'It is unacceptable that almost seven years after nearly 3,000 Americans were killed on our soil, the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 are still at large'

Barack Obama
July 15,2008

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7507929.stm

Nope. The terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 DIED on 9/11.

In addition 7,000 al-Qaeda members have been killed or captured and are no longer 'at large' as Obama claims:

'We have now killed or captured over 7,000 al Qaeda and Iraq terrorists. More than 30 senior level al Qaeda and Iraq terrorists have been captured or killed since July alone'

MAJ. GENERAL WILLIAM CALDWELL
MULTI-NATIONAL FORCE IRAQ
December 2,2006

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/02/tww.01.html

Al-Qaida leaders reported killed or captured since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001:

Waleed bin Attash

Police on April 29, 2003, arrested alleged al-Qaida operational commander Waleed bin Attash, suspected of helping plan the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, and five other alleged al-Qaida operatives in a raid in Karachi. U.S. officials also suspect Attash, a Yemeni also known as Tawfiq Attash or Khallad, coordinated the activities of two hijackers who crashed a plane into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001. U.S. law enforcement officials said a plot to crash an explosives-laden small aircraft into the U.S. consulate in Karachi was uncovered with the arrests. Pakistan's Interior Minister, Faisal Saleh Hayyat, declined to comment directly on the plot, but said the arrest helped avert a major terrorist attack.

Mohammed Atef (aka Abu Hafs)

Atef was reported killed in mid-November 2001 in a U.S. airstrike near Kabul, according to "credible" intelligence reports received from the region. He remains on the FBI's list of "Most Wanted Terrorists," however. U.S. officials said Atef, 57, was one of bin Laden's most senior deputies and a family member - his daughter was married to one of bin Laden's sons in January 2001. Atef also was a co-founder of the al-Qaida terror network and was a member of the group's ruling council, the officials said. He served as al-Qaida's top military commander. They also believe that the former Egyptian police officer was the key planner behind the Sept. 11 attacks, the bombing of the USS Cole and the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. Along with bin Laden, he was indicted in connection with the embassy attacks.

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed

Mohammed, one of the FBI's most-wanted terrorists, was captured in a raid in Rawalpindi, near the Pakistani capital of Islamabad, on March 1, 2003. U.S. intelligence officials describe Mohammed as the third-ranking official of al-Qaida, behind only Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri. They say he became head of military operations following the death of Mohammed Atef, who was killed by a CIA Predator strike in November, 2001. U.S. investigators believe Mohammed, working under bin Laden's leadership, planned many aspects of the Sept. 11 attacks. The uncle of convicted World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef, Mohammed also is believed to have participated in or planned virtually every major al-Qaida strike, including the attacks in 1998 on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Tunisia; and a deadly attack last year on a synagogue on the Tunisian resort island of Djerba. He and alleged Sept. 11 co-conspirator Ramzi Binalshibh gave an interview to an al-Jazeera TV reporter in which they claimed to have orchestrated what they called "the martyrdom operation inside America."

Abu Zubaydah

Considered a senior planner of al-Qaida terrorist operations, he was captured by Pakistani authorities in March 2002 and turned over to the U.S. military. Zubaydah, also known as Zain Al-Abidin Muhahhad Husain and Abd Al-Hadi Al-Wahab, was shot several times while trying to evade capture but survived and was turned over to U.S. authorities. A 31-year-old Saudi citizen of Palestinian descent, Zubaydah was, at the time of his apprehension, the most senior al-Qaida member to be captured. U.S. intelligence officials say he later provided useful information about pending plots, including intelligence that led to the detention of Jose Padilla, the American who federal officials allege was plotting to use a radiological weapon on U.S. soil.

Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi (aka Shaihk Saiid; Sa'd al-Sharif)

Al-Hawsawi, who authorities believe was the main money man behind the Sept. 11 operation, was arrested in Rawlpindi, Pakistan, on March 1, 2003, with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. He is described as a "supporting conspirator" in the indictment of Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 attacks for allegedly providing financial support to the hijackers using bank accounts he controlled in the United Arab Emirates.

