News you may have missed

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Bush officially gives up on capturing Osama"

I don't believe you even read the article at the link you posted. I didn't see Osama mentioned. John


"Bush said in an interview that he did not think the controversial amnesty deal between the Pakistani military and pro-Taliban elements in Waziristan gave a safe haven to terrorists, but added "we are watching this very carefully, obviously"."
 
More of GoSlash27's Blame-Bush (TM) links...

Rumsfeld actively suppressed all planning for post-war security
"The secretary of defense continued to push on us ... that everything we write in our plan has to be the idea that we are going to go in, we're going to take out the regime, and then we're going to leave," Scheid said. "We won't stay."
Click to expand...
Sounds like Rumsfeld had the right idea to start with.

No link between Saddam and Osama according to Republican Senate intelligence committee
There was no evidence of a link between former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, according to a report released Friday by the U.S. Senate.

After he was captured, Hussein acknowledged that government officials had met with Iraqi al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, but the report concluded there was no ongoing relationship.

The suggestion that al-Zarqawi was at the very least tolerated by Hussein was a theme of then-secretary of state Colin Powell's 2003 speech at the United Nations Security Council advocating the war in Iraq.
Click to expand...
You may be able to sort out the contradictions of politics; I don't pretend to.

Bush officially gives up on capturing Osama

Covered by johnbt; should Bush rush off to invade Pakistan because they aren't doing what we want?

NATO requests reinforcements in Afghanistan

Which means what?
 
You may have missed this one too, about one of the reasons why Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke believe Al Qaeda had a link to Saddam, WMD etc. This was probably partly why Clinton came up with the policy to remove Saddam from power. Seems to make sense why the Bush administration and so many others would think the same thing. Further confirms some of the reasons for going to war.

from the 9//11 Commission Report, pg 128

http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-145.html

"...The original sealed indictment had added that al Qaeda had "reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda
would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq." This passage led Clarke, who for years had read intelligence reports on Iraqi-Sudanese cooperation on chemical weapons, to speculate to Berger that a large Iraqi presence at chemical facilities in Khartoum was "probably a direct result of the Iraq / Al Qida agreement." Clarke added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the "exact formula used by Iraq."
 
Are we saying that Bush is responsible for that, as well? Even though he has had nothing to do with appointing anyone to that whacko group?:)
 
I don't believe you even read the article at the link you posted. I didn't see Osama mentioned. John
Click to expand...

He wasn't. In fact, he's hardly mentioned at all these days. Funny, that...
Anyway, where is he? According to our government, he's in Pakistan in this very area. Are they going to let us in to get him? No. Are they going to go in to get him themselves? No.
So what they're saying is our "allies" have just made Bin Laden's capture impossible...and we're "okay" with that?
Maybe you can explain to me how this constitutes anything other than what I said. The difference is lost on me.
 
Maybe what was said was real. Maybe it wasn't.

If you're Osama, you gonna take a chance and come out into the open? Right... That buzzing sound? That's a cruise missle bearing down on ya...

Is it a ploy? Or is it for real? Does even your hairdresser know for sure? LOL!! :eek:

GoSlash, your really stretching it here...
 
gc70,
We went into Afghanistan because they wouldn't hand him over. He is supposedly the mastermind behind 9/11 and the leader of Al friggin' Qaeda! I was told by my government that we wanted him "dead or alive".
Our servicemen have died over there.
Yes. I have a problem with that.
 
Pakistan never done anything to us. Why would we invade them? They probably dont even have a relationship with Bin Laden, or al quaeda. If you say they do you best be ready to prove it. And dont bother to point out the obvious we'll just say we dont believe you.:D :cool:
 
GC,
No, I don't advocate invading Pakistan. But I would be willing to put together a few carrots and sticks to try to get them to play ball instead of shrugging nonchalantly.
300+ dead, 900+ wounded. 70 Billion dollars gone. The war is getting worse and now we find out that the whole point of going there in the first place has evaporated....and your reaction is "oh, well"?
What do you advocate doing at this point?

Big Ruger,
I like it. I'm not certain if you intended it that way, but I like it :D
 
GC,
I also notice that I never responded to your earlier comments...

Sounds like Rumsfeld had the right idea to start with.
Click to expand...
"Let's knock over the sitting government, create a power vacuum, and leave" sounds like a good idea to you??
If that's the case, mission beyond accomplished. Why not just bring 'em home now?
And whatever happened to the argument that they set the troop levels according to the wishes of the commanders?

You may be able to sort out the contradictions of politics; I don't pretend to.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I gathered that. The Republican controlled Intelligence Committee of the Republican controlled Senate has just made it clear that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Al Qaeda, or Osama BinLaden. Yet our Republican president still insists on tying the two together.
What, are *they* playing politics now also?

Which means what?
Click to expand...
Which means that things aren't going well in Afghanistan.
 
Well Duuuuhhhhhh. This isn't news to some of us.

It's exactly the same "news" James Bamford found and revealed in his book " A Pretext For War" and what Robert Young Pelton revealed in an interview on Coast-To- Coast AM with George Noory.
 
Is it my imagination, or has GoSlash contributed absolutely nothing to this board other than "BUSH ATE MY BRAIN" type threads?

We get the idea, Slash. You have minor issues with the current administration.

Instead of spending so much time dredging up this repetitive stuff, why don't you actually go out and try to make your community a better place?

You claim that Bush & the Republican party are destroying this country. So why sit idly bitching about it, instead of doing something to counteract it?

If you devoted even 1/10th of the energy to your community that you expend venting about all things political, you'd have a positive impact.

Have you ever even posted a firearms related message?
 
No, I don't advocate invading Pakistan. But I would be willing to put together a few carrots and sticks to try to get them to play ball instead of shrugging nonchalantly.
Click to expand...
"Bush said in an interview that he did not think the controversial amnesty deal between the Pakistani military and pro-Taliban elements in Waziristan gave a safe haven to terrorists, but added "we are watching this very carefully, obviously".
Click to expand...
Doesn't sound like "shrugging nonchalantly." Bush may need some time to develop a response, but if you already have The Perfect Plan, you should send him a copy so he can get started right away.

(I advocate thinking before acting. I also advocate not complaining because precipitious action was not taken.)
 
"Let's knock over the sitting government, create a power vacuum, and leave" sounds like a good idea to you??
Click to expand...
Yes, it does! That is exactly the way it worked during the American Revolution. The French came and helped us gain our freedom from the British and then promptly left rather than staying to try to tell us how to run things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top