Dubya Can't Decide if Iraq is Part of the War on Terror

[JoseCuervo]

Colin Powell, in a press conference this morning from Coalition Provisional Authority headquarters in Iraq:

We have seen terrorist attacks all over the world that have nothing to do with the war in Iraq. We have seen terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia. We have seen terror attacks in the Philippines, Colombia, Morocco, in many places throughout the world and they are not attributable to the war in Iraq. They are attributable to the fact we have terrorists in the world that want to go after those nations that are trying to build a better future and are determined to kill innocent people from keeping that happening.

That's funny, because I thought the Bush administration has been telling us all along that the Iraq war is a vital part of the war on terror and would make the world safer from terrorists. If these attacks have nothing to do with the war in Iraq, why are we there?

 

[A-con]

I don't see wear Mr. Powell says the war in Iraq isn't a war on terrorist, he just states that there have been attacks that arn't about the Iraq war. Not putting words in his mouth are ya ?
I gess you just arn't getting the response you want in the "issues" section.

 

[A-con]

I don't see wear Mr. Powell says the war in Iraq isn't a war on terrorist, he just states that there have been attacks that arn't about the Iraq war. Not putting words in his mouth are ya ?
I gess you just arn't getting the response you want in the "issues" section.

Dang, must have gotten excited and pushed the post button twice.

 

[Whiskers]

Elkgunner if thats what you think Cheney said. Maybe you should reread it. I beleive what he said is that the Terrorist attacks aren't in retalation to the war in Irag, rather these attacks are because terrorist want everyone to live the same lifestyle as they do.
A-con, I beleive your right Elkgunner needs a bigger audience than he gets in Issues thats why he posted here. Or he wants to terrorize the innocents that opt not to read the SI section.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Whiskers/A-Con,

I think I was in the Category Fun and Info, thinking it was headed to SI, not Fireside. It belongs in SI.

Nut, Can you help us out, and move this one???

Whiskers....
Ummmmm..... You think I should re-read it???? Where did you see me saying anything about Cheney???? It was Colin Powell...

 

[pawclaws]

Uh; I think what Powell was saying is that the Iraqi war didn't cause these attacks to occur. Of course everyone is entitled to their mis interpretation!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Did attacking Iraq cause these attacks to cease?

 

[pawclaws]

Yep! In the US anyway; and I believe that was the objective.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paws,

On that one, I hope you are correct. (With the exception that I thought Dubya wanted to protect the world from Terror?) I do worry a bit about Dubya's October surprise, when they trot out the "recently" cabtured Bin Laden, and then another Madrid-type election influencer the day before the General Election.

And as someone who has to spend time in countries that are allies with Dubya, the threats of terror extend to me beyond the 48 contiguous states.

 

[Whiskers]

OOPS I did an elkgunner, I read into it what I wanted too. Sorry, it was early in the morning.

 

[ELKCHSR]

WOuldn't that be fun now if Bush was able to sport ol' Bin Lauden a month or so before the election...

 

[pawclaws]

Whatdaya mean; if??

 

[Toonces]

ElkGunner,

I think its pretty clear you have badly misinterpreted Powell's statement. As Paws correctly states, Powell means that the war did not cause additional terrorists acts in those parts of the world.

If you want to use this speech to critisize Bush a better angle would be to say that we have too many resources dedicated solely to Iraq and that Powell's own words seem to indicate that those resources may be better deployed to combat terrorism elsewhere.