Mohammed Omar Abdel-Rahman

Allegedly a senior al-Qaida operative and the son of the blind Egyptian sheik accused of inspiring the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, was arrested in February 2003 in Quetta, Pakistan. U.S. officials say Abdel-Rahman ran a training camp in Afghanistan before the Sept. 11 attacks and also had a role in operational planning. His father, Omar Abdel-Rahman, is in a U.S. prison for a 1994 plot to bomb landmarks around New York City.

Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri

Al-Qaida's Persian Gulf operations chief who believed to have been heavily involved in the planning of the bombing of the USS Cole. Al-Nashiri, a Saudi, was captured in November 2002 in the United Arab Emirates. Al-Nashiri was arrested based on intelligence provided by Saudi authorities, sources told the Associated Press. He was transferred to U.S. custody shortly after his apprehension and was questioned at an undisclosed location for several days before his apprehension was announced by U.S. officials. U.S. officials say he has been surprisingly cooperative.

Ramzi Binalshibh

A 30-year-old Yemeni, Binalshibh was arrested in Karachi, Pakistan, on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks after a gunfight with Pakistani police that left two other suspected al-Qaida members dead and five others in custody. Pakistan turned Binalshibh, accused of being one of the main planners of the Sept. 11 attacks when he was a roommate of suspected ringleader Mohammed Atta in Hamburg, Germany, over to U.S. authorities within days of his arrest and he was flown out of the country to an undisclosed location for questioning.

Mohammed Haydar Zammar

An al-Qaida recruiter who allegedly enlisted Mohammed Atta and other key members of the terrorist cell that carried out the Sept. 11 attacks while preaching at a mosque in Hamburg, Germany, in the mid- to late-1990s, reportedly is being held in Syria. Zammar, a German of Syrian descent, was arrested in Morocco after leaving Germany on Oct. 27, 2001, and was subsequently transferred to Syrian custody.

Ali Qaed Sinan al-Harthi

A senior al-Qaida member believed to have been involved in the planning of the attack on the USS Cole, al-Harthi was killed on Nov. 4, 2002, in Yemen by a Hellfire missile fired by a CIA-controlled drone, U.S. officials said.

Abdul Rahim al-Sharqawi

Also known as "Riyadh the Facilitator," al-Sharqawi reportedly is in the custody in an unidentified country where U.S. officials have access to him. The circumstances of his capture are not known. Considered a "top 25" al-Qaida leader, al-Sharqawi was responsible for coordinating logistics and finances for al-Qaida operations before his apprehension, which occurred before April 2002.

Mohsen al-Fadli

Described by U.S. officials as a senior Kuwaiti member of al-Qaida and the network's senior leader for the Persian Gulf, al-Fadli, 21, was arrested by Kuwaiti security forces in November 2002, who said the apprehension foiled a plot to blow up a hotel in Yemen used by Americans. He was sentenced to five years in prison by a Kuwaiti court in February 2003 for "joining the military forces of a foreign country which endangered Kuwait's political ties."

Abu Zubair Haili
A Saudi operative captured in Morocco in June 2002, Haili was nicknamed "the Bear" because of his size. An associate of top al-Qaida leader Abu Zubaydah, he was described by U.S. officials as an al-Qaida recruiter and planner.

Ibn Al-Shaykh al-Libi

A Libyan who ran some of bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan. He was captured by Pakistan and turned over to U.S. authorities in early January 2001.

Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi (aka Abu Abdallah)

Al-Iraqi, allegedly an al-Qaida training camp director, was reportedly captured by the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan in January 2001.

Zaid al-Khayr

Al-Khayr, a Saudi accused of serving as an al-Qaida trainer at training camps in Afghanistan, reportedly is being held in Pakistan.

Abu Jafar al-Jaziri

Al-Jaziri, a senior al-Qaida logistics coordinator, was reported killed in mid-January 2001 during U.S. bombing of the al-Qaida training complex of Zawar Kili in eastern Afghanistan.

