Question: What does it mean if God can't predict the future?

Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.

Answer: God may not be omniscient.

Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. <hl> If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient. <hl>

Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, <hl> God may not be omniscient. <hl>


Question: Who posited the existence of God?

Answer: medieval philosophers

<hl> Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. <hl> Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.

Many <hl> medieval philosophers <hl> developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.


Question: What philosophical debates arose in the middle ages?

Answer: God's omniscience

Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. <hl> For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. <hl> If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.

Many medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, <hl> God's omniscience <hl> may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.


Question: How does Alvin Plantinga describe faith?

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

Answer: "properly basic"

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. <hl> The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic" , or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. <hl> Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is <hl> "properly basic" <hl>, or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is <hl> "properly basic" <hl> , or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position.


Question: Who stated "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know"?

Answer: Pascal

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. <hl> There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." <hl> A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by <hl> Pascal <hl> as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.


Question: Which philosopher takes the evidentialist position?

Answer: Richard Swinburne

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. <hl> The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne , the evidentialist position. <hl> Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does <hl> Richard Swinburne <hl>, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does <hl> Richard Swinburne <hl> , the evidentialist position.


Question: Name three philosophers of the last 100 years arguing for the existence of God?

Answer: Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew

<hl> The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew , although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. <hl> The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as <hl> Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew <hl>, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as <hl> Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew <hl> , although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid.


Question: When did George W. Bush first say 'war on terrorism'?

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

Answer: 16 September 2001

<hl> On 16 September 2001 , at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " <hl> Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On <hl> 16 September 2001 <hl>, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On <hl> 16 September 2001 <hl> , at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... "


Question: Which word did George W. Bush apologize for using when talking about the war?

Answer: crusade

<hl> On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " <hl> Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This <hl> crusade <hl> – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."


Question: When did George W. Bush first say 'war on terror'?

Answer: 20 September 2001

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. <hl> On 20 September 2001 , during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. <hl> It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On <hl> 20 September 2001 <hl>, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On <hl> 20 September 2001 <hl> , during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there.


Question: Where did Bush say the 'war on terror' begins?

Answer: with al-Qaeda

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. <hl> On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda , but it does not end there. <hl> It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins <hl> with al-Qaeda <hl>, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated."

On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins <hl> with al-Qaeda <hl> , but it does not end there.


Question: When did Bush say the 'war on terror' ends?

Answer: every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. <hl> It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated ." <hl>

On 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, "This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while, ... " Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, "(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until <hl> every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated <hl>."

It will not end until <hl> every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated <hl> ."


Question: What did Obama say the US is at war with, in 2009?

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

Answer: a far-reaching network of violence and hatred

<hl> U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred ." <hl> In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against <hl> a far-reaching network of violence and hatred <hl>." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against <hl> a far-reaching network of violence and hatred <hl> ."


Question: What was the "Global War on Terror" officially renamed to in March 2009?

Answer: Overseas Contingency Operation

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." <hl> In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to " Overseas Contingency Operation " (OCO). <hl> In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "<hl> Overseas Contingency Operation <hl>" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to " <hl> Overseas Contingency Operation <hl> " (OCO).


Question: What term did Obama want the government to stop using?

Answer: war on terror

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". <hl> Basic objectives of the Bush administration " war on terror ", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. <hl> In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "<hl> war on terror <hl>", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

Basic objectives of the Bush administration " <hl> war on terror <hl> ", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place.


Question: Who said in 2012 that the fight would change from military to law enforcement?

Answer: Jeh Johnson

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. <hl> In December 2012, Jeh Johnson , the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. <hl> In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, <hl> Jeh Johnson <hl>, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "Countering Violent Extremism" in 2010.

In December 2012, <hl> Jeh Johnson <hl> , the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law.


Question: What was the "Overseas Contingency Operations" renamed to in 2010?

Answer: Countering Violent Extremism

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. <hl> In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to " Countering Violent Extremism " in 2010. <hl>

U.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated "Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from "Global War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operation" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using "Overseas Contingency Operation". Basic objectives of the Bush administration "war on terror", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been "effectively destroyed", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to "<hl> Countering Violent Extremism <hl>" in 2010.

In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is "to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from "Overseas Contingency Operations" to " <hl> Countering Violent Extremism <hl> " in 2010.


Question: Who said the 'war on terrorism' is 'an entire language of discourse'?

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

Answer: Richard Jackson

<hl> Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." <hl> Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist <hl> Richard Jackson <hl> has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.


Question: Who said that 9/11 drew a line between 'the civil and the savage'?

Answer: John Ashcroft

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." <hl> Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". <hl> Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by <hl> John Ashcroft <hl> that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.


Question: What did the Bush administration describe as parasitical?

Answer: terrorists

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". <hl> Administration officials also described " terrorists " as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. <hl> Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "<hl> terrorists <hl>" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

Administration officials also described " <hl> terrorists <hl> " as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil.


Question: What did the Bush administration describe as heroic?

