Bin Laden Warns of Retaliation in Iraq

[Guest Lottie]

sama bin Laden has accused George Bush of dragging America into a "quagmire" in Iraq for the sake of oil.

The al Qaeda leader said in a video broadcast that his fighters would hit back at the US for the deaths of Iraqis.

The 18-minute video is the full-length version of the statement giving by the Saudi fugitive on Friday.

In that broadcast he justified and explained his reasons for the 9/11 attacks.

The new video appeared on an Islamist website that has carried previous bin Laden tapes.

"The black gold (oil) blinded him and he put his personal interests above the general interests of America so the war took place, many died, American money was squandered and Bush was dragged into a quagmire in Iraq which threatens his future," bin Laden said.

"More than 15,000 of our people were killed and tens of thousands wounded and more than 1,000 of your people (Americans) were killed and tens of thousands wounded.

"Bush's hands are sullied with the blood of those on both sides just for oil and to employ his private companies."

He added: "Remember that for every action, there is a reaction," he said, adding that al Qaeda would carry on fighting the United States "until it forces it into bankruptcy".

Fighters loyal to Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi have recently pledged allegiance to the al Qaeda leader. Source

[Fluffybunny]

I for the life of me will never understand why the US government didn't stay after Osama. This guy is basically the quarterback for Al-Queda, and in my opinion such an icon for the terrorist wannabes that we should have never let up on him.

Having his head on a stick would have been quite the statement to the terrorist world; but we just blew it and went after Saddam.

Meanwhile Osama gets to continue to run about an plan attacks against us...great...

[stillcrazy]

It's only going to get worse.

Viet Nam all over again. Only in the desert.

More civilians than bad guys will die.

Oh well.

I leave for Canada in a few days. I just might not come back.

[fearfulone]

It's only going to get worse.

Viet Nam all over again. Only in the desert.

More civilians than bad guys will die.

Oh well.

I leave for Canada in a few days. I just might not come back.

339397[/snapback]

its not vietnam...its the terrorists that are the only ones uprising...they will eventually be crushed...iraq will be fine, theyve got their elections coming up in january.

[stillcrazy]

It's only going to get worse.

Viet Nam all over again. Only in the desert.

More civilians than bad guys will die.

Oh well.

I leave for Canada in a few days. I just might not come back.

339397[/snapback]

its not vietnam...its the terrorists that are the only ones uprising...they will eventually be crushed...iraq will be fine, theyve got their elections coming up in january.

339433[/snapback]

Why are there more dead Iraqi citizens than dead terrorist?

We do not have control of any part of Iraq at this time. relatively peaceful does not mean control.

While we are at it, why has Bin Laden not been captured or killed.

Answer, because we do not have the resources nor motivation to wage war on several fronts.

We have a larger percentage of reservist and national Guard in harms way than ever before.

The number of terrorist groups, plus those that allign themselves with these groups has increased since we entered Iraq.

It doesn't matter who won the election. we are in a very serious situation, that started years before Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr. ever took office. None of those 'Leaders have done a thing to prevent the course we are on. The last President who took a stand and followed the course to the end was Reagan.

9/11 was a tip of power by those we have been supporting to our advantage, and when we were done, we tossed them aside. It's a long list of crap the American government has done since WWII.

Folks It ain't Bush or Kerry. It's us.

[Michelle]

If you want to see the enemy face to face look in the mirror.

[stillcrazy]

If you want to see the enemy face to face look in the mirror.

339514[/snapback]

Very true. We need to start investigating, on our own, why we are where we are today.

It didn't start with Clintons failures or Bush Sr. policies, Or any one back to Eisenhower. We started being a world power in WWI and have made some very bad choices in who and what we supported from then til now.

It has never been about world peace, because politicians know it can never happen. It's not profitable.

Politicians need war, threat of war, poverty, poor education systems, divided groups of race and religion, It's the only way most of them can get elected.

We put these people in power, we are to blame.

[Scorpius]

Osama Bin Laden's is actually sounding more civlized...

He does have good justifications for attacking, however I dont' support with the attack on the twin towers.

"The black gold (oil) blinded him and he put his personal interests above the general interests of America so the war took place, many died, American money was squandered and Bush was dragged into a quagmire in Iraq which threatens his future,"

He added: "Remember that for every action, there is a reaction,"

"Money is the root of all evil" Too much money is really a bad thing.

"until it forces it into bankruptcy".

Well the attack on the trade centers sure did some damage to the economy. Yet it didn't cause another Great Depression. Unless that's what Osama is aiming for.

Edited November 3, 2004 by Blue-Scorpion

[Guest Lottie]

He does have good justifications for attacking, however I dont' support with the attack on the twin towers.

Terrorising the U.S by means of its infrastructure and in the meantime murdering thousands, there was no, is no justification for these wicked attacks. More like Osama's mindless dribble is using this as an excuse and any old excuse as well. What happened during 9/11 was terrorism, evil, and there was no justification for the murder of masses of innocence by those dispicable little people.

