Posted on 07/07/2005 12:35:25 PM PDT by churchillbuff
You haven't mentioned it, but seeing as your priority is fighting terror networks, I was curious about what you thought of the recent morphs of the so-called 'flypaper theory'. For example, from the President's recent speech:
Iraq is the latest battlefield in this war. Many terrorists who kill innocent men, women, and children on the streets of Baghdad are followers of the same murderous ideology that took the lives of our citizens in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania. There is only one course of action against them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home. The commander in charge of coalition operations in Iraq -- who is also senior commander at this base -- General John Vines, put it well the other day. He said: "We either deal with terrorism and this extremism abroad, or we deal with it when it comes to us."
Does that strike a cord with you at all?
BTW Saddam needed to be taken out. It does not matter wether Saddam was connected to 9/11 or not (although he was behind the 1993 bombing), he was a threat to us and to Israel.
Look kiddo just because its not reported by the MSM does not mean we are neglecting the hunt for Osama. Would we STILL have 100,000 troops in Afganistan if we gave up the hunt for Osama? I did not think so.
You're dreaming.
Prove that he was not a threat then.
"but we turned our attention to Iraq"
Tell that to the 100,000 plus military members in Afhanistan...the SEAL teams would love to hear your take on this...since you think there efforts are not substantive.
You may want to tell it to the thousands of people who work in intelligence etc who are working very hard attempting to track down the little cave-dwelling coward.
churchillbuff said,
You're dreaming.
USS Cole (financed by Saddam)
WTC 93 Saddams secret service did this operation.
These must be my nightmares.
I don't remember "churchillbuff" years ago, but I susspect you are not really a Freeper. You are to ill-informed.
Actually that is our job to prove that he was a threat. But churchillbuff flat out ignores facts. I honestly don’t believe he is a freeper or is playing devils advocate to see what people say.
Same here. Well he should go to DUmmy-stan. He would find more peole that agree with him there.
The Muslims didn't need Osama Bin Laden to invade Spain in 711 and slaughter or enslave everyone they found.
Prove that he was. He didn't have a military -- army, navy or air force - worth squat. He was hemmed in by sanctions and overflight patrols. His country was poorer than dirt. He didn't have WMDs -- as Bush has publicly said. (Bush says we had bad intelligence and that it turns out Saddam didn't have WMDs). He was less a threat to us than Cuba, and I don't hear anybody on FR arguing for invading Cuba.
Yes it does, because 9-11 was the reason, publicly stated, that we went on war footing. Responding to an attack -- and responding to the attacker -- should be the number one priority. Otherwise, it would be like responding to Pearl Harbor by invading Venezuala because we had some old unresolved beef with Venezuala, even thought it had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor.
-- No, it doesn't make sense to me, because terrorists whose goal is to blow up American cities will come to American cities, not to Iraq, in order to blow up American cities. Keeping them out -- keeping us safe -- means guarding our borders. And we're not doing that. Some "war on terror," when the terrorists can walz right in from Mexico or Canada.
A real war on terror means guarding the homeland. Ask Sharon - he put up a wall to fight terror. But we have a "come on in" policy.
Keeping them out -- keeping us safe -- means guarding our borders. And we're not doing that. Some "war on terror," when the terrorists can walz right in from Mexico or Canada.Pretty much. We're only fighting one front in a two-front war. It's a bit silly to trundle off and fight Osama at his house, but leave our back door standing wide open with a neon sign that says, "INVADE USA HERE."
Securing our borders is very much a part of the WoT. Why do we have to wait for al Qaeda to exploit that opening and kill more Americans before we close it?
That's my question - and I get flamed for asking it.
Interesting point. We were told that capturing Saddam would stop it. That was wrong, obviously. The difference is, Osama is actually a ringleader of a terror group - Al Quada - that hit us on 9-11 and is still hitting the West (London bombing is speculated to be Al Quada, as was MAdrid). Getting the ringleader is usually standard strategy when going after criminal elements.
No I told you to prove that he was not a threat. You are sidestepping the subject like any troll. But it appears that not even "Post Amnesty" is helping you when other people who have been here that long are gaining up on you.
You are dumb to think only in military terms and ignore his support for terrorists. Oh and there were several instances where nerve gas was found, another fact that you ignore.
Every single troll is an ENEMY OF THE REPUBLIC!
most Americans now recognized the invasion was a mistake - - an unfortunate diversion from going after Al Quada and Osama. We have the right number of troops in the field, but they should have been focused on destroying our prime military enemy - Osama and his culprits. Those thousands of people whom Osama killed on 9-11 have not been avenged.
That's my question - and I get flamed for asking it.It's a message board. What did you expect?
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.