Abu Salah al-Yemeni

Al-Yemeni, an al-Qaida logistics coordinator, reported was killed in mid-January 2001 during U.S. bombing of the terrorist training complex of Zawar Kili in eastern Afghanistan.

Tariq Anwar al-Sayyid Ahmad

Ahmad, a high-ranking member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which is closely linked with bin Laden's al-Qaida network, reportedly was killed by an airstrike near the Afghan town of Khost in early November 2000.

Muhammad Salah

Salah, described as a senior figure in Egyptian Islamic Jihad, also believed to have been killed near Khost, probably in the same strike in which al-Sayyid Ahmad died.

Tawfiq Attash Khallad

Described as an al-Qaida operational commander.

http://msnbc.com/modules/wtc/wtc_globaldra...ody_alqaida.htm




Where is Obama getting his 'information'?

"We don't do body counts." Lieutenant General Tommy Franks

you do realize those numbers thrown out are guesses ? In no way can they really be counted or confirmed. It's a PR feel good number for the pro war rhetoric.

We wouldn't be in Iraq at all fighting terrorism if it wasn't for Bush. They are there because we are.



smart . where McCain , well ,, isn't.

Then there was really no reason to invade Iraq, right? You make the point for impeachment. Thanks.

There is at least one glaring omission....anyone remember that Osama BinLaden guy?

No doubt fighting in Iraq has resulted in the death of many Al Qaida. But attacking Iraq drew some al qaida to iraq, they weren't there while Saddam was in power. But what about Pakistan? And the reassurgence of the taliban in Afghanistan?

Clearly, we killed lots of bad guys. But unfortunately, this isn't a srpint. Or a marathon for that matter. It's a mega marathon. We'll be dealing with these people for a very, very long time, and I hope that when we leave Iraq, we implement some real security measures here at home. Something of substance, not banning hair gel from airlines....

I agree. in terms of dealing with Terrorism Iraq was a waste of time , money and people . not to mention it CREATED more terrorism over all. so to claim any sort of victory is foolish . it would be like claiming victory after one has shoved their head of their own azz and then said tada I got it out !!

lol I love these quotes -



"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." --Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." --Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

"Can we win? I don't think you can win it." --after being asked whether the war on terror was winnable, "Today" show interview, Aug. 30, 2004

"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job." --to a group of Amish he met with privately, July 9, 2004

"F*ck Saddam. We're taking him out." --to three U.S. senators in March 2002, one year before the Iraq invasion, as quoted by Time magazine


"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

and of course -

"People say, how can I help on this war against terror? How can I fight evil? You can do so by mentoring a child; by going into a shut-in's house and say I love you." --Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2002

but his best in my opinion ? lol

"I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake." --on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

Tell us then, how many terroritst attack had there been since we entered Iraq?
And how many more terrorist are there now?

Bin Laden is none a factor now, he is good as dead.


The problem we had wioth AlQAeda when it all started is how do we find them or root them out. See, now they come to us.


What real security measure then do you have in mind other than what we are doing now?

Are you only counting attacks on american soil?

How many terrorist attacks on american soil were there since 1950 up until 9/11?



Says who? A guy orchestrates this attack and doesn't get caught...and you don't think that alone is not a factor?


What a brilliant strategy. Actually, they go to Pakistan and Afghanistan. Remember Afghanistan? The country where there actually WAS an enemy...an enemy that is now taking advantage of our waste of resources in Iraq to come back again.




Well, for starters we can start securing our ports and inspecting shipping containers, securing the mexican border, AND the canadian border. I've crossed by water into canada unoticed several times since 9/11. I'm sure someone could do the same from canada to the US. Start a series of background checks for air travel, like the Israelis do. Our secrity is a joke. You could move a whole battalion into this country in a week and probably not be noticed.

Isn't every suicide bombing and attack on goverment buildings in Iraq a terrorist attack?

The attack on the embassy's in Afghanistan, another terrorist attack.

you really are slow aren't you ? just because there have been no attacks on american soil by al qeada doesn't mean it was due to the Iraq war . nor is it because of wiretapping !!! the bulk of terrorists in Iraq are not and were not al qeada ! our own military is quoted at 10%. !! not to mention how far away we are !!!

Estimated Numbers of Foreign Fighters.

Although there have been
differences among commanders about the contribution of the foreign fighters to the
overall violence in Iraq, estimates of the numbers of foreign fighters have remained
fairly consistent over time, at least as a percentage of the overall insurgency. As early
as October 2003, U.S. officials estimated that as many as 3,000 might be non-Iraqi,43
although, suggesting uncertainty in the estimate, Gen. Abizaid said on January 29,
2004, that the number of foreign fighters in Iraq was “low” and “in the hundreds.”44
A September 2005 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies
estimated that there were about 3,000 non-Iraqi fighters in Iraq - about 10% of the
estimated total size of the insurgency. In testimony before Congress in January 2007,
the then Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (John Negroponte) said that
foreign fighters constitute less than 10% of the insurgents in Iraq. In December 2007,
al-Baghdadi (see above), the Emir (leader) of the Islamic State of Iraq (name used by
AQI, see above) claimed that the Islamic State is almost all Iraqi, and has only 200
foreign fighters.45 However, as noted above, the Islamic State of Iraq was formed
in part to try to portray AQ-I as an Iraqi, not a foreign, organization and many would
argue that the foreign component of the organization is purposely understated by AQI
spokespeople.

Of the approximately 25,000 insurgents in U.S.-led detention in Iraq as of
November 2007, only 290 or 1.2%, were non-Iraqi. This could suggest that the
percentage of foreign fighters in Iraq has dropped, or it could indicate that it has been
harder to capture the foreign fighters than it has been to capture Iraqi insurgents.
Some might argue that the foreign fighters tend to fight to the death rather than allow
themselves to be captured, and that the percentage in detention is not an accurate
indicator of the percentage of foreigners involved in the Iraq insurgency.

Report to Congress April 28 2008 Iraq and Al Qeada

Iraq has drawn terrorism there - it isn't where it came from . what part of that don't you understand ?? get a clue. If we had stayed in Afghanistan and never went into Iraq we'd still be attack free here.



Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until we invaded. Then sunni's who weren't Al Qeada before we invaded started calling themselves and aligning themselves with Al Qaeda because of the invasion. get it ??

now how many more al qeada attacks world wide since we invaded ? lots more ...............

Report: Global terrorism up more than 25 percent
POSTED: 8:39 p.m. EDT, April 30, 2007

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/30/terror.report/index.html

My question was clear, and you could not say none.



He is none factor since we hunted him down.



Yup, and we are still there.



Then you don't understand how National Security works, you can't actually watch the millions of people coming in and out of the country since we are in a free society.
Do you think you could have crossed freely had you been associating with suspected terrorist or have some links to illegal purchase of bomb making materials?
It's those shadow warriors that you don't see that is keeping us from being attacked.

Fine , I am slow. So now can you tell me really slowly how many terrorist are there ever since we went into iRaq, in other words they grew by how much?
You can start by telling us how many terrorist were there before we entered Iraq, right?

He said, the terrorist who attacked us on 9/11 died, not all those involved. You know, like the mastermind and financiers.

He still releases statements, he still emboldons and inspired millions. I would not call that a "none factor."



Your question is clear, but it is also clearly narrow and misleading.


Hey, if that helps you sleep at night, then keep believing that by all means.....If these "shadow warriors" (ninjas?) are so good, why am I not allowed to bring aftershave onto a plane in my carry-on baggage? Please.....

and we are still in Afghanistan, but we are understaffed there and the taliban has made a resurgance. A presence that we can't adequately deal with because we are tied up in Iraq. We now have to negotiate with Russia over Georgia from a position of weakness because they know we don't have the muscle to stand up to them, as we are sapped out in Iraq...so i would say we are beginning to see the consequences of going into Iraq.

you mean al qaeda ???? probably close to zero as one could get .. try a bit of education instead of rhetoric.

