To: ChipShot
Don't we want these idiots to move around and get out in the open where we have people that know how to deal with them. Yup.
What I learned from this article if we take everything at face value (other than that Newsweek will swallow anti-American spin whenever possible): 1) bin Laden (or whoever's running things now) has very limited financial resources, thus can't afford to fully fund the Taliban *and* get people over to Iraq. 2) bin Laden has a very limited number of active fighters. 3) bin Laden is afraid his western networks have been thoroughly penetrated and thus sees his best opportunity to kill Americans isn't with suicide bombs in the west, but by taking on heavily armed, young healthy American troops who would love to take out Al Qaeda members.
To: Numbers Guy
Keen insights.
15 posted on
12/08/2003 6:41:03 AM PST by
syriacus
(Ask Chuck Schumer if he would prefer to do away with lifetime appointments for Federal judges.)
To: Numbers Guy
I like your analysis. Occam's Razor in action. What you identify are the only facts that we can be reasonably sure of. And it's all good news for us.
16 posted on
12/08/2003 6:42:37 AM PST by
ClearCase_guy
(France delenda est)
To: Numbers Guy
Good points. Even if Saddam planned to fight a guerilla war from day one and put all his resources and organization into doing so, the Baathists aren't doing well at all.
I'd be tempted to covertly fund the transfer of Al Qaeda to Iraq. If the choice is to have Al Qaeda fighting Force Recon Marines and Army Airborne troops or the security guards at the nuclear power plant fifty miles west of me, I know which one I'd choose.
22 posted on
12/08/2003 6:49:56 AM PST by
Snake65
(Osama Bin Decomposing)
To: Numbers Guy
Exactly. As I read this article, I kept thinking, "This is all good news and the authors can't (or won't) see it."
26 posted on
12/08/2003 7:13:30 AM PST by
ChipShot
To: Numbers Guy
What I learned from this article if we take everything at face value (other than that Newsweek will swallow anti-American spin whenever possible): 1) bin Laden (or whoever's running things now) has very limited financial resources, thus can't afford to fully fund the Taliban *and* get people over to Iraq. 2) bin Laden has a very limited number of active fighters. 3) bin Laden is afraid his western networks have been thoroughly penetrated and thus sees his best opportunity to kill Americans isn't with suicide bombs in the west, but by taking on heavily armed, young healthy American troops who would love to take out Al Qaeda members.Yep. Remember all the Demorat spin about how a war in Iraq would divert resources away from the hunt for Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Looks like they were *exactly* wrong, as usual. AQ is the one who's getting stretched thin.
35 posted on
12/08/2003 7:37:37 AM PST by
mikegi
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson