posted
Granted, we lost 2,996 people in the tragedy that occurred on 9/11/2001. Iraq had nothing to do with that whatsoever. The alleged perpetrator is still at large.
There is no evidence that "terrorism in the streets" is being prevented by the "War on Terror." In fact, the opposite is true, as the growing opinion of America as an "arrogant aggressor" no doubt fuels terrorism groups worldwide.
quote:Originally posted by BuyTex: Commonpace terrorism in the streets would somehow be a good thing?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
evidence, shmevidence...had we sit still after 9/11? you'd have Mideast scenario in your hometown...well, not yours--you somehow managed to escape to Paradise, which you won't explain...
But for the those of us who live in the real America...much better it is "over there."
posted
I didn't just escape. I planned it carefully for years.
quote:Originally posted by BuyTex: evidence, shmevidence...had we sit still after 9/11? you'd have Mideast scenario in your hometown...well, not yours--you somehow managed to escape to Paradise, which you won't explain...
But for the those of us who live in the real America...much better it is "over there."
Dope? nope, different deal...
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might have been a good idea to focus on finding those responsible. Who suggested we sit still? Not me.
quote:Originally posted by BuyTex: evidence, shmevidence...had we sit still after 9/11? you'd have Mideast scenario in your hometown...well, not yours--you somehow managed to escape to Paradise, which you won't explain...
But for the those of us who live in the real America...much better it is "over there."
Dope? nope, different deal...
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
Since 911 when the soudi arabian terrorists trained in america to fly 747s , trained in afganastan to slit a flight atendants throat with a box knife, then killed 3,000 americans in a suicide attack with four jet airplanes.
posted
Make pretend that there is no oil in Iraq overnight it all disapeard and went some place else. How long would Mr. Bush care about Iraq's freedom?
Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bond006: Make pretend that there is no oil in Iraq overnight it all disapeard and went some place else. How long would Mr. Bush care about Iraq's freedom?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Afghan government captured Osama Binladen shortly after 911 and offered to transfer him to Pakistan for trial. George bush said no and began bombing afgahnistan. Binladen disapeared at that time .
Posts: 348 | From: seattle | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Soudi Arabian terrorists targeted no christian institutions , only government and office buildings. They must have an agenda aside from religion.
Posts: 348 | From: seattle | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The US government should stop supporting the dictators in Soudi Arabia, that would go along way towards stoping terrorism.
Posts: 348 | From: seattle | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
"The Afghan government captured Osama Binladen shortly after 911 and offered to transfer him to Pakistan for trial. George bush said no and began bombing afgahnistan. Binladen disapeared at that time"
That's a new one, care to expand on that a bit with some source material perhaps.
Posts: 559 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
since a lot of people feel so strongly against the Patriot Act, has nnyone done anything about it, or have all you people done is argue back and forth?
Just curious, seems alot of strong convictions but no action here.
-------------------- M.M. Semester #3 started,Only 7 more semesters to go. Why, in an age where information is so easy to get, cant we find information on one man. Experience is something you dont get until just after you need it. Posts: 1002 | From: Southaven, Mississippi, US | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, the last time I wrote to our senators (objecting to any thought of accepting an invasion of Iraq by the US), both replied with an identical form letter that they would add my name to a list of backers of the Presidentand the Republican party to be provided to the President so he would know I supposrted him and could use it to prove he had the backing of the public.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me pull up my links again. okay i suggest for starters, going here http://www.congress.org/congressorg/officials/congress/ as i put in the first post and write your represenatives. You get enough people emailing them, they wont beable to disreguard or ignore it forever. Ive written 2 emails, 1 strait to the president which i got an automated response and 1 to W and my local state represenatives and got no reply.
The people have the power, unfortunately you have to have a lot of people to wield that power, But it has to start somewhere, i sent my email expressing my concerns and fears about TPA, i suggest you make your voice heard as well. Otherwise that freedom could be taken away as well.
But you do what you wish, you asked for a suggestiong and there it is. have a nice weekend.
-------------------- M.M. Semester #3 started,Only 7 more semesters to go. Why, in an age where information is so easy to get, cant we find information on one man. Experience is something you dont get until just after you need it. Posts: 1002 | From: Southaven, Mississippi, US | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
actually i had another thought, if we had someone draft a letter that we all could send to W and our local reps, that might would have an impact of some sort. The more we get people to send the more they will have to listen.
Just a thought.
-------------------- M.M. Semester #3 started,Only 7 more semesters to go. Why, in an age where information is so easy to get, cant we find information on one man. Experience is something you dont get until just after you need it. Posts: 1002 | From: Southaven, Mississippi, US | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
By the way, that claim that dubya did talk to her before is bull sh-t. He had her stand in his office with some other people while he talked AT them and the paid political propagana staff took pictures.....a planned photo-op carried out according to script.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aragorn243 I remember the Taliban said they would turn osama over to the pakistan government for trial, the Bush admin said that was not acceptable, and that he must be sent to the USA for trial.. So the taliban left the decision up to the tribal leaders. about 500 tribal and religous leaders in afghanistan met and voted not to turn Osama over to America. Then Bush started to bomb the taliban,,, Osama escaped to tora bora caves at that time according to some reports. This is all from memory But I think it is accurate. I'll do a google search on it....
