Think if we had spent all the money used in removing Saddam on real terrorist threats that we might have had more progress in stopping Al-Qaida?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
al-Qaida behind Madrid attack?
- Thread starter aphexcoil
- Start date
Quote from sulong:
A pretty lackluster TRY if you ask me. The politicians will NOT be able to win this war.
We need military men to get the job done.
And that's why when the chips are down, which they have been since 9/11, fighting beats just talking about it. If we had fought back when we had first been attacked, we wouldn't be where we are today. But oh no, we need to talk with them, we need to negoiate.
Finally the military is doing what talkers couldn't.
Quote from ARogueTrader:
Think if we had spent all the money used in removing Saddam on real terrorist threats that we might have had more progress in stopping Al-Qaida?
ART, I really don't think so. Even though there was so love lost between saddam and bin laden, they had a common goal. Politics makes strange bedfellows. And for that purpose they would have come together. Afterwards, each would have after the other.
After 911, we had the support of nearly everyone.
We went to Afghanistan, and Bush's popularity soared.
We rounded up a bunch of folks and parked them down in Cuba to rot.
We did not crush Al Quaida, we did not find Bin Laden, we did not find sleeper cells....
What did we do?
Bush decided to take advantage of the situation to fulfill his personal mission to take out Saddam.
How did that help to find Bin Laden?
How did that help to maintain a global concerted effort by all countries to stop terrorism?
How did that help to find and destroy sleeper cells?
How did that help to tighten up security on our borders?
How did that help to find the person/persons sending anthrax to senators?
How did that help to keep our shorelines safe, and tighten up a lousy security system at harbors and docks?
If after COMPLETING THE JOB he had begun, Bush had then turned to Iraq, that may have been one thing.
But to abandon the search for OBL with all of our resources, to allow the war lords to come back into power in Afghanistan, to allow the poppy fields in Afghanistan to stay blooming and feed the drug traffic, was a grievous error.
Bush gave into his own personal vendetta, rather than acting in a manner that was best for this country.
So now we have had multiple attacks by Al Quaida around the world since 911, the legend of Bin Laden grows among the terrorist community, and we are in hock for a war that was not necessary.
Great plan.
We went to Afghanistan, and Bush's popularity soared.
We rounded up a bunch of folks and parked them down in Cuba to rot.
We did not crush Al Quaida, we did not find Bin Laden, we did not find sleeper cells....
What did we do?
Bush decided to take advantage of the situation to fulfill his personal mission to take out Saddam.
How did that help to find Bin Laden?
How did that help to maintain a global concerted effort by all countries to stop terrorism?
How did that help to find and destroy sleeper cells?
How did that help to tighten up security on our borders?
How did that help to find the person/persons sending anthrax to senators?
How did that help to keep our shorelines safe, and tighten up a lousy security system at harbors and docks?
If after COMPLETING THE JOB he had begun, Bush had then turned to Iraq, that may have been one thing.
But to abandon the search for OBL with all of our resources, to allow the war lords to come back into power in Afghanistan, to allow the poppy fields in Afghanistan to stay blooming and feed the drug traffic, was a grievous error.
Bush gave into his own personal vendetta, rather than acting in a manner that was best for this country.
So now we have had multiple attacks by Al Quaida around the world since 911, the legend of Bin Laden grows among the terrorist community, and we are in hock for a war that was not necessary.
Great plan.
Quote from cdbern:
ART, I really don't think so. Even though there was so love lost between saddam and bin laden, they had a common goal. Politics makes strange bedfellows. And for that purpose they would have come together. Afterwards, each would have after the other.
Quote from cdbern:
And that's why when the chips are down, which they have been since 9/11, fighting beats just talking about it. If we had fought back when we had first been attacked, we wouldn't be where we are today. But oh no, we need to talk with them, we need to negoiate.
Finally the military is doing what talkers couldn't.
How many Iraqis were piloting the air craft that did us so much harm?
Why are our boys still getting killed in Iraq?
No my friend, the military are not allowed to do their job. The politicians are still in charge.
A war can not be won, "humanely" or won by not confronting the enemy, until we as a nation can confront the enemy, we will continue to lose.
Think if we had spent all the money used in removing Saddam on real terrorist threats that we might have had more progress in stopping Al-Qaida
ART
______________________________________________
Exactly! If Clinton & Co. had only done something outside of the oval office we might not have even had 9/11. And some want to go back to those blissful ostrich days.
ART
______________________________________________
Exactly! If Clinton & Co. had only done something outside of the oval office we might not have even had 9/11. And some want to go back to those blissful ostrich days.