|
Author
|
Topic: Osama Bin Laden Gets What He Gives
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 17 of 98 (614190)
05-02-2011 3:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by kjsimons
05-02-2011 3:44 PM
|
|
Re: Grrrr @ the polarising nature of this issue
kjsimons writes: The best that I think we can hope for is that this causes a splintering of al Qaeda into smaller and less capable factions due to the power vacuum left by his death and the different agendas of the various groups that make it up and the egos of their various leaders. However that would likely make any terrorist attacks smaller and more localized but also far harder to discover early and prevent.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 16 by kjsimons, posted 05-02-2011 3:44 PM | | kjsimons has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 26 of 98 (614204)
05-02-2011 5:23 PM
|
|
|
The amazing thing was seeing that many Americans ...
The amazing thing was seeing that many Americans are really little different than the folk supporting Al Qaeda in the streets of Pakistan, Iran, Lybia, Palestine, Syria or Afghanistan; simply an ignorant jingoistic rabble.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes:
So I guess if one of your family members or friends was murdered by this bastard you would have no compulsion or desire to want to take this guy out. You would care less if he got of scott free in a court of law and go out to continue his murderous rampage. Speaks alot about your sense of morality and your willingness to tacitally condone his actions by doing absolutely fucking nothing, essentially spitting in the face of the victims of 9-11 and those who put their lives on the line to protect your freedoms. Nice pile of bullshit you posted there. What someone may want to do and what they actually do are not synonymous. Of course people would like to see a murderer punished and yes people might get upset if a court verdict does not go their way, but that is also totally irrelevant to the issue of the crowds of US citizens dancing and chanting in the streets or the utterly silly stadium chants of "USA, USA" when the first news broke. Nor has anyone suggested doing absolutely fucking nothing. Nor is it essentially spitting in the face of the victims of 9-11 and those who put their lives on the line to protect your freedoms; it is called respecting the rule of law; it is called being civilized. You are of course free to rant to your hearts content, but understand why others see it as just a rant. Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes: You act like we should never had pursued this guy to justice and then act all distraught that we have the audacity to conduct a surgical strike to take out someone who killed over 3000 Americans and god knows how many other people around the world. God forbid we actually take action and kill a truly evil person who had no regard for life. Again, that is simply not correct. I for one think we were really really stupid to militarily invade Afghanistan and likely criminal in invading Iraq, but that is a far cry from saying we should do nothing.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes: I for one think we were really really stupid to militarily invade Afghanistan and likely criminal in invading Iraq, but that is a far cry from saying we should do nothing. I was not a big supporter of the Iraqi war either and believed we should have pursued Al Queda in Afghanistan before trying to tangle with Huessein in Iraq. However, how praytell could we neutralize Al Queda and Bin Laden without going to the source of his operation in Afghanistan? You really think Bin Laden would have just stopped at 9-11 and not continued his attacks if we had not gone into Afghanistan immediately following 9-11? What actions do you think we should have done since you are evidently smarter than all the US military leaders combined in the last decade. Did we make misakes. Of course. Did we sometimes cause flashback on our own presence in the Middle East. Of course. However, what is the alternative? Sometimes we have had to pick the less of two evils. However, I do not regret our pursuit and removal of Bin Laden from the picture. This I believe was a victory not a mistake. I did not say that we should not have gone after Bin Laden or Al Queda either. I said that a military invasion of Afghanistan was stupid. We could have gone after the key people in Al Queda the very same way we got Bin Laden, through intelligence and a strategic strike.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes: How do you think we attained the intelligence to capture Bin Laden? Al Queda was much larger before we went into Afghanistan. Afghanistan for all intensive purposes was run by the Taliban and Al Queda in the 90's. Al Queda was severelly crippled only after a concerted attack by NATO forces in the region. Stategic strikes can only work if we have the intelligence to act on them. Once the 9-11 attack occured, Bin Laden went underground and became very elusive. It was only after whittling down Al Queda and capturing some of their key members were we able to get this intelligence. We gained intelligence the same way intelligence has always been garnered, slowly, piece by piece using technology, money, threat, force, coercion and most of all, through people on the ground that are accepted into a culture. The issue is whether a full scale military invasion of Afghanistan helped or hindered gathering that information.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
I don't see that at all. The issue with Al Queda and Afghanistan and 9-11 is not really cut and dry. Much of the planning for 9-11 as an example took place in the US, Canada, Spain, Indonesia, Philippines, and other areas far removed from Afghanistan. Since you bring up WWII, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was about as poorly thought out as so many military actions. The Japanese went after the wrong targets there just as we did with the Afghanistan invasion. (love to discuss that one maybe in a different thread) I am not saying that we should not have moved against Al Queda even in Afghanistan, and I fully support the initial limited introduction of special forces into Afghanistan. What I think was a major and very costly mistake was turning a relatively small covert operation into a full scale military invasion and occupation.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 68 of 98 (614636)
05-05-2011 2:28 PM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by Tram law
05-05-2011 2:19 PM
|
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
Well yes, all Americans are responsible for all the acts of our government, past, present and future.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by Tram law, posted 05-05-2011 2:19 PM | | Tram law has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes: Our physical presence in the Middle East was minimal in the 1970s and 1980s. It wasn't until the terrorists started bringing the war onto home soil that we started hitting back. Not exactly. We have had a major presence in the Middle East at least since the establishment of the Persian Gulf Command (PGC) during WWII. We have also been very involved in the politics of the region since the before WWII. Granted much (including the actual purposes and tasks of the PGC) were at least tacitly covert but hardly secret. In particular the Naval presence in the Persian Gulf since 1949 was pretty obvious. Throw in a few regime changes in countries like Egypt and Iran as well as fluctuating support for nations like Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Lebanon and I would hardly say the US presence in the Middle East was minimal in the70s and 80s. Now unreliable, capricious, inconsistent; those might apply. The problem is that so much of that history is NOT taught to the generations of Americans and so they are unaware of just how much meddling we really did in the area.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
DevilsAdvocate writes: Granted much (including the actual purposes and tasks of the PGC) were at least tacitly covert but hardly secret. In particular the Naval presence in the Persian Gulf since 1949 was pretty obvious. Throw in a few regime changes in countries like Egypt and Iran as well as fluctuating support for nations like Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Lebanon and I would hardly say the US presence in the Middle East was minimal in the70s and 80s. Granted. I meant minimal in relation to our involvement now. Minimal was probably the wrong word to use.
The problem is that so much of that history is NOT taught to the generations of Americans and so they are unaware of just how much meddling we really did in the area. You are not stating the other side of the story. That we were attempting to counterbalance the soviet influence in the middle east. Our involvement in the ME has waxed and waned all the way back to WWII. As far as our Naval presence in the ME, this was to provide stability to the region after the first Gulf War and to counteract Iran's attempt to mine the Straights of Hormuz to monopolize the oil exports out of Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq and other Persian Gulf states. You at least know about some of the history it seems, more than most Americans. And those are the reasons and justification WE used for our presence. But how does it look from the other side? How does it look to the folk living in the Middle East that are as ignorant of much of the facts, history and geopolitics as the average American?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 83 of 98 (614741)
05-06-2011 10:45 AM
|
Reply to: Message 82 by dronestar
05-06-2011 10:38 AM
|
|
Re: Regarding Rhetoric, Emotions, Irony and Healing
They are aware of a different set of "facts", but not of all or even most of the facts.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 82 by dronestar, posted 05-06-2011 10:38 AM | | dronestar has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 87 by Phat, posted 05-07-2011 5:07 PM | | jar has seen this message but not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2