tell that to all the people who did on the madrid underground. and the london underground. and in the bali bomb. all people loyal to al-Qaeda and ultimately mr bin laden. the people in the uk who perpertrated the underground bomb on 7/7 and the failed attempt 2 weeks later had all been to al-Qaeda training camps in pakistan. they weren't there to get a sun tan. if you call them disorganised and underestimate them you are in big trouble.
and don't forget the nazi's started off as a bunch of ramshackle band of renegades with a leader that people failed to take seriously.
maybe you should go back and read my post a little more carefully. These are all independent groups calling themselves al-Qaeda. They are not under a centralised organisation or any single leader.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Al-Qaeda has its origins in the uprising against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Thousands of volunteers from around the Middle East came to Afghanistan as mujahideen, warriors fighting to defend fellow Muslims. In the mid-1980s, Osama bin Laden became the prime financier for an organization that recruited Muslims from mosques around the world. These "Afghan Arab" mujahideen, which numbered in the thousands, were crucial in defeating Soviet forces.
Al-Qaeda differs significantly from more traditional terrorist organizations. It does not depend on the sponsorship of a political state, and, unlike the PLO or the IRA, it is not defined by a particular conflict. Instead, al-Qaeda operates as a franchise. It provides financial and logistical support, as well as name recognition, to terrorist groups operating in such diverse places as the Philippines, Algeria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kashmir. Furthermore, local groups may act in the name of al-Qaeda in order to bolster their own reputation—even if they are not receiving support from the organization.
Yes, this is all for the most part true, but a prime financier does not a leader make.
Al-Qaeda's leadership oversees a loosely organized network of cells. It can recruit members from thousands of "Arab Afghan" veterans and radicals around the world. Its infrastructure is small, mobile, and decentralized—each cell operates independently with its members not knowing the identity of other cells. Local operatives rarely know anyone higher up in the organization's hierarchy.
is partly true but based on the common misperception that there is a single leadership overseeing everything. There is not.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
and jlew24asu, as for my not understanding what I'm talking about, you seem to have suddenly gained an awful lot of authority for someone who couldn't spell al-Qaeda 10 mins ago
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
No - "most" does not mean "all".
But I suppose ostriches can't hear very well when their heads are buried in the sand.
Most of what you pilfered wholesale from some other source has a lot of truth in it but there remains the underlying fact that Osama bin Laden is not the sole head of some unified organisation.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
and jlew24asu, as for my not understanding what I'm talking about, you seem to have suddenly gained an awful lot of authority for someone who couldn't spell al-Qaeda 10 mins ago
Most of what you pilfered wholesale from some other source has a lot of truth in it but there remains the underlying fact that Osama bin Laden is not the sole head of some unified organisation.
he is the symbolic leader and well as the founder.
he is the symbolic leader and well as the founder.
Fine. Believe what you want. You're clearly not someone who who listens to other people, or to reason. Just decide what you want to believe, whether there's any basis in fact for it, and pretend there's no one who might actually know more about stuff than you. It's a waste of my time and patience trying to have a rational debate with someone who has decided everyone is wrong except them. I'm outta here.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Fine. Believe what you want. You're clearly not someone who who listens to other people, or to reason. Just decide what you want to believe, whether there's any basis in fact for it, and pretend there's no one who might actually know more about stuff than you. It's a waste of my time and patience trying to have a rational debate with someone who has decided everyone is wrong except them. I'm outta here.
who me??? nahhhhhhhh
Osama bin laden is the symbolic leader and well as the founder. that is fact
u gotta have a bad guy to wage war around the world ... without these yings to their yangs - you can't up pentagon spending to more than all of the rest of the world combined ...
u gotta have a bad guy to wage war around the world ... without these yings to their yangs - you can't up pentagon spending to more than all of the rest of the world combined ...
the US would be fighting el queda and islamic extremism whether or not osama has been caught or dead. we also would continue to spend money at the pentagon. actually on 9/11 rumsfield was holding a meeting to determine how they could cut costs. but we would always lead the world in spending we are simply too far ahead of anyone else
my first and foremost suggestion would have been to stay the fuck out of iraq and put those 100,000 soldiers in afghanistan to cover every inch and make sure nobody took a piss without our permission until we'd found him and subsequently established a stable democracy there.
however, since our president is a dumbass, i would advocate twisting some serious arms in pakistan to get his location and then dropping some navy seals or something in there to take him out. i dont think an invasion would be necessary. but barring that, yes. pull us the hell out of the clusterfuck that is iraq (a country that had no involvement with terrorism and no nuclear capabilities) and invade pakistan, a country that has made it clear it will harbor terrorists and has nuclear weapons.
my first and foremost suggestion would have been to stay the fuck out of iraq and put those 100,000 soldiers in afghanistan to cover every inch and make sure nobody took a piss without our permission until we'd found him and subsequently established a stable democracy there.
however, since our president is a dumbass, i would advocate twisting some serious arms in pakistan to get his location and then dropping some navy seals or something in there to take him out.
i dont think an invasion would be necessary. but barring that, yes. pull us the hell out of the clusterfuck that is iraq (a country that had no involvement with terrorism and no nuclear capabilities) and invade pakistan, a country that has made it clear it will harbor terrorists and has nuclear weapons.