Declassified Report: No Al Qaeda Link In Pre-War Iraq
Friday September 8, 2006
This is the second in a series of articles reflecting on the state of America since 11 September 2001.

A newly-declassified (but redacted) 400-page Senate Intelligence Committee analysis of pre-war Iraq reports no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. It concludes that Hussein "distrusted" al Qaeda and "viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime."

It includes a CIA determination that prior to March 2003, Saddam Hussein ''did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward [Abu Musab al Zarqawi] and his associates.'' Instead, he "attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al Zarqawi." A US airstrike killed al Zarqawi this summer.

The document is a scathing indictment of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), the document which presents a unified (some say political) front, reconciling or brushing over difference of opinion among various intelligence agencies. The NIE was used to justify attacking Iraq in March 2003.

Both post-war and pre-war intelligence show "no credible information that Iraq was complicit in or had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks or any other al Qaeda strikes." Nevertheless, Iraq is the most visible -- and costly -- US action since 9-11. In the name of protecting the US against terrorism, far more money is going to Iraq than to this nation's infrastructure.

and fyi just in case

# "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Information obtained after the war supports the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's (INR) assessment in the NIE that the Intelligence Community lacked persuasive evidence that Baghdad had launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program." (p 52)

# "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq's acquisition of high strength aluminum tubes was intended for an Iraqi nuclear program. The findings do support the assessments in the NIE of the Department of Engergy's Office of Intelligence and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's (INR) that the aluminum tubes were likely intended for a conventional rocket program." (p 52)

# "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure uranium ore and yellowcake' from Africa. Postwar findings support the assessment in the NIE of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's (INR) that claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are 'highly dubious.'" (p 53)
# "No postwar information indicates that Iraq intended to use al Qaeda or any other terrorist group to strike the United States homeland before or during Operation Iraqi Freedom." The 2002 NIE, however, asserted that Iraq would "probably attempt clandestine attacks" if Hussein felt threatened. (p 111)

cont .............

http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2006/09/08/d...re-war-iraq.htm

Yup, releases them once in a blue moon and the only ones left who gets excited by it are the media and you folks,


Like you said, it's clear. Crystal clear actually.
Well? Still can't say, NONE?


Because it can be done and it serves a deterrent, do you think you can actually prevent one aftershave from entering the United States???


And had we gone to Afghanistan only, you think we would suddenly put a frontal army against Russia?
And Saddam would still be in power, enriched by the Oil for Food corruption so who knows what new world headache he is up to by now.

I don't know why anyone bothers anymore.

He's a hero to these people. He spit in the eye of the US, he proved that we could be attacked and that you could get away with it. They call him "The lion of Islam" and he's become a figurehead for fundamentalist Islam. If that means nothing to you, it certainly means something to fundamentalist muslims.


There have been no attacks on domestic soil since 9/11. There also have been no aligator attacks in NYC either. So clearly, going to Iraq keeps New Yorkers safe from aligator attacks, right?



Wait, are you honestly trying to get us to believe that going through people's carry on luggage and taking away aftershave makes us one iota safer? I thought there were "shadow warriors" who would swarm all over me if I was a bad guy and tried to land a boat in canada (as I've done a few times). But they apparently need someone to keep hair gel of the planes? So to sum up your point, "shadow warriors" (are they like demons or elves or something?) know all the potential terrorists here, so that's why I can land a boat in canada, but they apparently still are unsure enough that they need someone taking away toothpaste and hair gel from me at the airport....

If they are so good, wouldn't they just let me go by without checking my carry on? I mean, they knew I was safe enough to land a boat in canada, but not safe enough to let me keep my hair gel?




Had we stabilized afghanistan and kept out of Iraq, we would still have a bit of muscle left, a little leverage. As of now, thanks to Iraq, we are having trouble keeping people in the army, we are broke and in severe debt, and our once mighty military reputation is a joke. Russia is less afraid of us now then they ever have been. We are negotiating from a position of weakness, because of Iraq.



