View Full Version : CIA Higher Up...we let bin laden get away
grimm
08-08-2005, 12:18 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8853000/site/newsweek/
OldJeff
08-08-2005, 07:25 AM
This is a surprise to anyone ?
Of course we would let Bin Laden get away, otherwise the whole thing would have been over, and there never would have been any support for Iraq.
Or we would have killed him, and created a new martyr, which would draw hundred of thousands into radical islam causing terror to really expand world wide...
First do the character killing, then do the actual killing - the other way around is 1.000.000 times harder...
OldJeff
08-08-2005, 08:31 AM
As opposed to the hundreds of thousands we have created by invading an unrelated country.
As for making him a Martyr, when his kidneys finally give out, he will be that, nothing we do will change that.
Trying to kill his character in the Arab world is along the same lines as trying to sell them sand.
Besides, how the hell does a war in Iraq have anything to do with Bin Ladden, the only ones buying that bullshit propaganda are idiot Americans.
Muslims might be ignorant to world policts and how democracies work, but they do understand the difference between civilians and military targets, so with having Al qaeda running amok in Iraq blowing up civilians, then in time Al qaeda, Osama Bin Laden etc. will have committed character suicide.
Opinion polls are already showing less support for Al qaeda and Osama Bin Laden in the middle east due to massive attacks on civilians in Iraq... in time their followers will only be those 5% of nutcases there are in every nation on this planet. Then we can kill him.
Ex. killing Adolf Hitler in 1938 vs. 1945 would have lead to 2 very different scenarios... one of them would have created a martyr statsman killed for his vision - the other a crazy person who lived like a coward after loosing it all...
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 10:20 AM
I have no doubt that Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. Bush definately dropped the ball. We should have committed US troops to handle the job.
I beleive part of the reason is Bush bcame ( and still is) gun shy. After being beat on by liberals, media, and anti-war types Bush ( Rumsfiled) do not want to commit us troops into combat where there would be huge US deaths. ( WWII type casualties - the realit is less then 2k deaths in Iraq after 2 years is statisticly nothing)
If we lost 2,000 troops in one week, the liberals and media would be flipping out.
Bush is doing things half assed. It is wel known Syria and Iran are helping our enemies in Iraq. We should make it clear to them if they continue they will be punished. Once thy do not stop, we need to make them feel the pain of helping out enemies. This does not have to be invasion, it could be economic pressure, and some cruise missles.
We cannot win a war by creating abritrary rules and boundaries. We should be going all out. Our troops deserve it.
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 10:23 AM
Muslims might be ignorant to world policts and how democracies work, but they do understand the difference between civilians and military targets, so with having Al qaeda running amok in Iraq blowing up civilians, then in time Al qaeda, Osama Bin Laden etc. will have committed character suicide.
Opinion polls are already showing less support for Al qaeda and Osama Bin Laden in the middle east due to massive attacks on civilians in Iraq... in time their followers will only be those 5% of nutcases there are in every nation on this planet. Then we can kill him.
Ex. killing Adolf Hitler in 1938 vs. 1945 would have lead to 2 very different scenarios... one of them would have created a martyr statsman killed for his vision - the other a crazy person who lived like a coward after loosing it all...
Rolo you are correct, the insurgency cannot "win" in Iraq. They have no popular support at all, nor do they have a platform of what they would do if they did win. It would be chaos, and the people of Iraq know this.
The Iraqi people are the ones who have been paying the price from the terrorist. These guys target children, mosques and anything else that they can. The only power they have over people is fear. This is not the vietcong, this is not a popular uprising, this is not even a politcal movement.
sarettah
08-08-2005, 10:35 AM
There goes the "No more political posts" :nyanya:
NickPapageorgio
08-08-2005, 10:40 AM
If we lost 2,000 troops in one week, the liberals and media would be flipping out.
Right on, cause as we all know, the moms and dads that are right wing, and have kids in Iraq or Afghanistan, wouldn't give a fuck... [/sarcasm]
C'mon Mike, you can't lay everything at the feet of liberals every time. This is one of those times...
Bush...gunshy because of the beating liberals gave him...lmao...damn I needed that this morning!!! :D
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 10:55 AM
There goes the "No more political posts" :nyanya:
Wasn't politcs. It was a war post, and I am agreeing the liberals. Bush sucks!!
sarettah
08-08-2005, 10:58 AM
Wasn't politcs. It was a war post, and I am agreeing the liberals. Bush sucks!!
What war has there ever been that was not "political" ?
:blink:
el pres
08-08-2005, 10:59 AM
Bush is doing things half assed. It is wel known Syria and Iran are helping our enemies in Iraq. We should make it clear to them if they continue they will be punished. Once thy do not stop, we need to make them feel the pain of helping out enemies. This does not have to be invasion, it could be economic pressure, and some cruise missles.
**** what happen with the quote not showing properly****
Unless the US could provide serious proof, it would be something they did unilaterally, not even the UK would back you on that one.
If you did end up fighting a ground war, have you got the troops?
Irans got a massive army.
Also the risk of sending oil prices sky high, holds you back.
Nickatilynx
08-08-2005, 11:03 AM
**** what happen with the quote not showing properly****
Unless the US could provide serious proof, it would be something they did unilaterally, not even the UK would back you on that one.