Answer: Americans

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. <hl> Americans , in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights. <hl>

Because the actions involved in the "war on terrorism" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that "the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices—wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions—and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives—it is an entire language or discourse." Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that "the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage". Administration officials also described "terrorists" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. <hl> Americans <hl>, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.

<hl> Americans <hl> , in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.


Question: Which war gave birth to al-Qaeda?

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

Answer: the Soviet war in Afghanistan

<hl> The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). <hl> The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to <hl> the Soviet war in Afghanistan <hl> (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.


Question: When did the Soviets leave Afghanistan?

Answer: February 1989

<hl> The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989 ). <hl> The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – <hl> February 1989 <hl>). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – <hl> February 1989 <hl> ).


Question: Which countries supported Afghan islamists against the Soviets?

Answer: United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). <hl> The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. <hl> A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The <hl> United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China <hl> supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.


Question: Who did Osama bin Laden volunteer to help fight in the 80s?

Answer: Soviets

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. <hl> A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets , including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. <hl> In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the <hl> Soviets <hl>, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the <hl> Soviets <hl> , including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance.


Question: Which group later became al-Qaeda?

Answer: World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. <hl> In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. <hl> In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

The origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 – February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of "Afghan Arab" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group <hl> World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders <hl> (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatwā, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.


Question: When did al-Qaeda attack the US embassy in Kenya?

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

Answer: 7 August 1998

<hl> On 7 August 1998 , al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. <hl> In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On <hl> 7 August 1998 <hl>, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On <hl> 7 August 1998 <hl> , al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans.


Question: How many people were killed when al-Qaeda attacked US embassies in 1998?

Answer: 224

<hl> On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. <hl> In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing <hl> 224 <hl> people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.


Question: How many Americans were killed when al-Qaeda attacked US embassies in 1998?

Answer: 12

<hl> On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. <hl> In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including <hl> 12 <hl> Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.


Question: What operation did Bill Clinton start to retaliate for the 1998 embassy attacks?

Answer: Operation Infinite Reach

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. <hl> In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach , a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. <hl> The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched <hl> Operation Infinite Reach <hl>, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched <hl> Operation Infinite Reach <hl> , a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant.


Question: How much of Sudan's medicines were produced by a pharmaceutical plant Clinton's operation bombed?

Answer: around 50%

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. <hl> The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. <hl> The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.

On 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and <hl> around 50% <hl> of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.


Question: How many planes were hijacked on 9/11?

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

Answer: four

<hl> On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. <hl> Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked <hl> four <hl> airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.


Question: Which al-Qaeda cell were the 9/11 hijackers members of?

Answer: Hamburg

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. <hl> The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. <hl> Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's <hl> Hamburg <hl> cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.


Question: Where were the 9/11 planes originally going?

Answer: California

<hl> On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California . <hl> Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for <hl> California <hl>. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for <hl> California <hl> .


Question: How many al-Qaeda operatives hijacked planes on 9/11?

Answer: 19

<hl> On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. <hl> Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, <hl> 19 <hl> men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.


Question: How soon after planes crashed into them did the WTC towers collapse?

Answer: within two hours

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. <hl> Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. <hl> The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.

On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met – no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers – members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell – intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed <hl> within two hours <hl> from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.


Question: What law was signed on Sep 14, 2001?

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

Answer: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists

<hl> The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. <hl> It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

The <hl> Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists <hl> or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.


Question: Who did the AUMF authorize the US military attacking?

Answer: those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001

<hl> The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001 . <hl> It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against <hl> those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001 <hl>. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against <hl> those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001 <hl> .


Question: What law did Congress refer to as a basic for the AUMF?

Answer: section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. <hl> Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. <hl>

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of <hl> section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution <hl> of 1973.


Question: When was the War Powers Resolution passed?

Answer: 1973

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. <hl> Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 . <hl>

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or "AUMF" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of <hl> 1973 <hl>.

Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of <hl> 1973 <hl> .


Question: When did the US invade Afghanistan?

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Answer: October 2001

<hl> Subsequently, in October 2001 , U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. <hl> On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in <hl> October 2001 <hl>, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in <hl> October 2001 <hl> , U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime.


Question: Who helped the US invade Afghanistan?

Answer: UK and coalition allies

<hl> Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies ) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. <hl> On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with <hl> UK and coalition allies <hl>) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with <hl> UK and coalition allies <hl> ) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime.


Question: What was the goal of the US invading Afghanistan?

Answer: oust the Taliban regime

<hl> Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime . <hl> On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to <hl> oust the Taliban regime <hl>. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to <hl> oust the Taliban regime <hl> .


Question: When did the US begin airstrikes on Afghanistan?

Answer: 7 October 2001

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. <hl> On 7 October 2001 , the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. <hl> Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On <hl> 7 October 2001 <hl>, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

On <hl> 7 October 2001 <hl> , the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets.


Question: Where did bin Laden escape to in Dec 2001?

Answer: Pakistan

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. <hl> It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle. <hl>

Subsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into <hl> Pakistan <hl> during the battle.