• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would the U.S. attacked Afghanistan if Hussein Obama had been President?

Would the U.S. attacked Afghanistan if Hussein Obama had been President?


  • Total voters
    43

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
That is the 64 dollar question....I personally believe he would have asked the French to do it.........
 
A democrat didn't invade a country the first time the trade towers were attacked. So most likely Obama wouldn't do ****.
 
That is the 64 dollar question....I personally believe he would have asked the French to do it.........
Probably not.

He might have sent some cruise missiles and some bombs, but I dont think that's what the question really asks.
 
Last edited:
I would hope not.

Invading whole countries to target small groups is a rather idiotic policy.
(as we can clearly see eight years later.)

Besides the fact they were all Saudi men funded through the Pakistani military.
 
I think he may have done something more serious than just bombing a country. Not sure if we would have gone the full out invasion route though. And we definitely wouldn't have gotten side tracked into Iraq; that part's for damned sure.
 
I would hope not.

Invading whole countries to target small groups is a rather idiotic policy.
(as we can clearly see eight years later.)

Besides the fact they were all Saudi men funded through the Pakistani military.

I'm not sure if they were funded by the Paki military. Where did you get that from?
 
That is the 64 dollar question....I personally believe he would have asked the French to do it.........

You mean immediately after we were brutally attacked and 3,000 people were murdered? Of course he would have, and you know it. Any president would have done so.
 
I would hope not.

Invading whole countries to target small groups is a rather idiotic policy.

At the time, that "small group" was also functioning as the Afghan government...or at least the dominant military force.

Joe1991 said:
(as we can clearly see eight years later.)

For most of that time, Afghanistan was not a major security problem. That's just been an issue in the last couple years.

Joe1991 said:
Besides the fact they were all Saudi men funded through the Pakistani military.

The planning was done in Afghanistan and the Taliban was harboring the people responsible.
 
Technically he wouldn't of attacked Afghanistan since Afghanistan didn't attack us. He would have attacked terrorists hiding in the border region of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He sure as hell wouldn't have missed the target completely and landed in Iraq.
 
Of course Obama would fight in Afghanistan and capture Osama, just like we capture Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

We are going in Iraq for nothing and look at the other country's that do fight in Afghanistan. We should be over there fighting Afghanistan, not other country's fighting for us.
 
Last edited:
At the time, that "small group" was also functioning as the Afghan government...or at least the dominant military force.

I think you're confusing Al-Qaeda with the Taliban.


The planning was done in Afghanistan and the Taliban was harboring the people responsible.

The perps directly responsible were killed that day. Al-Qaeda were in dozens of countries. The money to fund them came from Saudi Arabia through Pakistan, and even OBL seemed to flow freely into Pakistan.

Why we chose to move an entire army into AFG make almost as little sense as the Iraq invasion.
 
The perps directly responsible were killed that day. Al-Qaeda were in dozens of countries. The money to fund them came from Saudi Arabia through Pakistan, and even OBL seemed to flow freely into Pakistan.

Why we chose to move an entire army into AFG make almost as little sense as the Iraq invasion.

You're still not going to prove that, are you? Why bother with the facts, when you're version of the events sounds much better. Right?
 
I think you're confusing Al-Qaeda with the Taliban.

Suppose after the Oklahoma City bombing, Tim McVeigh had camped out with a cult. They willingly gave him refuge and refused to turn him over to the police. Wouldn't you consider them to be culpable as well?

Although actually, even this analogy doesn't go far enough. In 2001, al-Qaeda were not GUESTS of the Taliban. Al-Qaeda provided financial backing for the Taliban; they had much more power behind-the-scenes than the Taliban did.

Joe1991 said:
The perps directly responsible were killed that day. Al-Qaeda were in dozens of countries. The money to fund them came from Saudi Arabia through Pakistan, and even OBL seemed to flow freely into Pakistan.

The living people most directly responsible were in Afghanistan. Furthermore, the governments of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan cooperated with the United States.
 
Technically he wouldn't of attacked Afghanistan since Afghanistan didn't attack us. He would have attacked terrorists hiding in the border region of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He sure as hell wouldn't have missed the target completely and landed in Iraq.

No, he would have surrendered unconditionally..... ;)
 
He would try and reason with the talaban
 
He would, He would, he would blow up the White House for them. ZOMG!!!!11

Seriously people?
 
Thanks for your quality input. :2wave:

Well, where's my thanks, then?....:2razz:
It's all conjecture, but taking into account his world-wide apology tour, I can draw the conclusion that there would have been much talk & no action....;)
If nothing else we knocked the 'bad guys' on their heels for several years....
Obama does nothing but embolden them by looking like a .. uh..easy touch...
Especially after licking Putin's & Medvedev's boots......:(
 
Well, where's my thanks, then?....:2razz:
It's all conjecture, but taking into account his world-wide apology tour, I can draw the conclusion that there would have been much talk & no action....;)
If nothing else we knocked the 'bad guys' on their heels for several years....
Obama does nothing but embolden them by looking like a .. uh..easy touch...
Especially after licking Putin's & Medvedev's boots......:(

There's no better way to attack those that attack us then to fight a completely separate country and say "hey look what we could be doing to you, don't think about attacking us again."
 
There's no better way to attack those that attack us then to fight a completely separate country and say "hey look what we could be doing to you, don't think about attacking us again."

So, you do get it......
My apologies.... :)
 
Technically he wouldn't of attacked Afghanistan since Afghanistan didn't attack us. He would have attacked terrorists hiding in the border region of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He sure as hell wouldn't have missed the target completely and landed in Iraq.
You know this based on?
 
Back
Top Bottom