Fox News: Only Hope for America Would Be Nuked Cities

[Jangler]

All I know is in two months it will be the 8 Year anniversary of 9/11. 8 years. That is the same amount of time between the two attacks on the WTC. So for the people like to say nothing has happened since 9/11 on American soil, I say so what?

[rippadonn]

Originally Posted by Jangler

All I know is in two months it will be the 8 Year anniversary of 9/11. 8 years. That is the same amount of time between the two attacks on the WTC. So for the people like to say nothing has happened since 9/11 on American soil, I say so what?

Yeah, 9/11. Why didn't we go after the guys who did that instead of Saddam. That move is what makes us "unsafe".

Misplaced aggression and ideological foolery is not the answer for what happened on 9/11.

We are now broke and backtracking in order to gain the safety America was looking to their government for after 9/11.

Would you trust the same people to protect you???

[MurkN]

"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

[Davidson Deac II]

Originally Posted by rippadonn

Yeah, 9/11. Why didn't we go after the guys who did that instead of Saddam. That move is what makes us "unsafe".
Misplaced aggression and ideological foolery is not the answer for what happened on 9/11.

We are now broke and backtracking in order to gain the safety America was looking to their government for after 9/11.

Would you trust the same people to protect you???

We did go after them. And we got quite a few of them.

9-11 Mastermind Khalid

Of course, the main ones died in the attack.

But I assume you are talking about Osama bin Laden. I blame Bush for a lot of things, but blaming him for not getting bin Laden is silly, and only people who do blame him are for the most part, people who know nothing about these types of operations. Suffice to say that the war in Afghanistan and other operations that might go after him are not part of a James Bond movie. Unless Osama makes a mistake, we will not catch him unless we get lucky.

[Jangler]

Originally Posted by rippadonn

Yeah, 9/11. Why didn't we go after the guys who did that instead of Saddam. That move is what makes us "unsafe".

Misplaced aggression and ideological foolery is not the answer for what happened on 9/11.

We are now broke and backtracking in order to gain the safety America was looking to their government for after 9/11.

Would you trust the same people to protect you???

Who really knows why what was done was done. Revenge? Strategy in the Middle East? God told them to do it? But it's done. And another attack on America is coming. And now we have a whole nother set of idiots running the Government. Will they make the right decision take the correct turns? 20/20 it's so easy to look back and judge.

[rippadonn]

Originally Posted by Davidson Deac II

We did go after them. And we got quite a few of them.

9-11 Mastermind Khalid

Of course, the main ones died in the attack.

But I assume you are talking about Osama bin Laden. I blame Bush for a lot of things, but blaming him for not getting bin Laden is silly, and only people who do blame him are for the most part, people who know nothing about these types of operations. Suffice to say that the war in Afghanistan and other operations that might go after him are not part of a James Bond movie. Unless Osama makes a mistake, we will not catch him unless we get lucky.

It would seem like the "effort" to after Osama was halfhearted at best. All the gusto was put into Iraq.

Yes, I do blame him for not getting Osama. He took is eye of the ball. Do you think that could be due to family ties???

[Davidson Deac II]

Originally Posted by MurkN

"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

"The choice is not between security and liberty. It is between liberty with security and anarchy without either.

US Supreme Court Justice Robert H Jackson

[rippadonn]

Nobody in the world would have blamed us for putting our whole army on top of the Afghanistan border because of 9/11.

But Iraq?!?

[Davidson Deac II]

Originally Posted by rippadonn

It would seem like the "effort" to after Osama was halfhearted at best. All the gusto was put into Iraq.

Yes, I do blame him for not getting Osama. He took is eye of the ball. Do you think that could be due to family ties???

Well you are wrong imo. It took us several years to get Eric Rudolph and he was in our back yard, and had no ties to the Bush family. Osama bin Laden is has hundreds of loyal supporters, many of who are willing to die for him, an area the size of North Carolina to hide out in, and as long as he doesn't use a cell phone and none of his supporters spill the beans, he ain't gonna get caught, even if Batman was looking for him.

[Davidson Deac II]

Originally Posted by rippadonn

Nobody in the world would have blamed us for putting our whole army on top of the Afghanistan border because of 9/11.

But Iraq?!?

Would have been pointless to put our entire army in Iraq. No point in putting heavy infantry and armor into a country whose terrain doesn't support that type of warfare. Now maybe in hindsight, some things should have been done differently (more light infantry along the pakistan afghanistan border), but the fact of the matter is that the military followed its plans for littoral warfare to the letter. The goal was to eliminate Afghanistan as a safe haven for Al Qaeda, and thats what they did.

IMO, Osama is a distraction anyway. His capture wouldn't hurt al qaeda anymore that Khalid's did. It would be a moral victory with little real consequence.