Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by TheOne, Aug 2, 2004.
My you were busy during your time out.
You don't think that there were lots of 'suggestions' thrown out on the table? Guess you never participated in any kind of panels for infomation, huh? I do believe one of the most important functions of the Pentagon and the think tanks they employ, is to come up with 'alternative plans' most of which are thrown on a shelf.
whats the problem with this? If theres intel of an Al Qaeda cell in bolivia, bomb it.
There you go again! :2guns:
well, Rumsfeld, in his particular false arrogant superiority, refuses to listen to my tactical advice of 5 man special ops units for hunt and kill missions, he'd rather use long distance bombs so........i'm left with little choice but to call it like I see it.
Yeah, the only problem is they weren't even Al Qaeda cells. It was the neocon, Likudnik Feith's attempt to protect Israel with US anger over 9/11.
...They argued that an attack on terrorists in South Americafor example, a remote region on the border of Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil where intelligence reports said Iranian-backed Hizbullah had a presencewould have ripple effects on other terrorist operations.
a senior Pentagon official
How do you know it wasn't written in jest? How do you know it also doesn't say we should bomb Patterson NJ? I guess we should ask the source. Oh yeah, can't do that he too is unnamed..................
A terrorist cell is a terrorist cell. It doesn't matter if they are al-qaeda, hezbollah, or the cult of the dead cow.
and if that ripple effect is to stop, deter, or eliminate terrorist activity then it should be done. why do you support terrorism abroad?
Actually, it does and you're wrong. Even the authorization of the use of force against Iraq signed by Congress required Bush to prove that Iraq was complicit in 9/11. Here's the relevant passage.
I don't support terrorism abroad. I also don't support US blood being spilled to support Israel, a nation which has done nothing to secure American interests and whose military we created and maintain. If Israel wants to hit Hezbollah in South America, let them do it. Are they weaklings or is it just more convenient for them to not lose any of their soldiers protecting their country and Zionistic practices? If we are going to arm Israel to the teeth, why don't they use the weapons we give them? If not, make them like Japan and neuter them and then we can protect them.
I support the use of military force to capture or kill the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11, Al Qaeda. That's it. It's my tax money and that's my voice.
Separate names with a comma.