667242
Its Simple, if George Bush is Sidious, then he wouldve been the mastermind behind the 9-11 incident, off course then we have to assume tht Bin Laden is General Grievous. \n\nAs you can see how he won the elections anyway, with a Roaring success, and he is still in power, now he has turned his eyes to IRAQ. The only way for him to bring the US into power was thru war.Billions of dollars was used for weapons, the billions are being rolled up, its the only massive economic stabilizer for US, without war there is no weapons, no weapons no income, the US would be suffering in thier economy.
1099656
The "War on Terror" is a linguistic and philosophical impossibility and obviously it does not work in political and military terms either.\nOne cannot declare war on an abstract such as terror, but an unintelligent and uneducated  man like George W. Bush, who can not even speak proper English, seems to have missed that.\n\nBy its nature, war creates terror. So how can a war be ever on or against terror?\n\nPersonally I am against this war, which is now called inside the Pentagon "The Long War". I think it is really the first phase of World War III. \nThere was no need for this war, and no legitimate reason. The war was started illegally and lead to the invasion and illegal occupation of two countries (Iraq and Afghanistan). It is the biggest mistake the USA have ever made (so far) and will cost us all dearly in the present and future.\n\nIf this war is ever properly investigated, we will all be shocked beyond our wildest imagination, as US troops are commiting war crimes and atrocities every single day and abusing human rights as a pastime.\n\nThe more the USA behave as the bully boy of the world, the more terrorism will be created. So the best way to end it, is to get out of the Middle East, apologise and make amends.\n\nAnd one other thing we should not forget: Al-Qaeda, which was not in Iraq before the invasion, but is now, was founded by the CIA as a group to conduct a "jihad" against the Russians in Afghanistan. The CIA trained and financed the group, and selected their leader, Osama bin-Laden, who was (and most likely still is) a CIA operative. There is currently no country more involved with the sponsering and spreading of terror than the USA and the sooner that stops, the sooner peace and freedom will have a chance again.\n\nRegarding a new leader for the USA, I can at present see no one who springs to mind as the absolute solution. As possibilities I would see Senator McCain (Rep-Arizona) and General Wesley Clarke (Dem). McCain should have won the Republican nomination in 2000 (but was cheated out of his chance by the Bush camp and their millionaire sponsors) and Clarke should have been taken more seriously by the Democrats in 2004. After all, he was NATO Supreme Commander in Europe during the Balkan Wars and knows how to fight (and win) a campaign.
1011206
I am not a flaming liberal...but "war on terror" ? That was some slogan that Bush and his little minions thought up. Yes there is terrorism. Yes, we need to fight against it. But if you are referring to the war on terror in Iraq...we have no business there. Somehow we ended up there...9/11 having nothing to do with Iraq. Now...we can never leave. Bush says we will pull out...but how can we. If we do...they will say "look how the Americans came into Iraq...messed everything up....and then left" Democracy will never work there. Democracy means different things to different people. Democracy can never work in a tribal mentality. We should be focusing on Afghanistan. And Iran. But we are wasting our time in Iraq...the center of Bush's so called "War on Terror" I am willing to fight against terror. But to fight against those who are actually causing the terror.
933320
What you stated is something that I have repeated on this forum countless times, and yet these plain facts seem to bounce off the heads of Bush supporters the way bullets bounce off of Superman. They are oblivious to the fact Bush’s so called “War on Terror” does not truly address the progenitors of terror; namely Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Saudi Arabia provides much of the financing and ideological foundation for Islamic terror groups like Al Qaeda, and Pakistan offers the theological and military training grounds (think Madrassas) and it was in that country that the Taliban was born, and it is in Pakistan’s Western border region where many top Al Qaeda and Taliban officials are being harbored. \n\nBush’s closest action to ending Islamic terror was attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan, and rooting out some Al Qaeda terror cells that existed in that region. But this was a futile effort, since he has diverted most of our military resources to Iraq, thus leaving Al Qaeda and the Taliban free to regroup and rebuild their infrastructures. \n\nThe truth of the matter is George Bush’s war isn’t a “War on Terror” as much as it is a war to divert your attention from the failure of their “War on Terror”.
806699
Despite the apparent gains by the Democrats, all support for Bush has not vanished. First of all, he still has a good number of Republicans in his corner. Also, some of the gains made by the Democrats were from Conservative Democrats like Lieberman, Casey. Webb, and Tester. When it comes to certain issues, like the war on terror, don't count Bush out as the Republicans along with the conservative Democrats still may be able to prevent the Liberals from waving the white flag and retreat from Iraq, leaving victory to the terrorists.
1111066
The sad truth is, democrats are so hungry to get back in the Oval Office that they are willing to sacrifice our victory in the war on terror.  They have deluded themselves that these foreign interventions just don't matter that much.\n\nConsciously or not, they are sabotaging the efforts to combat terrorism.
897164
Like Rove is this dark sorcerer that plays golf with Satan.\n\nWhen they refer to terrorism in this vein, it is because Bush's policies fighting our nation's enemies have kept us safe.\n\nThe is no "tactic" about the very real danger of terrorism.