Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am very disgusted by them and their entitlement mentality while Mexico treats their illegals like horse****.
Yes, I am a liberal, believe it or not.
Both sides CAN agree if we try.
I confess I have liberal "training" as all of my friends and my brother are very liberal. We tend to agree on the big picture we just don't agree on the way to get there!
Both sides CAN agree if we try.
I confess I have liberal "training" as all of my friends and my brother are very liberal. We tend to agree on the big picture we just don't agree on the way to get there!
Exactly. We just gotta try and be civil no matter how much we disagree. You know?
You seem to be level headed and call see right from wrong. That is very good.
I am horrified by the commitment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. I voted for Obama, but as of tonight, he has lost 100% of my confidence. This is to protect the world from Al Queda? Certainly there are other strategies, if one was creative, which could be used to alleviate the threat, one which is less human-intensive and targeted. He's in way over his head and is driving this country into a debt position that is unrecoverable (thus the SNL skit a few weeks ago which was spot on). Each one of the individuals deployed is a son, daughter, husband, wife, mother, father, sister or brother of another human being. Do we treat our brethren with such callousness that we just throw them into harm's way to alleviate a threat that cannot be stopped by traditional "war" methods? It's disgusting and I am sick about this. Each death is someone's family. It's way too easy for politicians to toss other citizen's family members into jeopardy.....
how can you say you voted for him, but oppose this..as a candidate he said the afgan war was important..you voted for him TO increase afgan, and to pull out of Iraq...that was his campaign
I am a receint retiree who has been to iraq twice and afganistan 3 times.
Cmon PGH you're too smart to totally rely your entire argument on an implication you know to be completely false
AL QAEDA WAS NEVER IN IRAQ BEFORE WE OVERTHREW SADDAM
I dont have the energy right now to educate you.
Saddam hated Bin Laden and his entire cause and vice versa
Bin laden offered Saudi Arabia his Al Qaeda army to fight Iraq in Desert Storm.
There are no concrete facts that show Al Qaeda in Iraq before our war.
But there are many many irrefutable evidence that shows there was absolutely no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq prior to our invasion!
Yes there were.. There were indeed training camps inside of Iraq, they just did not cooperate with Saddam.. Jamaat al-Tawhid wa'l-Jihad / Unity and Jihad Group the Zarqawi network helped establish another poison and explosive training center camp, and this camp is located in northeastern Iraq.
Zarqawi's activities were not confined to a small corner of northeast Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May of 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day. During his stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These al-Qaida affiliates based in Baghdad coordinated the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network
From 1997 to 1998, the detainee acted as a trusted agent for Usama Bin Ladin, executing three separate reconnaissance missions for the al Qaeda leader in Oman, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In August 1998, the detainee traveled to Pakistan with a member of Iraqi Intelligence for the purpose of blowing up the Pakistan, United States and British embassies with chemical mortars.
The Senate Intelligence Commission Report, notes that a fugutive from the initial WTC attack in 1993 was from Iraq, Abdul Rahman Yasin
The internal Iraq Itelligence memo's note that they should continue to support and work with Al Qaeda, and to get information to/from Bin Laden
Even the 9/11 report notes that "The Shakir in Kuala Lumpur has many interesting connections that are so multiple in their intersections with al Qaeda-related organizations and people as to suggest something more than random chance."
There is tons of evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda worked together.... Some just choose to ignore it.
Bin Laden, Atef Indicted in U.S. Federal Court for African Bombings
New York -- Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.
Bin Laden's "al Qaeda" organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Somalia.
Bin Laden, the US Attorney charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.
According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.
"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the indictment said.
Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his "fatwah" committees a series of escalating "fatwahs" against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a "fatwah" stating that Muslims should kill Americans -- including civilians -- anywhere in the world they can be found.
and here is clarke also....
RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.
Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998. And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office — issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.
And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.
And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.
So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.
The sixth point, the newly-appointed deputies — and you had to remember, the deputies didn't get into office until late March, early April. The deputies then tasked the development of the implementation details, uh, of these new decisions that they were endorsing, and sending out to the principals.
Over the course of the summer — last point — they developed implementation details, the principals met at the end of the summer, approved them in their first meeting, changed the strategy by authorizing the increase in funding five-fold, changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance assistance.
And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course of five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of Al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline.
QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the — general animus against the foreign policy?
CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue. This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place. That doesn't sound like animus against uh the previous team to me.
JIM ANGLE: You're saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?
"Frankly, I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism," Richard Clarke told CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview Sunday night. "He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. We'll never know."
Clarke said he asked for a Cabinet-level meeting in January 2001, shortly after the president took office, to discuss the threat al Qaeda posed to the United States. "That urgent memo wasn't acted on," Clarke told CBS. Instead, he said, administration officials were focused on issues such as missile defense and Iraq.
You didnt answer the question, since there were terrorist camps INSIDE of Iraq, what should Bush have done to get them? Had he just invaded and took them out in Afghanistan, they simply would have moved more of them into Iraq, leaving us open to another attack.
Again, stop the cop out and changing the subject, what should Bush have done about the camps INSIDE of Iraq?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RD5050
Did you forget about the U.S.S. Cole, which was attacked shortly before the Nov 2000 election? Wasn't that Bush's responsibility to wage a war against Al Qaeda after assuming the presidency a few months later?
There you go with your flip flops again.. Per you, Obama inherited the problem from Bush, so didnt Bush inherit this problem from Clinton?
There is tons of evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda worked together.... Some just choose to ignore it.
Ignore what? Right wing jagoff blogs?
Saddam was a secular dictator and Bin Laden was a religious fanatic. They were not in cahoots, and Saddam confirmed that while he was detained. Quit lying!
I am horrified by the commitment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. I voted for Obama, but as of tonight, he has lost 100% of my confidence.
Were you in trance during the campaign...wait, don't answer that! We know the answer.
Obama SAID during the campaign that the "war of necessity" would be getting his full attention and all the resources it needed.
Weren't you listening....wait, don't answer that either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
