I am not sure what point he was trying to make, I am however sure that he has been shown to be wrong regarding Iraq's connection to the terrorism (Osama specifically), the rest just does not make any sense.
In regards to Osama:
What struggle are we talking about here? It seems the struggle to capture bin Laden and put down the Taliban and Al Qaeda has been left for others.
And I thought the struggle in Iraq was about :
-First their involvement with 9/11 (proved not true)
-then, that Sadam was a threat to the U.S. because of his possession of WMD's (once again prov-en not true)
-and then it was finally about instilling a democracy in Iraq and securing the middle east while actually all that has happened is that
*the struggle in Iraq has recruited more individuals to Al Qaeda's cause
* it redirected the emphasis from Afghanistan to Iraq (allowing for the Taliban to make a resurgence)
*the worldwide perception of the US has been harmed
When asked, "why hasn't he been caught fiver years later" (in reference to Osama)
I'd be interested to see him explain the concerted effort that is going into this endeavour. If they are aware that he's not moving like he used to, does that not imply that they know where he might be?
Does anyone believe this?
Comments?
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
Last edited by KharmaDog on Sep 11th, 2006 at 03:25 PM
someday pointless toughguy rhetoric will finally capture bin laden. until then, we need to focus on iraq....because we were attacked on 9/11....yes, i know its been admitted that saddam and al qaeda were never linked in any way, but we had to take him out of power because....see....we were attacked on 9/11....
It is pretty weird, that someone that so obviously lacks any logic (probably) or at least any language skills, can become so powerful to decide whichever country has to be attacked. Just sad.
The US knew where Osama was for a very long time, and could probably follow him without to much trouble, now those sources and channels are probably gone/blocked/destroyed so it's logical that things have changed and it's harder to find him.
For the rest I agree, but what are you going to do? Nothing has really changed in the last years...
I think that 9/11 was a happy day for the government, they finally had an excuse to wage war. We have to understand that these days the government cannot simply declare war, first they must forge an excuse to justify the war. 9/11 was a good one, as was Pearl harbor a good excuse for the government to test their new weapon, the "atomic bomb" on our friends, the Japanese.
There was much more civilians murdered in Iraq invasion than in 9/11, but ironically and hypocritically only 9/11 is remembered in the news every year.
Now what calls my attention is this strong involvement that Bush family had with Bin Laden family. I recall from that Farenheit documentary from Michael Moore, and some other things I saw the news that there where strong relations beetween the two families. One time when the Bin Laden family was sued by something it was the Bush family specifically who helped them with lawyers and everything. There is other strong factors that connects both families but I don´t remember, perhaps someone knows. But I remember they were strong factors that suggested a close relation between them.
KMC Community Forums
Sep 11th, 2006 03:19 PM