I'm sorry, what "world headaches" did he cause before? You mean keeping a volitile "country" that is younger than Paul Newman stable? Keeping Iran off balance and countered? Keeping fundamentalist muslims hiding in fear in Iraq and keeping their clergy out of power? Those are all good things. Things that are not happening any longer.

Iraq is NOT stable, and the Middle East is even less stable
Iran is rising, without Iraq to keep them down. In fact, they are cooperating. This has been the US's worst fear since the 1970's when the Shah was deposed
Fundamentalist clerics in Iraq are getting voted into office. (remember, those are the bad guys.)


Why didn't GH Bush go into Iraq after chasing them out of Kuwait? because he had more sense than his arrogant and ignorant son did, and he listened to the people who tried to tell GW what would, and is, happening.

Some of those financiers was saudia arbia, and possible iraq indirectly of course.

Wait a minute here, I thought these were Insurgents and not terrorist?
You alway argue that they are Insurgents who just want the USA out of their country, right?
How can you say now they are terrorist when you call them Insurgents or Iraqi freedom fighters?

Really now, a Lion who leads by hiding?
The more he hides the greater of a hero he becomes?


No, going to Iraq does not keep New Yorkers safe from alligators. You see, Alligators are found in florida, not in Iaq.
But terrorist can be found in the Middle East.


AGAIN, would be very tough to guard the entire American borders, so the shadow warriors try to Indentify foreigners who have links with known or suspected terrorist. But easier to monitor those getting in planes. By the way, why don't you find yourself an airline who does not screen any passengers and enjoy your hazzle free boarding.

Shadow warriors are those who gets no applause, interview or ends up in commercials when they get their job done.
Intelligence in simple terms.



Those are your Opinion, but how many actually would really want to take on the US MIlitary Force and expect to win against it?
Russia? We will wipe out Russia's Air Force easily, and our Main Battle Tanks are superior to theirs.
A couple of Aircraft Carrier Battle group will be enough to deliver a big punch against Iran.



Was the Middle East stable then?
Iran is all MOUTH, and it will be all mout for it knows one aggresive move from them and Israel alone will handle them.


GH Bush did not have to react to 3,000 dead Civilian Americans in one day.

What you don't understand is the terrorist never really stopped when our repsond to attacks before were mere words and condemnation.
Now if the terrorist are planning to strike us again if you ask me I will tell warn them now we hit again and we will invade Syria next.

George Washington/Nathaniel Greene
Mao tse-Tung
William Quantrill
Ho Chi Minh
Charles de Gaulle
Toussaint Louverture

Just a few famous leaders off the top of my head that fought by hiding and/or guerrilla war, and all revered by their followers. I'm not saying that bin Laden has been or will be as successful as any of these men, but the fact is many leaders have risen to fame (and sometimes success) through leading by hiding. I don't know if we should just ignore what he's capable of.

I can't help but wonder if you would shrug bin Laden off as a non-factor if the Democrats had been in charge during all of this.

Oh, I see. I should have guessed. You are apparently one of those people who think Iraq had something to do with 9/11.



What you don't understand is that the terrroist attacks have still not stopped.



With WHAT ARMY? Are we going to initiate a draft? Go further into debt, weaken our miliatry further by spreading out into yet another unholdable territory? How are we going to invade and hold syria when we can't even hold Iraq and Afghanistan?




You seem to be under the delusion that we are still a superpower. We are a housewife who can't stop running up the credit cards or running off her mouth. We are not the invincible juggernaut we were from 1950-2000. That era is over. The problem is, our mouth is still writing checks our *** can't cash without a draft or a real mobilization of industry for war. The problem is, we can't mobilize our industry for war....because it's all in china.

These people didn't hide, everyone knew they were alive, active and leading a certain organization or a rebellion, they just don't make a daily announcement of where they are which is normal when you have enemies.
While Bin Laden is just like Saddam, when things got tough he was found in a fox hole hiding. A lion???

If the Democrats are in charge now, I don't think Bin Laden would even be hiding.

Iraq was causing world instability, apparently you are one of those who thinks you got Saddam contained and can do so forever.


