Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: buckalfa
"the take over of Saudi Arabia. Why gamble on a high risk attack on Europe or the US...."

First of all any significant AQ presence in Saudi just gives us a specific target that is already offshore of our soil. Think anybody in the Arab world wants to risk letting us get hold of the Saudi Oil reserves in a response to such a clear cut threat to our own survival? We already proved we will strike unilaterally with Iraq.

Next, they don't want to "strangle" us for some sort of concessions. They want a large pile of bloody or burned American bodies. "High Risk?" For them, it's victory at all costs. At any cost!

2,570 posted on 07/29/2004 3:14:19 PM PDT by ExSoldier (M1A: Any mission. Any conditions. Any foe. At any range.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2180 | View Replies ]


To: ExSoldier

I highly respect your opnions and insight. My thinking
is based on my not being convinced that AQ has thermo
nukes at this moment (they would have already used them)
and the evidence gathered on this thread about infiltration
and the increasing frequency of incidents (attacks?). You
are most correct that in the long run, the Jihadists want
to see us all dead and America a pile of smoldering radioactive embers.


2,691 posted on 07/29/2004 8:10:56 PM PDT by buckalfa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2570 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson