http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/.../International/

 

Another sad slaying....we need to get these bastards...

and that bastard responsible is Bush yeah, I think I saw Bush right by the guy holding the knife...I think he was reading something in Arab with a "Don't mess with TExas shirt".

 

 

 

RRIIIIIIIIGGGHHHTT..... As tragic as this is, Bush is responsible. You couldn't care less about the thousands and thousands of innocent civilians in the middle east Bush has killed, but every time one American civilian gets killed you become outraged.

Bush regime is almost as bad as Al Qaeda

Yeah I wasn't too big of a Kerry supported initially (I was supporting Dean) but I am afraid what this administration can do with four more years.

I'm really not afraid of what the Bush administration can do....we will fight the terrorists, bring them to justice, and secure freedom and prosperity in the Middle East.

 

If you're afraid of the Bush administration, and you dare say it now, after another innocent American civilian has been violently killed, I'd say you're siding with the terrorists, you should go post on an Al-Jazeera forum. :mad : McCarthyism at it's best.

It still exists. Just replace "communist" with "terrorist", and replace USSR with the middle east

McVeigh was tried and executed... Where is Bin Laden?

 

It took how many years to catch Carlos the Jackal?

 

It took how many DECADES for Simon Weisenthal's crew to hunt down the worst of the notorious Nazis after WWII?

 

IMO, your expectations are unrealistically out of line with the realities of international manhunts. Tonyi stop calling names that we are not even talking about here... We are talking about Osama Bin Laden the Arab terrorist that killed thousands of Americans and that still heads the largest terrorist organization in the world... Answer my questions!

The administration used its resources elsewhere when instead we should have been focusing on the war on terror.

What specific resources being used in Iraq could be used elsewhere?

 

I personally don't see National Guard, ordinary armor, and such things being terribly valuable in a shadow war. Its not the sort of thing they've trained for.

 

Can you elaborate on this? Excuse me... May I remind you about Afghanistan? We deflected most of our resources from our fight in Afghanistan to go stick our noses where it wasn't needed... Do you know that the Taliban is still fighting and that Osama Bin Laden is still at large? HELLO!

 

What happened to making our intelligence more efficient? Why is it that we are using billions of dollars to reconstruct a country that we shouldn't even be reconstructing when at home we have severe problems with Homeland security and funds for intelligence agencies remain miger?

Yeah I wasn't too big of a Kerry supported initially (I was supporting Dean) but I am afraid what this administration can do with four more years.

I'm really not afraid of what the Bush administration can do....we will fight the terrorists, bring them to justice, and secure freedom and prosperity in the Middle East.

 

If you're afraid of the Bush administration, and you dare say it now, after another innocent American civilian has been violently killed, I'd say you're siding with the terrorists, you should go post on an Al-Jazeera forum. :mad : McCarthyism at it's best.

It still exists. Just replace "communist" with "terrorist", and replace USSR with the middle east Fishfanpr, why don't you go post in your NeoNazi forum?

 

"If you support Kerry... You support Terrorists!" Sounds to me like a chant of the skin head army...

 

pfft!

Yeah I wasn't too big of a Kerry supported initially (I was supporting Dean) but I am afraid what this administration can do with four more years.

I'm really not afraid of what the Bush administration can do....we will fight the terrorists, bring them to justice, and secure freedom and prosperity in the Middle East.

 

If you're afraid of the Bush administration, and you dare say it now, after another innocent American civilian has been violently killed, I'd say you're siding with the terrorists, you should go post on an Al-Jazeera forum. :mad : McCarthyism at it's best.

It still exists. Just replace "communist" with "terrorist", and replace USSR with the middle east Fishfanpr, why don't you go post in your NeoNazi forum?

 

"If you support Kerry... You support Terrorists!" Sounds to me like a chant of the skin head army...

 

pfft! I never said anything about kerry...I'm just saying that it's ridiculous to be scared of an administration that is fighting the terrorists.

 

Lcyberlina, what do YOU propose we do? You seem to criticize the current policy, but what are YOU proposing? How would you fight the terrorists if not how we're doing it now?

Yeah I wasn't too big of a Kerry supported initially (I was supporting Dean) but I am afraid what this administration can do with four more years.

I'm really not afraid of what the Bush administration can do....we will fight the terrorists, bring them to justice, and secure freedom and prosperity in the Middle East.

 

If you're afraid of the Bush administration, and you dare say it now, after another innocent American civilian has been violently killed, I'd say you're siding with the terrorists, you should go post on an Al-Jazeera forum. :mad : McCarthyism at it's best.

It still exists. Just replace "communist" with "terrorist", and replace USSR with the middle east Fishfanpr, why don't you go post in your NeoNazi forum?

 

"If you support Kerry... You support Terrorists!" Sounds to me like a chant of the skin head army...

 

pfft! I never said anything about kerry...I'm just saying that it's ridiculous to be scared of an administration that is fighting the terrorists.

 

Lcyberlina, what do YOU propose we do? You seem to criticize the current policy, but what are YOU proposing? How would you fight the terrorists if not how we're doing it now? It is simple. Don't vote Bush and vote for the clear alternative to get out of this international mess he has gotten us in. We need to have a responsible, intelligent president, someone who would have known that leading a country to an unnecessary war with lies would have bring about this disaster... Someone who for sure will re-build America's alliances through out the world, someone who can think before shooting, someone who can wage the war on terrorism the way it is supposed to be waged... With Intelligence!

Yeah I wasn't too big of a Kerry supported initially (I was supporting Dean) but I am afraid what this administration can do with four more years.

I'm really not afraid of what the Bush administration can do....we will fight the terrorists, bring them to justice, and secure freedom and prosperity in the Middle East.

 

If you're afraid of the Bush administration, and you dare say it now, after another innocent American civilian has been violently killed, I'd say you're siding with the terrorists, you should go post on an Al-Jazeera forum. :mad : McCarthyism at it's best.

It still exists. Just replace "communist" with "terrorist", and replace USSR with the middle east Fishfanpr, why don't you go post in your NeoNazi forum?

 

"If you support Kerry... You support Terrorists!" Sounds to me like a chant of the skin head army...

 

pfft! I never said anything about kerry...I'm just saying that it's ridiculous to be scared of an administration that is fighting the terrorists.

 

Lcyberlina, what do YOU propose we do? You seem to criticize the current policy, but what are YOU proposing? How would you fight the terrorists if not how we're doing it now? It is simple. Don't vote Bush and vote for the clear alternative to get out of this international mess he has gotten us in. We need to have a responsible, intelligent president, someone who would have known that leading a country to an unnecessary war with lies would have bring about this disaster... Someone who for sure will re-build America's alliances through out the world, someone who can think before shooting, someone who can wage the war on terrorism the way it is supposed to be waged... With Intelligence! You still haven't answered my question. You rely on the usual rethoric about the lack of intelligence of this administration, but if you're unable to sustain your points without any logical explanations, you're looking as dumb as they suppossedly are!

 

I just want to debate this with you...How would you fight the war on terrorism? We went into Afganisthan, kicked the TAliban's asses. Now we went to Irak, eliminated a regime that used WMD's against its own people and which publicly threatened to use force against American interests. For the second time: HOW DO YOU WANT THE US TO FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR?

You still haven't answered my question. You rely on the usual rethoric about the lack of intelligence of this administration, but if you're unable to sustain your points without any logical explanations, you're looking as dumb as they suppossedly are!

 

I just want to debate this with you...How would you fight the war on terrorism? We went into Afganisthan, kicked the TAliban's asses. Now we went to Irak, eliminated a regime that used WMD's against its own people and which publicly threatened to use force against American interests. For the second time: HOW DO YOU WANT THE US TO FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR?

When I say Intelligence... I mean Intelligence. I never mentioned the word stupid on my response and I did answer your questions... too bad you can't comprehend.

 

First of all. Do not patronize me. I fully understand the causes of the Afghanistan war. A war that in my eyes was justified. However, we have not defeated the Taliban. They are still fighting and Osama has not been caught. We instead dropped it and left to invade Iraq. Iraq posed no greater threat than Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc. Iran and North Korea are PROVEN to have WMDs and hate America as much as Saddam did. So the excuse you are using for our unjustified invasion of that country is useless.

 

Second of all. Terrorism can't be defeated, because terrorists don't have a state and as you may know they are spread out all over the world. The only way to fight terrorism is with INTELLIGENCE.

 

What we have done, thanks to the Bush administration, is spread the word of Osama Bin Laden. A horrible message that we have turned truth in the eyes of many people. A message that says we are so evil and power hungry that we would invade the middle east to appropriate their land to control the oil industry. This may not be the purpose of Mr. Bush (then again who knows) but this is the message we are sending to them... We invaded Iraq with no justification, we killed thousands of people (including our own soldiers) and now we are showing to them with the total disregard for international law that we don't care for human rights, we show them that we are no better than Saddam Hussein by torturing those Iraqies.

 

Now, I am sure you will come up with a thousand explanations for the above... But hear me: Nothing, Absolutely Nothing justifies lying a country into a war, killing thousands of people and torturing human beings...

You still haven't answered my question. You rely on the usual rethoric about the lack of intelligence of this administration, but if you're unable to sustain your points without any logical explanations, you're looking as dumb as they suppossedly are!

 

I just want to debate this with you...How would you fight the war on terrorism? We went into Afganisthan, kicked the TAliban's asses. Now we went to Irak, eliminated a regime that used WMD's against its own people and which publicly threatened to use force against American interests. For the second time: HOW DO YOU WANT THE US TO FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR?

When I say Intelligence... I mean Intelligence. I never mentioned the word stupid on my response and I did answer your questions... too bad you can't comprehend.

 

First of all. Do not patronize me. I fully understand the causes of the Afghanistan war. A war that in my eyes was justified. However, we have not defeated the Taliban. They are still fighting and Osama has not been caught. We instead dropped it and left to invade Iraq. Iraq posed no greater threat than Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc. Iran and North Korea are PROVEN to have WMDs and hate America as much as Saddam did. So the excuse you are using for our unjustified invasion of that country is useless.

 

Second of all. Terrorism can't be defeated, because terrorists don't have a state and as you may know they are spread out all over the world. The only way to fight terrorism is with INTELLIGENCE.

 

What we have done, thanks to the Bush administration, is spread the word of Osama Bin Laden. A horrible message that we have turned truth in the eyes of many people. A message that says we are so evil and power hungry that we would invade the middle east to appropriate their land to control the oil industry. This may not be the purpose of Mr. Bush (then again who knows) but this is the message we are sending to them... We invaded Iraq with no justification, we killed thousands of people (including our own soldiers) and now we are showing to them with the total disregard for international law that we don't care for human rights, we show them that we are no better than Saddam Hussein by torturing those Iraqies.

 

Now, I am sure you will come up with a thousand explanations for the above... But hear me: Nothing, Absolutely Nothing justifies lying a country into a war, killing thousands of people and torturing human beings... As far as I know, a lack of intelligence=stupidity.

 

thanks, that's what I wanted to hear...your opinions.

 

 

I now only ask you one more thing: Would you then support invading Syria, North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia? Because that's basically what I'm getting from you. It's ridiculous to oppose a war by saying we should be focusing on other countries. If you oppose war, you oppose war.

Lcyberlina, it has to be made clear to fishfanpr. Intelligence=intelligence agencies, effective internal strategies, support for the correct international leadership. Not the literal use of the word fishfanpr.

 

 

fishfanpr, youre the one who talks with rhetoric, or at least falls for the rhetoric of this administration. If you can stop blindly following the adminstration for a second, you might realize that everything they do is not always good for the defeat of terror. Theyve barely linked the Saddam to who we were supposed to be fighting. Everything theyve put out about justification for the war is weak. But you keep buying it. They could say that we need to bomb Japan tommorow and cite is as good for the war on terror...would you buy it? Thats our point. He hasnt done a good job with the war on terror. Iraq has made things worse but they nor you will admit anything can go wrong. AlQuada is stronger now because Bush, instead of going after them, has gone after the middle east. But that seems to fit well with the uberpatriots.

 

Look how many intelligence officials, ambassadors, generals, and others have said Bush has screwed it up.

 

 

But you keep distorting this into supporting terrorists. Its foolish. Nobody supports the terrorists. But for you Bush can do no wrong and its blind faith

You still haven't answered my question.? You rely on the usual rethoric about the lack of intelligence of this administration, but if you're unable to sustain your points without any logical explanations, you're looking as dumb as they suppossedly are!

 

I just want to debate this with you...How would you fight the war on terrorism?? We went into Afganisthan, kicked the TAliban's asses.? Now we went to Irak, eliminated a regime that used WMD's against its own people and which publicly threatened to use force against American interests.? For the second time: HOW DO YOU WANT THE US TO FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR?

When I say Intelligence... I mean Intelligence. I never mentioned the word stupid on my response and I did answer your questions... too bad you can't comprehend.

 

First of all. Do not patronize me. I fully understand the causes of the Afghanistan war. A war that in my eyes was justified. However, we have not defeated the Taliban. They are still fighting and Osama has not been caught. We instead dropped it and left to invade Iraq. Iraq posed no greater threat than Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc. Iran and North Korea are PROVEN to have WMDs and hate America as much as Saddam did. So the excuse you are using for our unjustified invasion of that country is useless.

 

Second of all. Terrorism can't be defeated, because terrorists don't have a state and as you may know they are spread out all over the world. The only way to fight terrorism is with INTELLIGENCE.

 

What we have done, thanks to the Bush administration, is spread the word of Osama Bin Laden. A horrible message that we have turned truth in the eyes of many people. A message that says we are so evil and power hungry that we would invade the middle east to appropriate their land to control the oil industry. This may not be the purpose of Mr. Bush (then again who knows) but this is the message we are sending to them... We invaded Iraq with no justification, we killed thousands of people (including our own soldiers) and now we are showing to them with the total disregard for international law that we don't care for human rights, we show them that we are no better than Saddam Hussein by torturing those Iraqies.

 

Now, I am sure you will come up with a thousand explanations for the above... But hear me: Nothing, Absolutely Nothing justifies lying a country into a war, killing thousands of people and torturing human beings... As far as I know, a lack of intelligence=stupidity.

 

thanks, that's what I wanted to hear...your opinions.

 

 

I now only ask you one more thing: Would you then support invading Syria, North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia? Because that's basically what I'm getting from you. It's ridiculous to oppose a war by saying we should be focusing on other countries. If you oppose war, you oppose war. Definetely Lack of Intelligence = Stupidity... You've proved your own point.

 

INTELLIGENCE is accomplished by being engaged, around the world, on a daily basis to detect/uncover real and/or perceived threats to the US and/or US national interests. Intelligence as an intelligence provided by EFFICIENT INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES!!!!

 

PFFT!

Lcyberlina, it has to be made clear to fishfanpr. Intelligence=intelligence agencies, effective internal strategies, support for the correct international leadership. Not the literal use of the word fishfanpr.

 

 

fishfanpr, youre the one who talks with rhetoric, or at least falls for the rhetoric of this administration. If you can stop blindly following the adminstration for a second, you might realize that everything they do is not always good for the defeat of terror. Theyve barely linked the Saddam to who we were supposed to be fighting. Everything theyve put out about justification for the war is weak. But you keep buying it. They could say that we need to bomb Japan tommorow and cite is as good for the war on terror...would you buy it? Thats our point. He hasnt done a good job with the war on terror. Iraq has made things worse but they nor you will admit anything can go wrong. AlQuada is stronger now because Bush, instead of going after them, has gone after the middle east. But that seems to fit well with the uberpatriots.

 

Look how many intelligence officials, ambassadors, generals, and others have said Bush has screwed it up.

 

 

But you keep distorting this into supporting terrorists. Its foolish. Nobody supports the terrorists. But for you Bush can do no wrong and its blind faith

Bush has screwed up in some areas...the entire uranium in Africa findings were a disgrace. I disagree with the administration in other foreign policy areas such as recognition of Taiwan, for example.

 

Yet, I'm still trying to find a way in which we can successfully make advances in the war on terror while at the same time gaining more and more adepts in the Middle East. I'm as disheartened with what's happening as you are, I just think that the best approach right now is to bring the war to the terrorists, and that's exactly what we're doing. You and I both know that intelligence alone would never be able to defeat or cripple these terrorist cells. America will fight according to what's best for us, and our main advantage is our strong military. Sending hundreds and hundreds of agents into the Middle East to hunt for terrorists would surrender that advantage and could prove very costly.

Lcyberlina, it has to be made clear to fishfanpr. Intelligence=intelligence agencies, effective internal strategies, support for the correct international leadership. Not the literal use of the word fishfanpr.

 

 

fishfanpr, youre the one who talks with rhetoric, or at least falls for the rhetoric of this administration. If you can stop blindly following the adminstration for a second, you might realize that everything they do is not always good for the defeat of terror. Theyve barely linked the Saddam to who we were supposed to be fighting. Everything theyve put out about justification for the war is weak. But you keep buying it. They could say that we need to bomb Japan tommorow and cite is as good for the war on terror...would you buy it? Thats our point. He hasnt done a good job with the war on terror. Iraq has made things worse but they nor you will admit anything can go wrong. AlQuada is stronger now because Bush, instead of going after them, has gone after the middle east. But that seems to fit well with the uberpatriots.

 

Look how many intelligence officials, ambassadors, generals, and others have said Bush has screwed it up.

 

 

But you keep distorting this into supporting terrorists. Its foolish. Nobody supports the terrorists. But for you Bush can do no wrong and its blind faith

Bush has screwed up in some areas...the entire uranium in Africa findings were a disgrace. I disagree with the administration in other foreign policy areas such as recognition of Taiwan, for example.

 

Yet, I'm still trying to find a way in which we can successfully make advances in the war on terror while at the same time gaining more and more adepts in the Middle East. I'm as disheartened with what's happening as you are, I just think that the best approach right now is to bring the war to the terrorists, and that's exactly what we're doing. You and I both know that intelligence alone would never be able to defeat or cripple these terrorist cells. America will fight according to what's best for us, and our main advantage is our strong military. Sending hundreds and hundreds of agents into the Middle East to hunt for terrorists would surrender that advantage and could prove very costly. We should be focussing on assisting government who want to modernize and rid themselves of fundamentalist elements. The problem is we force the hand and we do it with heavy pressure and thats been the biggest problem I have.

 

 

A lot of people have said one of the biggest problems in the middle east is destruction of identity. A lot of people there feel a lot of pride for who they are. One of the reasons they hate the west is that they blame the west for destroying their identity. So they turn to fundementalist Islam to compensate. Ive got a good friend who is a duel Iranian and American citizen. This guy is as westernized as they come. He despises the fundamentalists. I trust him over talking heads and he says the current leadership of Iran was nothing at one point. The Iranian people wanted the Shah out but his funding and power gain from the west so alienated a lot of Iranians that they turned to the Ayatollah and the nation went to the right.

 

Herein is the problem. We've got to assist those nations who want to westernize through backdoor channels instead of the Ann Coulter "invade them all" BS. A lot of what we'ev done, especially under Bush, has fed the anti westernization mentality.

 

The problem is we ignore the gradual modernization and go with force and rhetoric. Its the foolish white mans burden that never ends. Its when we do unessecary and foolish actions that the westernization notions are fed. How much outrage was there for our invasion of Afghanistan? Very little. They knew what we had to do and new it was because of 9/11 and the Talibans protection of AQ. But how can we expect them to understand every ambigious justification for war or conflict that comes from our, not their, president? Maybe if you buy into the America and thats all that matters mentality, one can demand this.

We should be focussing on assisting government who want to modernize and rid themselves of fundamentalist elements. The problem is we force the hand and we do it with heavy pressure and thats been the biggest problem I have.

 

 

 

That's a very legitimate option, IMO. The problem is, that that policy has failed in the past (i.e. Vietnam, where we left the war to the people). We can't afford to lose this war, though.

 

I think you have very good points. I don't want war, but it seems that there isn't any other option in order to fight these fundamentalist mofo's. Only by helping the people more directly will we be able to turn the tide, and provoke a chain reaction of massive disgust towards the terrorists in the Middle East. Obviously, war doesn't help, but we must also recognize that it is nonetheless a viable option.

We should be focussing on assisting government who want to modernize and rid themselves of fundamentalist elements. The problem is we force the hand and we do it with heavy pressure and thats been the biggest problem I have.

 

 

 

That's a very legitimate option, IMO. The problem is, that that policy has failed in the past (i.e. Vietnam, where we left the war to the people). We can't afford to lose this war, though.

 

I think you have very good points. I don't want war, but it seems that there isn't any other option in order to fight these fundamentalist mofo's. Only by helping the people more directly will we be able to turn the tide, and provoke a chain reaction of massive disgust towards the terrorists in the Middle East. Obviously, war doesn't help, but we must also recognize that it is nonetheless a viable option. Absolutely war cannot be dismissed as an option. But it has to be tempered with diplomacy and intelligence. Thats why a lot of people supported Afghanistan but a lot of people couldnt figure out why Iraq need to be done, and have more or less been proven correct now.

 

One of the best ways you can tell when someone is incorrectly justifying war IMO is when they make reference to the greatest and most righteous of all wars, the defeat of the Nazis and Japan. No clear or better example of that exists. But if you can easily cite that as a need for war, than any use of war becomes proper. Im sure Saddam fed this to a lot of people when he invaded Kuwait too.

McVeigh was tried and executed... Where is Bin Laden?

 

It took how many years to catch Carlos the Jackal?

 

It took how many DECADES for Simon Weisenthal's crew to hunt down the worst of the notorious Nazis after WWII?

 

IMO, your expectations are unrealistically out of line with the realities of international manhunts. Tonyi stop calling names that we are not even talking about here... We are talking about Osama Bin Laden the Arab terrorist that killed thousands of Americans and that still heads the largest terrorist organization in the world... Answer my questions! OK, Osama is somewhere on planet earth.

 

Now how does that answer make expected timeframes for his capture any different than those of other international manhunts in the past?

 

I still contend your expectations are highly unrealistic if you expect him to be caught by now. Saddam was a fluke IMO. I fully expected him to be on the run for many years. Yeah, of course he is going to be on the run for many years... We let him go! If we hadn't gone to Iraq, deflecting our attention and resources, probably we would have caught him by now. Also, the lack of leadership of this administration and the complete arrogance he has when handling international alliances has left us almost alone in this "war" against terrorism. Now it will be almost impossible to catch him, because all the countries that would have helped us in the past are reluctant to cooperate with their own intelligence... Again thanks to Mr. Bush.

He was just doing a job. The kingdom relies on thousands and thousands of outside workers. Part of this is due to cultural reasons that they've been trying to work on for a while now.

 

Americans have been working in the kingdom for a very long time. I have a friend who father worked for ARAMCO. He was born in Saudi Arabia and lived 18 years of his life there on the gulf coast near Dammam, then spent 3 years in Lebanon doing salvage diving (this was before the PLO turned Lebanon into a moonscape)

 

Granted he was doing his job, but with the recent rash of attacks (not only on westerners but also on the Saudi monarchy, who are really your only source of protection over there), he should have known better than to stay. I do not intend to advocate outsourcing, but it's no secret that American companies have lead to the enormous immigration of Indian and Pakistani nationals to the Persian Gulf. I'm sure that no American company would deny a request for a temporary transfer at the risk of something happening to the employee and then being held responsible for forcing him to stay.

 

Poor guy. I guess his love for life and Saudi culture ended up becoming his downfall.

Yeah, of course he is going to be on the run for many years... We let him go! If we hadn't gone to Iraq, deflecting our attention and resources, probably we would have caught him by now. Also, the lack of leadership of this administration and the complete arrogance he has when handling international alliances has left us almost alone in this "war" against terrorism. Now it will be almost impossible to catch him, because all the countries that would have helped us in the past are reluctant to cooperate with their own intelligence... Again thanks to Mr. Bush.

Actually it was Clinton that turned down a few freebies on Osama.

 

I've asked several times now with no response from anyone yet, so I'll ask again in yet another undoubtedly futile attempt to get an answer.

 

What specific military "resources" do *YOU* see being used in Iraq that would be better used in Afganistan? I don't know.... Maybe more troops in Afghanistan... You know trying to get the guy that attacked us on 9/11... Maybe we should be focusing on the complete reconstruction of Afghanistan instead of Iraq... Too late for that! :pullhair

 

What don't you understand?