Oh yeah, they are still out there, that is why we are going after them.


Syria is just next to Iraq, couple of Tank division should do the job and one Carrier Battle group, we just hit them and then leave. Or maybe we strike Iran, just create bigger damage everytime a terrorist hits us.


Come on, you would not have been so worried about governemnt spending if the Democrats would over spend on entitlements.
And we always hear these doom and gloom whenever the Democrats don't have the White house.

Do you know Iraq's history? Even recent history? After Kuwait, (which could be argued rightfully belonged to Iraq anyway....) Iraq didn't do anything to anybody. And their war with Iran was at OUR ENCOURAGEMENT. We wanted Iran and Iraq at war for as long as possible. That's why we double dealed them both and secretely supplied them both. Are you even aware of this?




Just not in the countries they are actually in. Like Pakistan. And they are back training in Afghanistan. Why don't we just kick them out of Afghanistan again? Because we are spread too thin in Iraq and we are not the mighty giant you seem to think we still are. We are even too tied up to get them out of Pakistan.



You live in a flag waving fantasy world. How are we going to HOLD syria then? We are having a difficult time holding Iraq and Afghanistan as it is.




I'm not a democrat.

But I am concerned that China owns this country, and stupid people keep buying chinese crap from walmart to save a few cents. Because we are a country of intellectually lazy people who are so selfish that it is to their ultimate demise.

It is a concern that we are a nation IN debt, and full of debtors, and our "leader," when given an opportunity to pull the country together, told people to go shopping. Because we don't make anything anymore, and nobody buys what little we do make. We'v cut our own balls off.

The Russians know this, the Chinese (our landlords) know this. We need to seriously stop ****g around before our negligance is the cause democracy dies.

By the way, have they found any WMDs in Iraq?

Or Saddam's "weapon program?"

No.

because he didn't have any. And the weapons he did have and that he used on the Kurds and Iran, we gave him.

I suspect this is news to you, though.

Iraq didn't do anything to anybody?????????? Then explain what the UN sanction, embargoes, no fly zone, resolutions after resolution, weapons inspectors was for?
Not true, we didn't encourgae Saddam to go to war, the last thing we need is a war in the Middle East for we all know what that could do to the Oil Market.
But we did support Saddam during that war for the State Dept didn't want Iran to gain grounds in the Middle East. CIA admitted, they tried to influece Saddam but he was just a nut case. See, we tried it all with Saddama nd you folks still complain.

We are not mighty, compare to who? Or beacuse we can't be all over the world at one time?



Don't even need to hold Syria or Iran, just hit back on any nation that is known to support or harbor terrorist.



True, other Nations works harder while most Americans now wants more pay, benefits and work less.


Because production cost here is too expensive. But we still do have a lot of exports from companies like Boeing, Microsoft, General Electric, General Dynamica, Genentec to name a few.


Remember in the 80's when the Japanese were suppose to be our Landlord?

And how do you know now that there is no WMD?
Nope, the Chmical weapons he used were made with ingredients that came from different countries and that includes the United States. We didn't give him any Chmical Weapon
And the weaponry or delivery technology was supplied by the Germans, I suspect that is news to you?

I said since being kicked out of Kuwait.

Are you kidding? We didn't encourage Iraq to go to war? WE SUPPLIED HIM. We gave him the weapons he used to go to war. Hello? And then, behind his back, we gave Iran weapons too. Then we wondered why Iran and Iraq didn't like us anymore.



We don't have the military capability to remain stuck in Iraq and also have leverage to influence policy. We simply are not strong enough to hold down Iraq, fight terrorism, and influence Russia and China. We just don't have the juice anymore. And Iraq has both contributed to this and exposed this.




Sure. But then what? Hit them and then leave? What do you imagine will happen then? Will these terrorists say to themselves "well, we better not be terrorists anymore" or will they come back in and establish a bigger following, and take advantage of a weakened gov't to set up ligitimate controll? Think it through.