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seemed odd to me at the time that the US started to have the taliban members rounded up by tribal leaders. And then gave control of areas to the tribal leaders. Is it just me or was that backwards?
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Mid-Sept. 2001 U.S. demands that the Taliban hand over bin Laden and al-Qaeda members.
The Taliban offers to turn over bin Laden if presented with evidence of his guilt. They also suggest that they will allow him to be tried by Muslim clerics.
Oct. 7 The U.S. begings bombing strategic Taliban sites in Afghanistan
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef, spoke after President Bush warned Afghanistan must hand over bin Laden and his lieutenants "or they will share their fate."
"Our position on this is that if America has proof, we are ready for the trial of Osama bin Laden in light of the evidence," Zaeef said.
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"In response to the attacks, the Taliban offered to bring Bin Laden to trial; before the bombing campaign, in an Islamic court, and, after the war began, in a Pakistani court. For this, the Taliban asked to receive recognition of their legitimacy by Western powers, and President Bush responded by saying, "When I said no negotiations, I meant no negotiations." (New York Times, 10/16/01)"
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Administration felt that sending 2,215 Americans off to die (so far), having 16,155 US Troops wounded (so far) and spending $234,000,000,000 on the war (so far) made more sense.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
$234,000,000,000 ......... To the Bush administration this is a plus because most of that money is going into their friends pockets.
And Osama knew to much, a trial would bring out information, and you know how dangerous that is, especialy when we are at WAR.
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bush not getting Osama from the taliban was a crime... If I was the president at that time I would have sent a team of amasadors and military escort and just said thank you and taken him...
Posts: 203 | From: Renton, WA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
France has the right idea..... By CHRISTINE OLLIVIER, Associated Press Writer Thu Jan 19, 4:40 PM ET
L'ILE-LONGUE, France -
President Jacques Chirac warned Thursday that France could respond with nuclear weapons to a state-sponsored terrorist attack, broadening the terms of his country's deterrence in the face of emerging threats.
ADVERTISEMENT
The warning came as France worked with other Western nations to ensure that
Iran does not become a nuclear power. But officials and experts said Chirac's comments were not aimed specifically at Tehran.
"Nuclear deterrence ... is not aimed at dissuading fanatic terrorists," Chirac said in a speech delivered at the L'Ile-Longue nuclear submarine base in the western region of Brittany.
"Leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, just like anyone who would envisage using, in one way or another, arms of mass destruction, must understand that they would expose themselves to a firm and fitting response from us," he said. "This response could be conventional. It could also be of another nature."
France's nuclear arsenal is considered a purely deterrent force to protect the nation's vital interests and is not intended for regular combat.
But Chirac, who has the power to decide on deploying nuclear weapons, said there should be no doubt "about our will and our capacity to use nuclear arms" if the country's vital interests are threatened.
He addressed new threats in the post-Cold War world. While traditional enemies are now allies of the West, he voiced France's concerns about volatile new alliances emerging between regional powers and terrorists.
"In numerous countries, radical ideas are spreading, advocating a confrontation of civilizations," he said, adding "odious attacks" could escalate to "other yet more serious forms involving states."
Chirac did not explain what he meant by regional powers. But officials close to the president and experts said he was laying out France's strategic posture, not designating an enemy.
Bruno Tertrais, a defense expert at the Foundation for Strategic Research, said Chirac was not changing the threshold for use of French nuclear weapons but the array of threats that could trigger a nuclear response. The United States moved in the same direction last year.
"This is a message to any kind of regional power that might believe it could bypass French nuclear deterrence by using terrorist means," Tertrais said.
"This is really Chirac's nuclear legacy," he added. The 73-year-old French president, who last addressed the nuclear issue in 2001, ends his second term next year.
Chirac said nuclear warheads have been reduced on some missiles on France's four nuclear-armed submarines with the aim of targeting specific power centers rather than risking wholesale destruction in an enemy country.
"Against a regional power, our choice is not between inaction and destruction," Chirac said. "The flexibility and reactiveness of our strategic forces allow us to respond directly on the centers of power."
Tertrais said he did not believe Chirac was sending a message to Iran.
"That being said, Chirac certainly realizes that Iran will be one of the countries taking notice of the speech."
Iran broke a 2 1/2-year moratorium last week and restarted nuclear research, which Western countries fear is aimed at developing arms. France, Germany and Britain had been seeking a diplomatic solution with Iran to avoid an international crisis.
Chirac was speaking at a western base with the 110-member crew manning The Vigilant — one of the four nuclear-armed vessels. Submarines carry 85 percent of French nuclear warheads
Posts: 45 | From: Cincinnati | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
