9-11 Did 2Trillion in Damage, War Against Terror 1.7 Trillion, DAMN!

[The Rabbi]

Are you just a critic or do you have something to say?

Yes I have something to say.
You're an idiot.

OBL was more a symbol than anything else. He had been marginalized by the Bush administration. The threat from terrorism was not dependent on OBL but on dozens of other organizations loosely associated with al Qaeda.
While his death is welcome, it won't change much.

And what have I said incorrectly?

This:

I guess sending in a few hundred guys to knock off the real threat would be revenge, but because it took tens of thousands of troops and trillions to find and kill those same guys, you can sanctify your actions by calling it war on an enemy.

 

[brokenarrow]

Yes I have something to say.
You're an idiot.

OBL was more a symbol than anything else. He had been marginalized by the Bush administration. The threat from terrorism was not dependent on OBL but on dozens of other organizations loosely associated with al Qaeda.
While his death is welcome, it won't change much.

And what have I said incorrectly?

This:

I guess sending in a few hundred guys to knock off the real threat would be revenge, but because it took tens of thousands of troops and trillions to find and kill those same guys, you can sanctify your actions by calling it war on an enemy.

If you send a few guys, "Oh my God! That's an assassination plot! Americans don't do that. It's illegal!"

But waste billions of dollars, using thousands of troops, get hundreds of innocent people killed......That's OK.

THAT is within the rules of the "BIG RULE BOOK IN THE SKY"!

What a complete load of steaming horseshit!

 

[The Rabbi]

And what have I said incorrectly?

This:

I guess sending in a few hundred guys to knock off the real threat would be revenge, but because it took tens of thousands of troops and trillions to find and kill those same guys, you can sanctify your actions by calling it war on an enemy.

If you send a few guys, "Oh my God! That's an assassination plot! Americans don't do that. It's illegal!"

But waste billions of dollars, using thousands of troops, get hundreds of innocent people killed......That's OK.

THAT is within the rules of the "BIG RULE BOOK IN THE SKY"!

What a complete load of steaming horseshit!

I dont have a problem with that. Israel has practiced assassination for a while and it seems to work pretty well. I don't know why any president since Ford hasn't reversed the policy.

But that's different from the iraq and Afghan wars, which weren't a substitute for an assassination.

 

[Dr.Drock]

This:

If you send a few guys, "Oh my God! That's an assassination plot! Americans don't do that. It's illegal!"

But waste billions of dollars, using thousands of troops, get hundreds of innocent people killed......That's OK.

THAT is within the rules of the "BIG RULE BOOK IN THE SKY"!

What a complete load of steaming horseshit!

I dont have a problem with that. Israel has practiced assassination for a while and it seems to work pretty well. I don't know why any president since Ford hasn't reversed the policy.

But that's different from the iraq and Afghan wars, which weren't a substitute for an assassination.

Yeah, an assassination wouldn't have resulted in enough dead soldiers, iraqi civilians and wouldn't have been near expensive enough for the liking of our bureacrats.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you send a few guys, "Oh my God! That's an assassination plot! Americans don't do that. It's illegal!"

But waste billions of dollars, using thousands of troops, get hundreds of innocent people killed......That's OK.

THAT is within the rules of the "BIG RULE BOOK IN THE SKY"!

What a complete load of steaming horseshit!

I dont have a problem with that. Israel has practiced assassination for a while and it seems to work pretty well. I don't know why any president since Ford hasn't reversed the policy.

But that's different from the iraq and Afghan wars, which weren't a substitute for an assassination.

Yeah, an assassination wouldn't have resulted in enough dead soldiers, iraqi civilians and wouldn't have been near expensive enough for the liking of our bureacrats.

Yeah because politicians always make unpopular expensive decisions that often cost them elections.

What a fucking tool you are.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I dont have a problem with that. Israel has practiced assassination for a while and it seems to work pretty well. I don't know why any president since Ford hasn't reversed the policy.