In addition, as Iraq continues to suck the stregnth and money out of the US, other countries that are watching are seeing more and more chinks in our armor, more weakness, more inability to fight a war on more than two fronts. And the american people display weakness too. We want to fight terrorism and wave the flag and invade all these countries, but we wont' tolerate a draft or gas or food rationing. We want a war to feel good about, but we don't want to sacrafice any comforts at home for it.



I said INTELLECTUALLY LAZY. We are ignorant and we prefer to remain so. We accept what is spoon fed to us, we would rather hear what panties brittney and paris are wearing than educate ourselves about what is going on in the ME, in Georgia, etc. Many countries don't WORK as hard as we do, and that's fine. What's unacceptable is intellectual laziness.



It's only too expensive because we have a throw away culture. Instead of buying one american watch that costs 100 dollars and keeping it for 10 years, we buy a 10 dollar chinese watche that breaks and get thrown away and replaced every year. We don't want to pay extra for quality and take care of things, we just want cheap crap NOW. And we are sacraficing our country for it.



And where does GE MAKE it's products? China. So the idea that we have more than a few american countries exporting is a distortion. Yea, GE is an american company and they sell things abroud. but they make their stuff in china, largly.



The Japanese economy took a nosedive because they lacked....what? Anyone know? Their own Natural resources and manufacturing. Two things China has in abundance.

How much of our debt does china hold?

You can answer that in the same post you answer my question about whether or not we found WMDs in Iraq.

1- They weren't used when we invaded. If you had a weapon and were losing a war, you would use it
2- We've been looking for years, and haven't found anything.



We advised him to use them on Iran, and we, along with france, GB, germany, etc, supplied them.

Then why were the measures not withdrawn on Iraq if they were not a threat aymore?


AGAIN, Middle East instability is something we would not encourage really.
What weapons? You mean those during the Shah era?



You mean like how we have Military presence in Europe and some other parts of the world?



Well, when we didn't do anything we kept getting hit by terrorist, so far we not been hit yet.
Think it through.


We are fighting a different enemy, and slowly we are figuring them out and learning how to fight them, it's really the other way around.
Be patient.


The people was never this well informed since the advancemant in modern Technology, communication, media and world wide web.
So what you are saying is untrue and was the case 20 years ago.



Not many can afford a $100 watch really.


I am not talking about toasters, GE makes jet engines for one thing.


Nope, Japanese manufacturing became expensive as well. Why do you think Toyota and Honda has plants here now?


Oh yeah, we did not find any WMD in Iraq.
And we all know that now beacsue we went in and verified it, right?

We didn't know then and our Military was even prepared for it.


And Saddam would not cooperate , so no one could verify it even after so many years.


We advised him mainly on defensive against chemical weapons indeed, but not to strike Iran with any.

That's great. Let's just pretend bin Laden is dead so he'll just disappear like a bad dream. If you close your eyes and can't see him, he doesn't exist right?

True, the people I listed were all known to be alive at the time. But then again we don't exactly know bin Laden is dead. And that's the big problem, as long as there's even the idea that he's still alive, he can still have a powerful leadership role. But hey, no harm ever came from just letting someone go as a non-factor.



Yes, perhaps the Democrats would have actually stuck to the plan and finished what they started by capturing/killing him. Guess we'll never know about that, but you did happen to avoid my point: would you give up on bin Laden if the roles were reversed and the Democrats had been unable to apprehend him?

He made himself disappear and you don't even have to close your eyes really.
The thing is, I don't think we have stopped looking for him, we are just easing off a bit and maybe that will make him stick his head out if he is still alive.


You can assume whatever you want, the thing is he is non- factor now.
I mean what has he been a factor of the past 4 years??? How can you lead when not even ytour own followers knows where you are or if you still exist.
You describing him really as if he is some God then.


Oh yeah, even if Kerry is the Presiden now it does not change the fact that Bin Laden is non factor now.
But like i said, we are still looking but have ease off on it.

But your hero McCain wants a draft so that he can "chase him to the ends of the earth". Kind of makes McCain and the Republicans think he is a major factor.