Posted on 07/07/2005 12:35:25 PM PDT by churchillbuff
I was lectured on Freerepublic that I was supposed to "feel safer" because we captured Saddam -- even though there's no evidence that he was behind 9-11. Osama is the guy that Bush promised to get "dead or alive" -- but four years later, he's still out there, free as a jail bird.
Maybe it's time to refocus on the mastermind and culprits who were behind 9-11?
Prediction: I'll get flamed as a "DU provacateur" for advocating that we go after somebody who killed 3000-plus people on American soil.
I argued with you about this before, and you ignored me then.
This is simply not true, although we have no evidence that he attacked us on 911 we have an over whelming amount of evidence that he attacked us in other areas including the WTC 93.
I will say this again. I am ashamed at you for being a freeper for so long and still ignorant of facts.
I wonder?
Wouldn't it be nice to at least bring bin Laden to justice for 9/11?
Lots of insults, and arrogance.
Sure it would, but that still wouldn't stop them.
Actually I'd like to see him brought to 'justice' with his head gracing a pole.
You have a problem with truth?
Do DU people want to kill Osama and Al Quada? I doubt it.
Lots of insults, and arrogance.
LOL..yes it has.
[I have a question to ask Churchill-Buff which I thought you two might be interested in.]
You don't bring Churchill to mind. I'm no scholar of Churchill, myself, but I don't recall reading that he tried to get along with Hitler, for example, back when Chamberlain was appeasing Hitler. Just think: Hitler hadn't done anything to England when the Brits declared war on him.
Did Churchill call for a withdrawal of troops from occupied Germany? I remember reading he was concerned about the Iron Curtain, so that doesn't seem likely.
So I have to ask this in all sincerity: are your studies of Churchill opposition research?
Can you provide me with a link to one instance of your defending or supporting the Bush administration on this board. I'll wait.
I don't know. Col. Hunt was saying the same thing on O'Reilly last night. Said it is way past time to take the gloves off and get these people. Myself, I do not know how it could be done. We would not have any support world-wide or at home. I think Bush waited too long in his effort to please Blair and the UN, when we went into Iraq. Gave the bastard time to hide the WMDs. I think were we able to locate and secure them quickly, we would be able to launch into Syria, Iran, or Pakistan. Now, however, any intelligence we "show" will always now be met with suspicion.
That is as it's always been.
Tet was a perfect example. Unit commanders who viewed provided intel with suspicion were surprised and their units paid the price.
Better Unit commanders who listened were ready and kicked Charlies butt.
You've been of FreeRepublic a while, so I'm curious as to what prompted your outburst (you're a Brit? was it the recent attacks?), and how you feel about the responses to your question. You haven't said much in response.
I also wonder how you feel about the 'no one ever said Saddam was connected to 9/11' comments. Do you feel that you were told this?
I don't think you quite understand what I am saying. What I mean is now, whenever we go on the tube or in front of the world and say "our intel indicates Iran has ten nukes and is ready to sell them to terrorists," those in the media and others will say, "wait, that's what you said about Iraq's WMDs and they were not there." I am not saying individuals leaders but the nation as a whole will be led down a path of non-believing. Get my drift?
NOT SURPRISED.
"""I also wonder how you feel about the 'no one ever said Saddam was connected to 9/11' comments."""
BALDERDASH
My purpose is to stimulate some independent thought among freepers who are too willing to be guided by the administration's propaganda slogans re. the war in Iraq. (I'm a rare bird - a conservative Republican - NOT a Buchananite - who opposed the Iraq invasion from the outset as a diversion from Job 1: capturing and killing Al Quada. It's precisely because I'm NOT a pacifist or appeaser that I wanted us to go with force and fury against the culprits of 9-11, before using 9-11 as an excuse to pursue unrelated agendas - which is what I consider the invasion of Iraq to be. Now, Saddam, Al Quada and its networks having been neglected, on a relative scale, by us, their threat continues and perhaps has grown - that's the message I take from yesterday's bombing). Therefore, it was an appropriate time for some pot-stirring, and that was the point of starting this thread.
I think the seals recently killed in Afghanistan were after him.
The MSM branch of the CommiecRAT party doesn't care about the truth anyway.
They'll make stuff up and lie to support their traitorous buddies.
Indeed you are. One who parrots the BS of Michael Moore and Charlie Rangle and tries to pass yourself off as a conservative while dipping your serpant tongue into the blood of innocents to use for your political agenda.
Yes, you're a bird alright...a carrion feeding vulture.
You think we're not working 24/7 to get Osama?
President Bush warned us all that some might tire of the WOT.
Two Japanese soldiers from WW2 just walked out of the jungle in the Phillipines this year! That war was over 60 years ago. We may not get him before he dies but get him we will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.