Originally posted by: Gaard
Shanti - <<Especially those of you who think we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan in the first place.>>
I don't recall ever seeing anyone say this. Can you be more specific on who you are talking about?
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: Gaard
Shanti - <<Especially those of you who think we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan in the first place.>>
I don't recall ever seeing anyone say this. Can you be more specific on who you are talking about?
It would have been extremely unpopular at the time for anyone to have voiced their opinions against the actions in Afghanistan. Most people were still caught up in the terror of 9/11 anyway...
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: Gaard
Shanti - <<Especially those of you who think we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan in the first place.>>
I don't recall ever seeing anyone say this. Can you be more specific on who you are talking about?
It would have been extremely unpopular at the time for anyone to have voiced their opinions against the actions in Afghanistan. Most people were still caught up in the terror of 9/11 anyway...
But somebody must have said something in order for him to make this claim.
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
Originally posted by: Gaard
Shanti - <<Especially those of you who think we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan in the first place.>>
I don't recall ever seeing anyone say this. Can you be more specific on who you are talking about?
It would have been extremely unpopular at the time for anyone to have voiced their opinions against the actions in Afghanistan. Most people were still caught up in the terror of 9/11 anyway...
But somebody must have said something in order for him to make this claim.
Why must someone have said this? Is it not logical to conclude that not all people hold the same opinion? If everyone had the same opinion on an issue I would be a little worried about that issue...
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
It was 8 years between the two major terrorist attacks on the WTC, its not like terrorists attacking US soil was common before 9-11. Saying Afghanistan and Iraq are succesfull because we haven't had a major attack here in the past 2 years is premature and wishful thinking.
Originally posted by: GrGr
Since Osama could not bring the real war to the US (too far away) he made the US come to him by the strike on 9/11. The Bush administration knew that Osama was going to strike the US but they probably did not reckon with how effective Osama's strike would be. Osama's strategic aim is to humiliate the US and to promote his own political ideas in the Middle East. Osama is succeeding with both aims at the moment. As he told Robert Fisk in an interview in 1997:
"Q: At the beginning of the war, you said the U.S. might be falling into a trap. What did you mean?
Fisk: If it is bin Laden, he's a very intelligent guy. He's been planning his war for a long time. I remember the last time I met him in 1997 in Afghanistan. It was so cold. When I awoke in the morning in the tent, I had frost in my hair. We were in a twenty-five-foot-wide and twenty-five-foot-high air raid shelter built into the solid rock of the mountain by bin Laden during the war against the Russians. And bin Laden said to me (he was being very careful, watching me writing it down), "From this mountain, Mr. Robert, upon which you are sitting, we beat the Russian army and helped break the Soviet Union. And I pray to God that he allows us to turn America into a shadow of itself." When I saw the pictures of New York without the World Trade Center, New York looked like a shadow of itself.
Bin Laden is not well read and he's not sophisticated, but he will have worked out very coldly what America would do in response to this. I'm sure he wanted America to attack Afghanistan. Once you do what your enemy wants, you are walking into a trap, whether you think it's the right thing to do or not."
Originally posted by: Tabb
If you beileve that Osama Bin Laden wasnt involved in 9/11 I seriously hope you die.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I haven't seen the Media say it yet but what's not to say that Bin Laden and Saddam haven't joined up forces and re-grouping? They could be anywhere in the world, not just in that region over there.
Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: SuperTool
I don't think anyone is denying Afghanistan has been successful, but that does not apply to war in Iraq.
Additionally, I think the resources tied up in Iraq would be better used to hunt down Al-Qaeda.
Some on this board deny Bin Laden and Al Qaeda had anything to do with 9/11. I have heard quite a few libs saying we shouldn't have attacked Afghanistan either. It is refreshing however, to hear that you differentiate the two events, rather than taking a pure "whatever Bush does is bad" attitude that I have seen among many on the left.
I'd like to see proof that anyone on this board denied Al Qaeda had something to do with 9/11, or did you just pull that out of your ass?
Originally posted by: Tabb
If you beileve that Osama Bin Laden wasnt involved in 9/11 I seriously hope you die.
Originally posted by: AEB
we arent being attacked because bush drove fear into the terrorists. bush doesnt mess around and they know if they attack us we are going to attack them right back