If you did end up fighting a ground war, have you got the troops?
Irans got a massive army.
Also the risk of sending oil prices sky high, holds you back.
sigh...fixed it for you...
needed the "/"..
fucking newbs...
;-))
PornoDoggy
08-08-2005, 11:11 AM
C'mon Mike, you can't lay everything at the feet of liberals every time. This is one of those times...
You underestimate him.
Irans got a massive army.
Also the risk of sending oil prices sky high, holds you back.
An iranian army filled with young people who do not want to die, so the mullahs can stay in power... invading Iran would not take longer than Iraq. Ofcourse occupying 3 countries at the same time would be too much, but when Iraqies are ready to do their own house cleaning, then resources would be ready for the next terrorist nest.
As for the oil price - a swift war in Iran or Syria will not harm the price of oil, it would probably lower the price, since the regional stability would be increased.
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 12:13 PM
An iranian army filled with young people who do not want to die, so the mullahs can stay in power... invading Iran would not take longer than Iraq. Ofcourse occupying 3 countries at the same time would be too much, but when Iraqies are ready to do their own house cleaning, then resources would be ready for the next terrorist nest.
As for the oil price - a swift war in Iran or Syria will not harm the price of oil, it would probably lower the price, since the regional stability would be increased.
El Pres, I did not say INVADE and OCCUPY Iran. Only punish them if they continue to support the terrorists in Iraq. We could force an oil embargo with our navy, and destroy pipelines going to Turkey, etc. This would put a big dent in their income.
We could create "safe zones" in Iran like we did in Iraq to protect the Kurds and the Shia's for years.
There are many ways to effect countries behavior besides all out war.
The worst crime is not doing anything and accepting it.
grimm
08-08-2005, 12:46 PM
El Pres, I did not say INVADE and OCCUPY Iran. Only punish them if they continue to support the terrorists in Iraq. We could force an oil embargo with our navy, and destroy pipelines going to Turkey, etc. This would put a big dent in their income.
We could create "safe zones" in Iran like we did in Iraq to protect the Kurds and the Shia's for years.
There are many ways to effect countries behavior besides all out war.
The worst crime is not doing anything and accepting it.
Meanwhile, back at the raqnhc, iran resumes nuclear program
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050808091109990003
grimm
08-08-2005, 12:47 PM
An iranian army filled with young people who do not want to die, so the mullahs can stay in power... invading Iran would not take longer than Iraq. Ofcourse occupying 3 countries at the same time would be too much, but when Iraqies are ready to do their own house cleaning, then resources would be ready for the next terrorist nest.
As for the oil price - a swift war in Iran or Syria will not harm the price of oil, it would probably lower the price, since the regional stability would be increased.
as oil hits 64 bucks a barrel
http://finance.myway.com/ht/nw/bus/20050808/hlm_bus-l08675543.html
PornoDoggy
08-08-2005, 12:55 PM
Is not doing anything as bad as doing something for the sake of doing something?
The people who are telling me that support for the insurgency is coming from outside Iraq are the same people who told me that the war in Iraq was over WMD. They have about the same credibility as a Bill Clinton assurance that his zipper is secure.
A unilateral attack on Iran or Syria would cost the United States far more than it can afford, and the negative consequences would dwarf the short-term benefits.
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 01:02 PM
as oil hits 64 bucks a barrel
http://finance.myway.com/ht/nw/bus/20050808/hlm_bus-l08675543.html
Grimm you should be making money off of this!
I gave you some stocks to make money on!!
Hell I gave http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=hal back when it was $50 to Old Jeff!!
grimm
08-08-2005, 01:09 PM
Grimm you should be making money off of this!
I gave you some stocks to make money on!!
Hell I gave http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=hal back when it was $50 to Old Jeff!!
XOM is up a healthy 2 % today.
bought some HAL yesterday
im not worried about stocks. i just hate paying at the pump:)
Mike AI
08-08-2005, 01:15 PM
XOM is up a healthy 2 % today.
bought some HAL yesterday
im not worried about stocks. i just hate paying at the pump:)
yeah but you can make enough with these stocks to pay at the pump with Noah's Hummer!!
:okthumb:
as oil hits 64 bucks a barrel
2% rise in oil price due to a terror warning is nothing, when compared with the increase the last 2 years, which is mostly due to demand and not terror, war etc.
The world used more energy last year, than the year before, and it will use more energy than ever this year. Terrorists are not stopping the worlds oil pumps - we are sucking them dry... big difference ;-))
grimm
08-08-2005, 01:35 PM
yeah but you can make enough with these stocks to pay at the pump with Noah's Hummer!!
:okthumb:
id need to sell my body at the pump to fill the hummer:)
anyway last i heard it was paraying at Our Lady of Perpetual Maintanance. so if anything, noah is saving money:)
OldJeff
08-08-2005, 02:39 PM
Grimm you should be making money off of this!
I gave you some stocks to make money on!!
Hell I gave http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=hal back when it was $50 to Old Jeff!!
And I should have fucking listened too :)
And I should have fucking listened too :)
I took Wig´s advice last year - thank you Wig, I feel much better now ;)
Rolo, Just a buy a shitload of oil calls and get it over with already. ;-))
http://oprano.com/msgboard/showthread.php?t=35621&highlight=oil
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.