Edited November 3, 2004 by Lottie

[bathory]

I for the life of me will never understand why the US government didn't stay after Osama.

the US is looking for him, you've got to be kidding if you think they need 130 000 troops or something to do so, its up to the intelligence agencies and such now, and most likely up to Pakistan.

[tigger]

i like everyone else am wondering why they were scurrying about after osama and then hey presto, now they want saddam... something doesnt quite gel here

[Fluffybunny]

I for the life of me will never understand why the US government didn't stay after Osama.

the US is looking for him, you've got to be kidding if you think they need 130 000 troops or something to do so, its up to the intelligence agencies and such now, and most likely up to Pakistan.

340338[/snapback]

Well Bathory the fact that they have not found him in all this time is pretty dang good evidence that we needed more troops there then we had...Perhaps the idea that we have less than 1/10 the resources in Afghanastan as we do in Iraq may not mean anything to you...

If we had caught him then you might have a point, but the guy is out running wild and free and planning attacks against the US and the rest of the west.

[vimjams]

something doesnt quite gel here

That would be all the bull***t coming from the Pentagon and distrubited through every American letter box.

If we had caught him then you might have a point, but the guy is out running wild and free and planning attacks against the US and the rest of the west.

The guy is more than likely sitting in one of homes someplace...sipping coffee and dunking biscuits and having a real good laugh at all this.

"planning attacks"....Jeez: Wake up!

Cluck...Cluck cluck cluck.

Vimjams

[Fluffybunny]

If we had caught him then you might have a point, but the guy is out running wild and free and planning attacks against the US and the rest of the west.

The guy is more than likely sitting in one of homes someplace...sipping coffee and dunking biscuits and having a real good laugh at all this.

"planning attacks"....Jeez: Wake up!

Cluck...Cluck cluck cluck.

Vimjams

340625[/snapback]

Vimjams, I tire of your constant trolling. Having gone through your posts I find a relatively small percentage where you are not trying to incite an argument or stir up trouble. I don't understand why, but it is getting old.

If you would like to add something constructive; please do. If you want to run around trolling for arguments; go elsewhere. I am not the only one here tired of having to deal with the spats you seem to be at the center of so often.

[vimjams]

‘Trolling’…Isn’t that just something else to call me rather than take issue with things I do say.

I don’t see where I am ‘bucking’ for an argument because I do not agree with a great deal of what you and your comrades have to say.

Take for instance the ‘considered’ opinion concerning Al Quaida.

Most of you accept that here we have an international terrorist organisation that Bush identifies with in his war on terror…I don’t agree. And when I attempt to express my disagreements about this, I am met with (pro Bush) fanaticism and a considerable amount of disdain.

I do not believe that Al Quaida is an organised body…But more than likely is a collection of smaller groups of (independent) terrorists getting funds from the likes of Bin Laden and people of his ilk.

Bush and Rumsfeld repeatedly spoke of caves where these Al Quaida operated from in Afghanistan.

Diagrams and drawings were shown us of how we ‘stupid’ and ignorant people didn’t seem to realise how huge and complex these cave ‘systems’ were. What actually was discovered by US and British forces when in control of these ‘complexes’ was nothing of the sort…Just holes in the mountains for storing ammunition and supplies. A completely different story to that put across by the politicians. And the media forgot to explain that.

And the media failed to explain to us ‘ignorant’ people that the US were paying (cash) to Northern Alliance forces to bring ‘body counts’ of Al Quaida and ‘Taliban’ suspects. I wonder how many poor innocent herdsmen had a price on their heads?

Now Fluffy, I can argue these points and have done, and tried. But, if you read my posts from before you’ll see that from experiences I have had on this board (I’m sorry you are ‘tired’ of it) I am constantly defending myself from personal attacks and insults regarding my opposite views.

I find this quite challenging and make no complaints about it yet, it is somewhat pathetic when the very people who like to call me childish names and accuse me of posting ‘crap’ quite often turn things around and point the accusing finger at me. Is this the ‘democracy’ that Bush wants the world to enjoy?

If we had caught him then you might have a point, but the guy is out running wild and free and planning attacks against the US and the rest of the west.

This statement of yours…

How do you know this? Who gave you this knowledge about these so-called ‘planned attacks’?

And, How many of the (highly publicised) terrorist cells previously discovered in the USA have shown themselves to be anything other than simple innocent groups and events? Do you know? Have there been media follow-ups to these incidences? And the arrested individuals who now languish in your prisons without charge and without trial…Are they terrorists?

Do you know this for fact…Or are you and others blindly repeating everything you are told…?

I am not (just looking) to cause trouble because I happen to disagree…I have an opinion. And the problem of accepting differences doesn’t lie at my feet.

