Why do YOU think terrorist want Democrats to win?

ballz2wallz · 11-03-2006, 10:24 AM

So many of us have known this all along, and now it's officially reported by World Net Daily, but why do you think the terrorist organizations/countries want Democrats to win?

I believe that they want Democrats to win because they expect Democrats to pull out of the middle east, and they will consider that a win. That will embolden the terrorists, make them stronger than ever, and give them the feeling that they can take on the strongest nation in the world, and win.

I have to agree with them. Yes, that's right; I agree with the terrorists.

WickedLou9 · 11-03-2006, 10:25 AM

You are with us or against us. You must hate america

Scrum · 11-03-2006, 10:26 AM

Any source of this other than an opinion piece from WND?

I think that assumption is totally wrong. The republicans are a fantastic recruiting tool for them.

hsmith · 11-03-2006, 11:26 AM

You know, the only reason they attack us iS because we meddle in the middle east.

So logic would dictate, leave the middle east and the problems go away.

Scrum · 11-03-2006, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by hsmith

You know, the only reason they attack us iS because we meddle in the middle east.

So logic would dictate, leave the middle east and the problems go away.

You may be calling for something that the fine people at worldnetdaily are severely short on.

motivez · 11-03-2006, 12:21 PM

I disagree, I think the terrorists want to kill Americans and it's much easier to do that with a Republican Administration willing to get us stuck in a quagmire of epic proportions, giving them real live urban training grounds for the next generation of terrorists, all while making us spend money and go further into debt to finance a war with no plan.

I think the Democrats will fight it smarter, and aside from WND not being a credible source of information, it's a Republican tactic to say the terrorists want Democrats to win. It's certainly in line with their usual fear mongering tactics.

imind · 11-03-2006, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Any source of this other than an opinion piece from WND?

i would like to see another source, as well.

JaJae · 11-03-2006, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I disagree, I think the terrorists want to kill Americans and it's much easier to do that with a Republican Administration willing to get us stuck in a quagmire of epic proportions, giving them real live urban training grounds for the next generation of terrorists, all while making us spend money and go further into debt to finance a war with no plan.

I think the Democrats will fight it smarter, and aside from WND not being a credible source of information, it's a Republican tactic to say the terrorists want Democrats to win. It's certainly in line with their usual fear mongering tactics.

They want to kill us because they want us out so they can gain power. That is much easier if we're not there. And they wouldn't be fighting so hard if they didn't know how easy it was to break the will of the American public and get us to go home. We were weak in the past, and they know how to use propaganda to turn the course of American military strategy. CNN has been doing a pretty good job of helping them out lately.

Ardentfrost · 11-03-2006, 03:02 PM

This idea is ludicrous to the point of flame-baiting. Firstly, to say that terrorists want one specific thing itself is fallacy. We don't have a single group of people of size larger than 10 here in America that all want the same thing (at least for the same reasons), so to say that all terrorists want the same thing when there are thousands of them is silly.

Secondly, it seems to me that some terrorists (and I don't even like that word really, let's say, people who we're fighting in Iraq... they're not all Al Queda) WANT us to be over there so they can fight us and kill us easier, whereas others want us gone so that they can go back to leading their own lives. I'm sure there are other reasons some may want us there and some may want us gone... and that'll vary from person to person.

But importantly, republican or democrat isn't going to ensure anything. I don't care how much disrespect you (meaning anyone) has for the democratic party, if they did gain power and start our pulling out of the middle east, and that only caused MORE terrorist attacks, I've no doubt they'd abandon that strategy. Likewise, I think even Republicans are starting to see the distaste for our involvement in Iraq and the middle east, so even they are not above (any longer) starting a pull out.

Both parties want the same thing: political power. And if they can promise or do something that can ensure that, they will do it. Republicans have taken their power for granted over the past few years, and now it's really starting to bite them in the ass. They'll come back around whether or not they lose congress this term, otherwise they're bound to lose the white house in 2 years and possibly their entire party

SpicyMcVoodoo · 11-03-2006, 03:10 PM

Hmmmm, which terrorist shall we believe, because this one has endorsed Bush:

The statement tells American voters that Abu Hafs al-Masri supports the re-election campaign of President Bush: "We are very keen that Bush does not lose the upcoming elections."

The statement said Abu Hafs al-Masri needs what it called Bush's "idiocy and religious fanaticism" because they would "wake up" the Islamic world.

FOXNews.com - Islamists Declare Spain Truce, Endorse Bush - U.S. & World

IMO, they love Republicans. What do Islamists want most?
To get into a fight with Americans. It's so inconsistent to always say these people are crazy and want to die, and then say they're afraid of Republicans because they don't want to die or fight with us. Are you kidding? They are crazy and want to get into a fight with America, and they'd love nothing more than to bleed our treasury by ensnaring us into fights abroad. Bin Laden clearly admits this.

