Home › Forums › Open Discussion › SHots fired between US and Pakistan
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 26, 2008 at 7:25 am #588189
FullTiltParticipantSeptember 26, 2008 at 7:52 am #641225
AnonymousInactive“Pakistan says that the area of no-man’s land along the border is its territory and Afghanistan makes similar claims.”
First, it is unclear WHO shot first. Second is the above confusion.
Why is this particular incident President Bush’s fault, exactly?
September 26, 2008 at 7:58 am #641226
FullTiltParticipantIf we had not invaded Iraq unfairly, and tied up most of our troops there, we could have gone after the people that were actually responsible for 9/11. Bin Laden and the Taliban. Instead, we have a skeleton crew there that has allowed the Taliban to take hold of most of the area.
Doesn’t really matter who shot first.
September 26, 2008 at 8:16 am #641227
AnonymousInactive“In a statement, commanders said troops fired warning shots at the helicopters when they strayed over the Pakistan border.”
“In New York, Pakistan’s new president gave another version of events when he said that Pakistan forces had fired “flares” to warn the helicopters they were near the border.”
I guess it’s good that it doesn’t matter to you, personally, WHO shot first, considering no one there, even their own president, really knows what is going on.
“Instead, we have a skeleton crew there that has allowed the Taliban to take hold of most of the area.” – FullTilt
So now you’re upset that shots (regardless of who fired first) are being fired at all?
September 26, 2008 at 8:23 am #641228
FullTiltParticipantDo you have a point, or do you just have a need to argue?
September 26, 2008 at 8:46 am #641229
ErikParticipant“we could have gone after the people that were actually responsible for 9/11. Bin Laden and the Taliban.” – Fulltilt.
Funny that, there is no evidence to support this.
When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, [Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI] said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
“So we’ve never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming” – Dick Cheney.
[whitehouse.gov]
September 26, 2008 at 8:54 am #641230
FullTiltParticipantSO you think we are in Afghanistan for no reason?
September 26, 2008 at 9:01 am #641231
mellaw6565MemberErik – what about the fact that Osama publicly took responsibility for 9/11 on recordings after the event?
September 26, 2008 at 9:04 am #641232
mellaw6565MemberPakistan’s army has lost many, many members trying to fight the Taliban and other extremists in the border areas with Afghanistan. One of the reasons they don’t want the US to start things up again is that it causes problems for the Pakistani military. They announced last year a “don’t bother us and we won’t go after you” policy towards many of the extremists in the tribal lands because the cost of fighting them is too high.
September 26, 2008 at 9:08 am #641233
ErikParticipantThe fact is a tape was found, it could’ve been him or not.
I could’ve made the tape it was so bad.
The FBI must not have taken much credence in the tape either…but we did see it played over and over on the tele. So it must be real?
September 26, 2008 at 9:20 am #641234
mellaw6565MemberNo – he has claimed responsibility for it on other tapes as well since 9/11. I don’t think there. is any dispute in the world community that Osama is responsible for the 9/11 incident.
Are you one of the “conspiracy theory” people that think we did this to ourselves?
September 26, 2008 at 9:25 am #641235
ErikParticipantI don’t think we did it to ourselves.
September 26, 2008 at 10:13 am #641236
acemotelParticipantDoes anybody know anything? (that’s not party line?) I mean, really? Or maybe someone in West Seattle gets the CIA briefings…..
September 26, 2008 at 2:33 pm #641237
JoBParticipantI don’t get a CIA briefing…
and i don’t think it really matters if Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind or not…
he has taken public credit for 911 and used the credibility that it brought him to recruit new jihadists who will do what they can to perpetrate terrorist acts against non-muslims.
I believe it was him. He had the financial resources to pull it off.. and thanks to the American military’s doing such a fine job of training him and his men.. he had the skills. and he says it was him. But Cheney is right, we don’t have proof.
However, whether it was him or not, he is using his base in the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan to cause as much havoc in the area as he can… and to secretly encourage if not run an international network of terrorists…
Full Tilt is dead on.. we diluted the military strength that could have been used to ferret him out and to calm the situation in Afghanistan by invading Iraq…
Whether we would have chosen to invade Iraq eventually or not, i don’t know. I personally think Saddam was well on his way to becoming another Quadaffi.. bled too dry to be much trouble internationally.. but maybe not.
regardless. the timing was incredibly bad.. and pretty much guaranteed that we would leave the Taliban and Al Quaeda alone to regroup and recruit… instead of striking a fatal blow to their organizations.
Bush was in charge.. or Cheney was. Either way, they not only made the decision to invade Iraq right after 911.. they enthusiastically sold it to the American public with repeated lies.
The only reason some of you still believe it was the right thing to do is because they did such a superb sales job…
September 26, 2008 at 3:40 pm #641238
JiggersMemberWe could have had Bin Laden and Saddam, but Bush quit going after B.L because it was easier to go after Saddaam that retard. We were actually real close in getting BL in Tora Bora.
September 26, 2008 at 4:40 pm #641239
charlabobParticipantSo the new party line is Bin Laden wasn’t involved in 9/11? Damn, I missed that one. As a veteran of the revisionist history of the 70’s, I must salute the ability of the new right to revise almost on the fly.
Oh, wait — we’re quoting the PR flack from the FBI — and what relationship with reality do we think he might have?
When the Democrats really take back the country, it’s still going to be ages before we get back to the reality-based world.
September 26, 2008 at 5:25 pm #641240
CaitParticipantI really think that arguing for the sake of argument on this one is futile, NR. It truly doesn’t matter who fired first – the fact that this is even going on is a scary fact and I think it’s naive to think that Bush didn’t have anything to do with it. I mean really it has his stamp all over it.
September 26, 2008 at 8:15 pm #641241
AnonymousInactiveCait – I couldn’t agree more that WHO fired first is a futile argument.
I felt the article linked was unclear and insufficient. That’s all I was trying to point out. Also, I know the easiest thing for everyone to do is blame Bush for everything. It’s almost become a tag line. However, I personally thank president Bush for preventing any attacks on US soil since 9/11.
Heck, the argument that has ensued FROM this is more interesting, imo. AND, it got Erik talking – that’s always a good thing, again, imo.
September 26, 2008 at 10:20 pm #641242
Tonya42MemberThe war on terror began in Pakistan and it will end there.
September 26, 2008 at 10:50 pm #641243
CaitParticipantWell I don’t think they would be attacking us in the first place if we didn’t have a playground bully and imbecile dictating our foreign policies.
And Tonya – with a 5 year long detour in Iraq? For what reason one wonders?
September 26, 2008 at 10:57 pm #641244
mellaw6565MemberCait – the attacks actually started years before this imbecile administration and has more of its roots in US Foreign Policy and support for Israel.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.