We have them here in the UK. Every so often the media will inform us of a pending attack or some little terrorist cell being discovered. Not one single event has proven itself to have any validity.

“Six men arrested for risen plot” “Terrorist threat to kill Blair” “Al Quaida were to bomb Football stadium”. These events are blasted across TV and newspapers for everyone to take on board…Young men are seen handcuffed and marched away by heavily armed police…But nothing ever comes of it.

There was no risen plot…no threat to blow up football stadiums. It’s all a lie! But one has to search out those facts…The media conveniently forget to repel the fears of previous headlines.

I’m not looking for an argument Fluffy…The argument is all ready here.

Vimjams

Edited November 4, 2004 by vimjams

[Guest Lottie]

Vijams said to Fluffy:

This statement of yours…

How do you know this? Who gave you this knowledge about these so-called ‘planned attacks’?

The same could be said for what you have posted above. The same could be said for everyone who has an opinion on this. I think that most of us who post on these issues have some knolwdge and awareness of what is happening. Whether or not its fact is a different matter, however everyone has a right to express their opinions based on the knowledge they are faced with. Fluffs I would say has more knowledge than most on this area seeing as he has first hand experience in war. However this does not make him right or wrong it is just an opinion, just like you and me and everyone else.

[bathory]

Well Bathory the fact that they have not found him in all this time is pretty dang good evidence that we needed more troops there then we had...Perhaps the idea that we have less than 1/10 the resources in Afghanastan as we do in Iraq may not mean anything to you...

not really, its evidence that we haven't found him, nothing more, nothing less.

As i said before its up to the CIA and other intelligence agencies to find him, and then the various powers will attempt to grab him, they didn't find Saddam by covering Iraq with military and then searching, Saddam got ratted out.

[Babs]

I was just perusing the material and came across this statement, "Why is it that more Iraqi citizens are dead than terrorists?"

.... I am going to bust a gut on this one. You got to be kidding, stillcrazy?! Could it be because our beloved terrorists hide and ensconce themselves with the Iraqi citizenry?

Edited November 4, 2004 by Babs

[stillcrazy]

I'm sorry, I didn't know dead civilians was such a laughing matter.

Edited November 4, 2004 by stillcrazy

[Fluffybunny]

I'm sorry, I didn't know dead civilians was such a laughing matter.

341616[/snapback]

Ouch.

[Babs]

Ah...what's wrong I didn't say any thing of the kind.

Well, why don't you address that stillcrazy? What about those terrorists hiding with the people_ and getting their people blown up?

Hey, and what about the terrorists killing the Iraqis, now?

Edited November 4, 2004 by Babs

[stillcrazy]

I was just perusing the material and came across this statement, "Why is it that more Iraqi citizens are dead than terrorists?"

.... I am going to bust a gut on this one. You got to be kidding, stillcrazy?! Could it be because our beloved terrorists hide and ensconce themselves with the Iraqi citizenry?

341611[/snapback]

Yes you did say that.

The reason there are more dead citizens than terrorist is due to, like you stated, the cowards hiding in among the citizens of the Iraq.

The reason there are terrorist in among the Iraqi's is because we did not secure the borders.

Almost all of these terrorist came in after we took out Saddam's war machine. They were not in country prior to our invading Iraq. They are now recruiting Iraqi's to the cause. Because we import people to do the work that the Iraqi's could do themselves.

It seems that you have an opinion on this and while I respect your right to your opinion I would like to suggest that you do your own research into these matters.

Edited November 4, 2004 by stillcrazy

[Babs]

I knew the terrorists would flood into Iraq...terrorists from all over the globe. I wrote to CNN about this and said this on the UM board. I have been saying this for a long time. Where have you been?

You can't stop them; you have to kill them.

At least the war is contained now. That helps us kill as many terrorists as we can on Iraqi soil.

[stillcrazy]

I knew the terrorists would flood into Iraq...terrorists from all over the globe.   I wrote to CNN about this and said this on the UM board. I have been saying this for a long time. Where have you been?

You can't stop them; you have to kill them.

At least the war is contained now. That helps us kill as many terrorists as we can on Iraqi soil.

341784[/snapback]

We went to Iraq to secure our safety, we followed the terror trail to Iraq where Al Qaeda 'lives and thrives'. Just look at the way the terrorist groups have crawled out of the woodwork.

This statement from another thread states that the terrorist were already in Iraq. So which is it. Where they there before or after. Since your more educated on this matter than I, I would really would like to know.

[reese2]

You know, I think everyone fighting here is just sickening.

I don't think ANYONE here, unless being a monster, would want civilians to die. It is unfortunate, and horrid.

I think when you seperate the muck, we all have more in common than we do differences.

I am going to be reading up on a couple of other threads, since someone *cough SC cough*, brought up the DRAFT issue again...

So....... I will make some posts in just a bit, after I plow through all the niceties that you all have so graciously posted... (For my veiwing pleasure)

toodles till then,

Reese