Posted on 07/07/2005 12:35:25 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Not the ones who are determined to come here and hit us in our streets. If that was my goal -- as it's the goal of a number of terrorists, no doubt -- I wouldn't be stupid enough to get diverted to Iraq, I'd go directly to the US. If you think such a simple calculation is beyond the intelligence of terrorists, then you're following Rule 1 of the How to Lose a War book: Always assume your enemy is stupid.
"If you think such a simple calculation is beyond the intelligence of terrorists, then you're following Rule 1 of the How to Lose a War book: Always assume your enemy is stupid."
But you're assuming that WE'RE stupid.
"Not the ones who are determined to come here and hit us in our streets."
They did so on 9-11, before the WOT without much trouble. Since we started hitting back we haven't heard very much from them. Does this suggest anything to you?
They can be as motivated as they want but without a support structure they are just impotent little men. We have VIOLENTLY shaken that support structure. In WWII we fought two wars. In the WOT we fight here and there--so what?
So far WE are winning.
As far as the lessons of History: the hate that eats them from the inside out will do more to bring them down than you seem to realize: See Adolph Hitler.
You are missing a point if they are hitting us in our homeland then they are taking forces from Iraq. In my book that means they are near their end.
OMG! He released one just late last year, just as DevSix says. remarkable you missed that event.
Yes, you're a prime example of that.
So tell me, is it better for U.S. interests for Mush to remain in control or to force his hand with bin Laden? It seems to me it's wiser to bide our time using whatever anti-terrorist assistance he can provide in the short term. Do we want to trigger the angry hornet's-nest of fundamentalist anti-Americanism that exists in Pakistan by violating their territory and arresting/killing their hero bin Laden?
I think Porter Goss has stated the problem accurately, calling it one of "diplomacy." I don't know what concessions Mush expects from all this but it's true that we exposed Khan and Mush protected him. I think he's protecting bin Laden as well, for fear of a terrible political backlash. I think the fundamentalist Pakis have us over a barrel for the moment unless we're willing to risk a nuclear war.
Well, I would disagree. I believe we missed an opportunity to deal with the Paki end of jihad.
The longer we wait, the harder it gets.
I don't think we trigger anything by resolute action; we took on the opprobrium of the world in going after Iraq.
But we're afraid of offending Pakistan, and their benefactors the Saudis?
On Pakistan, we'd have a lot of allies.
And what price pride and honor? The evidence linking 911 to Pak is greater than that to Iraq, so every day we don't get them looks bad for us, not to mention the incredible growth in stature that Osama has had because of our unwillingness/inability to get him so far.
Otherwise in a nutshell, we're spooked by the Paki fundies so we don't follow the trail of 911 vengeance where it leads.
And we allow him to hold sham elections. Who's fooled by that? NO ONE. So the American rhetoric about democracy rings hollow when our interests are at stake.
Anyway, the die is cast and we're on the path we're on. It's not a situation that generates optimism. It means not only a long presence in Afghanistan, but endless skirmishes along the border, with the jihadis using their sanctuaries with impunity.
Now, how you gonna defeat a jihadi enemy if he has safe sanctuaries to run to every time the US piles it on.
[Prediction: I'll get flamed as a "DU provacateur" for advocating that we go after somebody who killed 3000-plus people on American soil.]
You write and talk the montra of a "DU provacateur".
Germany has KSK there as well.
You're not being very active in a vanity thread that you posted. Dont you have anything else to say, I mean in reaction to everyone else's comments or were you just playing devils advocate?
What is worth replying to here? Its the same ole crap, people get frustrated, make a post and get flamed...
Maybe it's time for you to pay for the bandwidth that you are wasting on your inanity.
Posting on FR isn't the only call on my time during the day. I think I've made my point: Al Queda attacked us on 9-11, but we turned our attention to Iraq, which didn't attack us. Saddam is captured, but Al Queda is still bombing people.
Yeah he was the guy Clinton had a chance to apprehend twice and did not want to be bothered! Yeah, I remember him!!!!
Must stop having a life :-)
I think I've made my point: Al Queda attacked us on 9-11, but we turned our attention to Iraq,
No, we first turned our attention to Afghanistan and removed the Taliban from power because they were giving bin laden aid and comfort (and IIRC, named him their commander in chief of their armed forces just to tweak us)
which didn't attack us.
Attacked us through terrorist proxies or at least tried to. And basically Saddam was an irritant in the area that we needed removed. Imagine trying to fight a war on terror with him still firmly in power.
Saddam is captured, but Al Queda is still bombing people.
Al-Qaeda doesnt need bin laden to bomb people. IF he is dead, then why are the terrorist attacks by al-qaeda still going on? If he is alive, and then someday captured and taken out of circulation, but the terrorist attacks continue in al-qaaedas name, then what?
Weekend at Bernie's! The dude is already in hell. He hasn't made one of his egotistical video's in a few years, lets say round 4.
Only the dems keep saying there is some claimed link between Saddam and 9-11. However, Saddam HAS been linked to terrorism.
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 don't know if you're from DUmmie land or not, but I do know that the dems continue to call for the US to invade Pakistan to get hold of Osama...so which party is the one looking to start a war with Islam as a whole...yup, that'd be the dems. If you have a way to obtain Osama hiding in a nation of 162.5 MILLION Muslims feel free to share it.
I'm with him, you guys. Time to re-vamp our efforts. Throw more chips on the table. Do whatever has to be done.
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.