[NELSON111]

I wanted to reach into the TV and knock his freakin head off. " I would go in and get him...we shouldn't get him by dropping bombs"...well HARRY? how in HELL do you suggest we DO get him? You think the taliban are going to let you waltz on in and take him? No wonder you lost you loser!

After this the loser got on the kick of "no evidence that Bin Laden did this...or at least I have not seen it". Hey Harry...who gives a FLIP if you have seen the evidence or not?! You LOSER! The one thing people need to do when IDIOTS make this suggestion is to simply say "well...do you doubt the evidence that he was behind the Cole attack...or the African Embassy bombings? How many lives have to be lost before you are moved deeply enough to use force to get him? I guess the 17 of the Cole...and we KNOW he was behind it...is not enough for you."

[Numbers Guy]

What surprises me is that if there's one war that any libertarian would quite easily support, it's this one. Someone hiding behind the protection of another nation launched a murderous attack on our own soil. The U.S. demanded that bin Laden and Al Qaeda be turned over, the Taliban refused, so the U.S. attacked. If *this* war isn't a just war to the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate, I'd like to see what he'd do if OBL's boys happen to detonate a nuclear weapon in the U.S. Probably call for further negotiations . . .

[rwfromkansas]

That statement makes me grow even stronger in my conviction that Libertarians are nothing more than pseudo conservatives, no matter how much they protest to the contrary.