Thorgrim · 11-03-2006, 03:22 PM

The worst thing for the terrorists would be if we pulled out of Iraq, focused on Afghanistan, and entered into direct talks with Syria, Iran and North Korea

Get israel to give Syria the golan heights in exchange for peace and extraordinary anti-terrorism help

Give information that shows Iran we are stopping the effort to topple their regime and that they will not be attacked, and give them respected talks and set up a friendly embassy, in exchange for nuke deal

In North Korea, make agreements to protect the regime, and have direct talks, give enough carrots for them to seal their nuke secrets, hand them over, and store or give up their nukes and material to be monitored by IAEA

That would be an INCREDIBLE blow to terrorism, and we'd be officially winning the war on terror

Nonphixion · 11-03-2006, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I disagree, I think the terrorists want to kill Americans and it's much easier to do that with a Republican Administration willing to get us stuck in a quagmire of epic proportions, giving them real live urban training grounds for the next generation of terrorists, all while making us spend money and go further into debt to finance a war with no plan.

I think the Democrats will fight it smarter, and aside from WND not being a credible source of information, it's a Republican tactic to say the terrorists want Democrats to win. It's certainly in line with their usual fear mongering tactics.

It's also according to certain reports apparentl a big funnel for corruption, 3 billion is currently unaccounted for in Iraq. We built a "75 million dollar" police station that has leaky toliets and cracked the foundation, so we scrapped it, this building cannot and will not be used. But that 75 million dollars still went into somebody's pocket.

Bush is also pulling to remove the "Inspector General" altogether from the Iraq project, so there will be no oversight on spending at all.

JaJae · 11-03-2006, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Secondly, it seems to me that some terrorists (and I don't even like that word really, let's say, people who we're fighting in Iraq... they're not all Al Queda) WANT us to be over there so they can fight us and kill us easier, whereas others want us gone so that they can go back to leading their own lives. I'm sure there are other reasons some may want us there and some may want us gone... and that'll vary from person to person.

I don't entirely agree with this. I think people are either killing us over there because they want us out so they can gain power. Or they want us to stop occupying their country. I think the majority of them want us gone. And once we do leave, the vast majority of them will end attacks on America.

The way I look at it is, what if North Korea came in and took over America. Shit I'd be killing people too. And militant groups would be fighting back trying to gain power as well.

I kind of relate it to how I would feel if it were on my own soil.

Just because I think the vast majority of the insurgents want us gone, doesn't necessarily mean I think the Democrats are the weaker party though. I think it's true the insurgents want us gone, but on the same token I do want the Democrats to gain power this election. I think a lot of people aren't equating this situation with you can bash the president, and still support the troops. Just because the Democrats want to leave Iraq doesn't mean they're weaker or it's wrong to possibly give the majority of the insurgents what they want. They're killing us because they don't want Americans occupying their country. Some for the simple reason they don't like America, others because they don't want to be occupied, and still others because they want to gain power.. or a combination.

But Iraq needs to stand on their own. We can't sit there forever taking pot shots while they get their act together.

SpicyMcVoodoo · 11-03-2006, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The way I look at it is, what if North Korea came in and took over America. Shit I'd be killing people too. And militant groups would be fighting back trying to gain power as well.

I kind of relate it to how I would feel if it were on my own soil.

So you're calling the terrorists freedom fighters?

JaJae · 11-03-2006, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

So you're calling the terrorists freedom fighters?

No, because killing us doesn't grant them any more "freedom".

Thorgrim · 11-03-2006, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

No, because killing us doesn't grant them any more "freedom".

Well, if there were 0 deaths, we'd be occupying them longer, thats an almost certainty...occupation=less freedom

JaJae · 11-03-2006, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Well, if there were 0 deaths, we'd be occupying them longer, thats an almost certainty...occupation=less freedom

The occupation wouldn't be there if their own people weren't blowing them up and allowed them to form a Democracy (give them freedom). We're there trying to help the Iraqis give themselves freedom from the people trying to gain power and who would likely run the country like Saddam again...

Ardentfrost · 11-03-2006, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The occupation wouldn't be there if their own people weren't blowing them up and allowed them to form a Democracy (give them freedom). We're there trying to help the Iraqis give themselves freedom from the people trying to gain power and who would likely run the country like Saddam again...

I dunno if I buy that. Who was it that said "Freedom isn't given, it's taken"? Alexander Hamilton or someone like that? We can't GIVE someone freedom, so we're just wasting our time if that's what we're there for.

SpicyMcVoodoo · 11-03-2006, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

No, because killing us doesn't grant them any more "freedom".

Yes it does. I think it's a pretty plain meaning of freedom to be free of occupation by an invading force. The more US soldiers they kill, the more likely they'll be to leave.

Thorgrim · 11-03-2006, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

The occupation wouldn't be there if their own people weren't blowing them up and allowed them to form a Democracy (give them freedom). We're there trying to help the Iraqis give themselves freedom from the people trying to gain power and who would likely run the country like Saddam again...

We're in their homes and controlling their country and we haven't the right

We're meddling

US-style Democracy is only freedom if the people want it, Democracy, like everything else in the world, is not a universal good

Maybe the French should have occupied America in the 1860s to stop the civil war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans

After all they are just trying to stop hundreds of thousands of death!