So Tommy, have you turned into a technical retard, or do you just like to see yourself post?
Six posts, each covering one point of my post, that could have been done in one? Here are your replies, in one post.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
Never mind the fact that he let bin Laden get away.
Bin Laden would have never been in Afghanistan if Bill Clinton hadn't allowed him to "get away".Really? Clinton had troops in Afghanistan and had bin Laden on the run, and then let him get away in the mountains of Tora Bora, then call of the dogs and go an a boondoggle in Iraq? You'd better let the historians know...this will be news to them.
The truth is, Clinton did try to kill bin Laden and the Clinton Administration did specifically warn the Bush Administration about bin Laden when Bush took office, and Bush was warned repeatedly in the months before 9/11.
On July 10, 2001, two months before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, then-CIA Director George J. Tenet met with his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, at CIA headquarters to review the latest on Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist organization. Black laid out the case, consisting of communications intercepts and other top-secret intelligence showing the increasing likelihood that al-Qaeda would soon attack the United States. It was a mass of fragments and dots that nonetheless made a compelling case, so compelling to Tenet that he decided he and Black should go to the White House immediately....
...But Tenet had been having difficulty getting traction on an immediate bin Laden action plan, in part because Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had questioned all the National Security Agency intercepts and other intelligence. Could all this be a grand deception? Rumsfeld had asked. Perhaps it was a plan to measure U.S. reactions and defenses....
...Tenet hoped his abrupt request for an immediate meeting would shake Rice. He and Black, a veteran covert operator, had two main points when they met with her. First, al-Qaeda was going to attack American interests, possibly in the United States itself. Black emphasized that this amounted to a strategic warning, meaning the problem was so serious that it required an overall plan and strategy. Second, this was a major foreign policy problem that needed to be addressed immediately. They needed to take action that moment - covert, military, whatever - to thwart bin Laden.
The United States had human and technical sources, and all the intelligence was consistent, the two men told Rice. Black acknowledged that some of it was uncertain "voodoo" but said it was often this voodoo that was the best indicator.
Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies.Washington Post ArticcleThere's your dimwit-in-chief in action, Tommy. He did not want to "swat at flies." Bin Laden was a "fly" as far as he was concerned.
Bus was further warned, on August 6, 2001, that bin Laden was up to something involving "hijacked planes" I guess he didn't have a fly swatter.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
Afghanistan is the war on terror.
Oh really! So a "win" in Afghanistan. wins the war on terror? Just how do you propose to "win" there? Remember the Soviets? Remember Veit Nam?It is now, as much as any one target or country can be identified. The war on terror, of course, is everywhere, but we can't have troops everywhere, can we? One step at a time. Afghanistan is step one...always has been. As for the Soviets, they were trying to keep the country a satellite, which we are not trying to do. We are not trying to subjugate the government of Afghanistan. Our issue is with al Qaeda and the Taliban.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
Afghanistan is the job that Bush never finished because he went into Iraq, and which allowed Afghanistan to re-flame and al Qaeda to rebuild.
Bin Laden is in Pakistan, not Afghanistan, is he not? How did al Qaeda rebuild in Afghanistan when they are in Pakistan?I don't exactly know where he is, do you? If so, please send the coordinates to Bush now. Maybe he can drop a bomb on his head. What we do know is that they are picking up the fight in Afghanistan, and do in fact have training bases in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They had the time to rebuild because we took the pressure off them and went to Iraq. Bin Laden must have no doubt been praising Allah (not to mention laughing) when Bush did that.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
BTW, I doubt McCain and Bush think it is good news. Watch for all kinds of reasons from them why they think it is not, in fact.
I don't care if they think it is good or not, kool aid boy. I get the picture. You think it is good but don't care if they think it is good or not. You are one confused puppy.
FACT is, Obama has nothing to do with the succes that is occuring in Iraq, isn't that right?Ah, now you really getting nutty. He was not the President, was he? What has that got to do with it? Touting some success in a war that never should have been? I guess you could say that Obama has had nothing to do with that success. You would also, in the same breath, have to say that he has had nothing to do with the loss of almost a trillion dollars, over 4,100 U.S troop lives, and countless Iraqi civilians; and that he had nothing to do with starting the war in the first place, to name a few. With no end in sight to any of it.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
Thomas, that civil war will finish itself out after we are gone. Hint: The Shiites will win.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25748613
Come again?Certainly interesting, but we'll see what happens once we are gone. They have been fighting for hundreds if not thousands of years. It's easy for the Shiites to say they will get along with the Sunni's once we are gone. Doing it will be another story.
ThomasK wrote:truthhurts wrote:
The Iraq war falls in the "stupid war" category.
Both are stupid. And it's really stupid to think that sending more and more troops to Afghanistan will "win the war on terror".Hmmm. So now now you think both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are stupid. So tell me again, whey are you supporting McCain, the guy who has no plan (other than total victory, no matter how long it takes) to extricate us from EITHER war, and in fact pretty much wants to continue the status quo?
