Terror war must target 60 nations, says Bush

The Times (U.K.) ^ | 06/03/2002 | James Doran

[gcruse]

 
THE United States must be prepared to take the War on Terror to up to 60 countries if weapons of mass
destruction are to be kept out of terrorists’ hands, President Bush said at the weekend.

I don't think this is doable.  How about covert operations to fight
terrorism with its own tactics?

[edger]

I am reluctant to say this, but that is crazy.

[He Rides A White Horse]

THE United States must be prepared to take the War on Terror to up to 60 countries if weapons of mass destruction are to be kept out of terrorists’ hands, President Bush said at the weekend.

Why do I get the feeling that this is not quite the way it was said?

[swarthyguy]

Start with Saudi and eliminate the source of funding and you've made a HUGE start.

[TomGuy]

THE United States must be prepared to take the War on Terror to up to 60 countries if weapons of mass destruction are to be kept out of terrorists’ hands

Mr. President, we could start with our own borders. Literally thousands of illegals, including Middle Easterners and Islamics, cross into this country every month as the INS sleeps. And what about those known terror cells throughout the country, according to Steven Emerson's research. All those thousands of uninspected shipping cartons entering daily. And infiltrators swimming ashore from the sea drops. And those millions of illegal aliens already in this country.

[He Rides A White Horse]

It seems rather odd that the opening statement of the article has no quotations around the 60 nations portion, while the rest of the article is littered with quotes.

Maybe it is something like this:

The President makes a statement to the effect that we have to confront terrorist whereever they exist. Enterprising 'journalist' does some homework, and sees a large number of countries suspected of supporting terrorism. Maybe sixty, according to his figures.

Sits down at his word processor and extrapolates the statement to mean that we are planning an imminent war against sixty nations.

They wouldn't do that, would they?

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

THE United States must be prepared to take the War on Terror to up to 60 countries if weapons of mass destruction are to be kept out of terrorists’ hands, President Bush said at the weekend.

Why do I get the feeling that this is not quite the way it was said?

Maybe because 9 months after Sept. 11th, we haven't even hit the top 3 countries that sponsor terrorism. We're chasing al-Qaeda all over the hills of Afghanistan while the real perpetrators are sitting in the halls of government in Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia laughing their heads off.

[Maceman]

Does that include SAUDI ARABIA?

[He Rides A White Horse]

Maybe Pakistan also.

[gcruse]

You know, you're right. The '60' nations developing weapons of mass destruction have no means to deliver them, nor the means to increase terrorist attacks in the US anymore than is now likely. We need to eliminate the threat at home, then worry about any more foreign adventures.

[gcruse]

They wouldn't do that, would they?

Would they be wrong?  Bush's
rhetoric has to have a pony in it somewhere.

[He Rides A White Horse]

This article tries to imply that we are about to embark on a campaign of total war against 60 nations. Probably at the same time, the author would want people to believe.

[Walkin Man]

If the United States decides to make surprise strikes on other countries, it will mark a big change in strategy for the US military, which traditionally acts only in self-defence.

This will be a hard thing to do. We need to have proof that we can show to the world if we undertake sudden military attacks on other nations that we are not at war with. I agree with W that we can't sit back and wait for the islamic fascists to strike us with WMD. If its war the jihadists want lets give it to them in spades!

[gcruse]

 high-volume precision air strikes in all times
and weathers, and in all terrains.

Now THAT'S a HYPERPOWER!

[Alan Chapman]

Preemptive military incursions? It's megalomania. An imperialistic foreign-policy will foster more hatred of the US and innocent Americans will be the target of retaliation.

If Americans are afraid of terrorists now, just wait until we start dropping bombs in other countries.

[He Rides A White Horse]

Maybe because 9 months after Sept. 11th, we haven't even hit the top 3 countries that sponsor terrorism.

It may take more than 9 months to replace the hardware needed; the military is recovering from a president who expended much of our ordinance covering his tracks with Monica, and other things.

Monica, the face that launched (and wasted) a thousand missiles.