Officials talk of military response

Washington Times ^ | 9/13/01 | Rowan Scarborough

[kattracks]

U.S. military retaliation for Tuesday's kamikaze-style attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon will come sooner rather than later as part of a broader war against terrorists, administration officials said yesterday.

Military officers said the Pentagon has quickly updated options for striking terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, a haven for Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, the No. 1 suspect in masterminding the well-coordinated terrorist attacks. Officials said the Bush administration is in the early stages of developing a much broader war on Middle East-based terrorist organizations that could involve attacks on training camps in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.

[goody2shooz]

Massive carpet bombing with fuel-air bombs would be nice; how about turning much of Afghanistan, Iran, and Irag into a single-level glow-in-the-dark parking lot?

I'm not feeling particularly conciliatory towards those countries tonight. That much should be obvious.

[rockfish59]

uhhhhh, talk is cheap, ain't it?

[Aric2000]

Yes, I have been watching this unfold, and I believe that the US has 72 hours max to respond, before the american people forget the intitial feelings, and other countries begin to wear on thier support. We need to hit quickly, decisively, and completely. Once we get it started, we can sustain it, but it HAS to be done quickly!!!

[Southack]

"Mr. Powell added, "Let's not think that one single counterattack will rid the world of terrorism of the kind we saw yesterday. This is going to take a multifaceted attack along many dimensions."

Contrary to the anti-Americans who will criticize everything that we say or do, these are the right words to say.

Obviously we are going to war. This won't be one strike with a few cruise missiles. No. This will be the eradication of the world's new Barbary pirates.

[tbeatty]

Fuel air bombs, maiming bomblets (we need a terror weapon). We need to steel ourselves against civilian casualties because I think it's going to be necessary. These people will hide behind civilians and that can;t be allowed to stop this hunt. Send in tanks with the flamethrower in the barrel.

After we take kabul, ring it with land mines with only one entrance that's guarded. No planes in or out.

[mrustow]

See also:

It DID Happen Here

[newwahoo]

We already have enough reason to nuke Kabul and Tehran as well. We are enduring a WMD attack in effect, and what I saw in Manhattan today was more than enough to convince me to release the nukes. Its quick and easy, and the future deterrant effect would be enormous.

Besides, what are they going to do? Hijack planes and fly them into a huge pair of buildings and kill thousands of Americans? We just took their best shot, lets show them ours.

[Silvertip]

$100 bucks says the US doesn't do crap.

[truth_seeker]

$100 bucks says the US doesn't do crap.

You're on. I hope you can afford to pay. Check back on this in a year. Let freepers be the judge of the definition of "crap."

[Silvertip]

A half-assed, limp-wristed response weeks or months later won't cut it.

Only a hard-hitting and immediate overwhelming response will do. I don't think Bush has it in him, it might offended someone.

I hope I'm wrong. If I am, $100 bucks to your favorite charity.

[CommiesOut]

How about all these MFs who spent our tax money and said our skies, and especially skies over DC and NYC, are super safe? How about those who trained terrorist pilots? How about INS, State Department (visas and politics) and airport safety dudes? Etc. etc.

How come noone asks these obvious questions? I'm sure FReepers can come up with more.

[brat]

No rhetoric! ACTION please!

[Alberta's Child]

Open the wallet. What odds will you give me that the U.S. will not only respond, but that the response will include tactical nuclear warheads?

From my view up here north of the border, the signs are ominous. Something VERY BIG is going to happen.

[sneakypete]

>>"I think you have to introduce Army ground troops," said a retired four-star general who endorses forcible entry into Afghanistan's mountainous terrain. Said an active duty Army officer: "It would be something like Somalia. A large element to secure the outer perimeter and a team to take down the suspected structures."<<

Both are right. Unfortunately,this may well be too much like Somalia.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I think you are wrong!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Tactical nuclear warheads might be just the right weapons to use. delivers a message to countries that have been supporting the nasties!

[CommiesOut]

Let me steal from your new post and add to this thread. Thank you.:

How come ***U.S. intelligence agencies failed to do what we depend on them to do -- penetrate terrorist cells and warn law-enforcement agencies of impending attacks so that they can take preventive action.***?

***The CIA "has always had a process for assessing a potential informant's reliability, access [to information about a terrorist group's activity] and value," the Bremer panel concluded. But, the Clinton guidelines, by contrast, "set up complex procedures for seeking approval to recruit informants and forced the United States to rely too heavily on foreign intelligence services. The adoption of the guidelines contributed to a marked decline in agency morale unparalleled since the 1970s, and a significant number of case officers retired early or resigned."***

***Unfortunately, 15 months after its publication, neither the Bush administration nor Congress have seen fit to act on this critical recommendation made by the National Commission on Terrorism. Tuesday's events make clear, however, that this dangerous part of Bill Clinton's foreign policy legacy should be deep-sixed at once.*** (Washington Times 9/13/01)

Can it be we have a mole in the White House? (per William Safire)

That would be the questions expected from smart citizenry.

[wastoute]

Agreed. Ever play "Battleship"? I say we just start dropping nukes on places where we think he "might" be until we figure we have got him, say 100 or so in various places throughout Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, etc. I don't give a shit if Dan Blather shows pictures of little arab children horribly suffering. I can counter every one of those pictures with a picture of an American orphan. Again, not out of hate or anger. This is a WAR against terrorism, we HAVE to have the resolve to do the HORRIBLE things necessaary to win. Otherwise we lose. It is that simple.

[wastoute]

PS I would say that we make it clear that ANY "American" who would protest that "innocent" or "good arabs" may suffer during what needs to be done be considered to be "protecting the enemy" and treated like a traitor. This kind of war requires things be done in which innoents suffer, it is too bad, but we didn't ask for this, it has been thrust upon us.