But that's different from the iraq and Afghan wars, which weren't a substitute for an assassination.

Yeah, an assassination wouldn't have resulted in enough dead soldiers, iraqi civilians and wouldn't have been near expensive enough for the liking of our bureacrats.

Yeah because politicians always make unpopular expensive decisions that often cost them elections.

What a fucking tool you are.

Lol still offended by me pointing out that you aren't really a conservative? Hopefully you'll get over it soon enough and don't stoop to making such childish posts.

Yes, politicians do always make unpopular expensive decisions. Obama and the dems did/do, your hero Bush and repubs did/do as well.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah, an assassination wouldn't have resulted in enough dead soldiers, iraqi civilians and wouldn't have been near expensive enough for the liking of our bureacrats.

Yeah because politicians always make unpopular expensive decisions that often cost them elections.

What a fucking tool you are.

Lol still offended by me pointing out that you aren't really a conservative? Hopefully you'll get over it soon enough and don't stoop to making such childish posts.

Yes, politicians do always make unpopular expensive decisions. Obama and the dems did/do, your hero Bush and repubs did/do as well.

Yeah change the subject when you're wrong. Always a good strategy. Congrats. I'm sure no one else will notice.

I am actually a conservative. I am not a narco-libertarian. That might be your confusion.

 

[Charles_Main]

I'd say the terrorists are bleeding America WHITE!

What do you say?

Is this cost of revenge worth it?

We have a worse enemy using immigration to invade the US. That will permanently destroy the American way of life and everything it took 500 years to build.

Washington: Pick your battles more carefully.

9/11 did 2 trillion in Damage in 1 DAY!!! The way on Terror has cost 1.7 Trillion over 10 Years.

Enough said.

 

[brokenarrow]

I'd say the terrorists are bleeding America WHITE!

What do you say?

Is this cost of revenge worth it?

We have a worse enemy using immigration to invade the US. That will permanently destroy the American way of life and everything it took 500 years to build.

Washington: Pick your battles more carefully.

9/11 did 2 trillion in Damage in 1 DAY!!! The way on Terror has cost 1.7 Trillion over 10 Years.

Enough said.

The 9-11 damage estimate considered the long term damage to things like the stock market in months after 9-11. The war on Terror cost could have been reduced considerably if Bush had pressed for immediate retribution with nukes.

It would also serve as a warning to other countries that now consider us a "pushover" that only looks at it's image in the world and doesn't care when American get killed.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I'd say the terrorists are bleeding America WHITE!

What do you say?

Is this cost of revenge worth it?

We have a worse enemy using immigration to invade the US. That will permanently destroy the American way of life and everything it took 500 years to build.

Washington: Pick your battles more carefully.

It wasn't "revenge" asshole. It's a war. In war you kill people. You go to war to win and remove the threat from your country. We seem to be doing just that.
sheesh, some people.

I guess sending in a few hundred guys to knock off the real threat would be revenge, but because it took tens of thousands of troops and trillions to find and kill those same guys, you can sanctify your actions by calling it war on an enemy.

Somebody's making big $$$ on the difference.

Hey moron! How much did we spend in adjusted dollars after Pearl Harbor?????????

You idiots suggest we should have done nothing after 3,000 of our citizens died??????

How many more 9/11s would we have had, had we just sat there and let them get away with the first one???????

Shall you guys remember we had a prior attack on the WTC in 1993, and Clinton treated it as a "law enforcement" issue.

So, the terrorists simply came back, in eight years and TRIED AGAIN! This time they succeeded.

You libs are unbelievable!

Besides, if you want to see who spent MORE, Bush in the War or Terror, or Obama with is Porkulus. Take a look!

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP

2001 -1.25
2002 1.48
2003 3.39
2004 3.48
2005 2.52
2006 1.85
2007 1.14
2008 3.18
2009 9.91
2010 10.64

US Federal Deficit as percent of GDP - Charts Tables History

There goes your BS, shot to hell!