invading pakistan would be 100 times the mess that Iraq is
invading pakistan would be 100 times the mess that Iraq is
it's not an invasion if they never know about it. but we're not concerned with taking out terrorists. we're concerned about the politics of taking out terrorists. killing bin laden is not as important as showing it off to the american people for ratings.
how would pakistan be worse? india would certainly be happy about it. and if we were going to talk so much shit about terrorist sympathizers and dangerous nuclear powers, pakistan makes more sense than iraq.
let me get this straight, just so i know what you're saying:
osama is bad
but not so bad he's worth pursuing
it was a really good idea to start a war in iraq and we should "stay the course there" becos it's not a clusterfuck and very winnable
but a war in pakistan would be a clusterfuck and is a bad idea becos they actually harbor terrorists and have nuclear weapons?
the US would be fighting el queda and islamic extremism whether or not osama has been caught or dead. we also would continue to spend money at the pentagon. actually on 9/11 rumsfield was holding a meeting to determine how they could cut costs. but we would always lead the world in spending we are simply too far ahead of anyone else
its nice to have a figurehead u know ... someone everyone can put a good hate on ...
how would pakistan be worse? india would certainly be happy about it. and if we were going to talk so much shit about terrorist sympathizers and dangerous nuclear powers, pakistan makes more sense than iraq.
because of the sheer size. there are 180 million people there all of which would rise up and become suicide bombers. India would be happy but wouldnt help.
yes he is worth pursuing. absoulutely 100% yes. but we simply can not invade pakistan to get him. I dont like it but its true. I hate pakistan even though they have given some level of support. its a tricky balancing act for the president of pakistan.
its nice to have a figurehead u know ... someone everyone can put a good hate on ...
It certainly makes policy easier to dictate...something to rally people around....make even an abstract concept of terrorism be labelled to one face.
However that politcal route has a consequance that being once you paint a face to an abstract concept you will undoublty create some sort of hate not just for the man (where reasoning for ill feelings is more than acceptable) but for who he is, the colour he is, the race he is, etc.
Certainly not all, in fact the majority, will fall into that hate trap but it does create more problems.
hey im all for it but evn the US isnt that good to drop some soliders on the ground and take out some terrorists in the most lawless area of the world
because of the sheer size. there are 180 million people there all of which would rise up and become suicide bombers. India would be happy but wouldnt help.
yes, the worst man alive.
yes he is worth pursuing. absoulutely 100% yes. but we simply can not invade pakistan to get him. I dont like it but its true. I hate pakistan even though they have given some level of support. its a tricky balancing act for the president of pakistan.
fuck no. when have I ever said that? a good idea? what the fuck is wrong with you
again, who the fuck are you? of course its a clusterfuck. I never said otherwise. winnable? yes I think it is.
yes much larger and worse then Iraq.
I stated why its a bad idea.
fair enough, then what do you propose we do about bin laden?
how i wish al gore had been elected in 2000. we'd have osama in chains, less spending and a balanced budget, and no americans dying in iraq.
fair enough, then what do you propose we do about bin laden?
I think the best way to get him is similar to what we are doing now. keep our armed drones flying around the area and shoot whenever they see him or leaders. sadly they are smarter then that and probably dont see the light of day much. besides that, load up our forces in afgahistan along the border and take out anyone who steps over.
I think the best way to get him is similar to what we are doing now. keep our armed drones flying around the area and shoot whenever they see him or leaders. sadly they are smarter then that and probably dont see the light of day much. besides that, load up our forces in afgahistan along the border and take out anyone who steps over.
whille I agree with the last 2, I dont see how gore is a guarantee osama would be caught.
gore would not have been distracted by a foolish vendetta against iraq and would have kept our eyes on making sure afghanistan was in the bag. he also would not have squandered our international support, which would have helped.
I think the best way to get him is similar to what we are doing now. keep our armed drones flying around the area and shoot whenever they see him or leaders. sadly they are smarter then that and probably dont see the light of day much. besides that, load up our forces in afgahistan along the border and take out anyone who steps over.
Where do we get these forces to park at the border? Are you going to join the military and do this? No... I didnt think so. So where????
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
gore would not have been distracted by a foolish vendetta against iraq and would have kept our eyes on making sure afghanistan was in the bag. he also would not have squandered our international support, which would have helped.
osama still would or could have escaped into pakistan. gore would have stopped at the border just like bush.
gore would not have been distracted by a foolish vendetta against iraq and would have kept our eyes on making sure afghanistan was in the bag. he also would not have squandered our international support, which would have helped.
Come on you know Gore would have run up the white flag and handed Bin Laden the keys to the White House.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.
this is the thread that caused all the confusion a few months ago so i'm going to answer your question while clearing my name on this board.
i was wrongfully accused of a crime. my ex-wife told the government the perpitrator was me. she was trying to collect the reward. I DIDN'T DO IT. so i got an attorney to clear my name in a case where it looked impossible to do. with a supposed collaberating witness the governments case was basically a slam dunk. so i transfered everything to my daughter and didn't draw a salary. if your income is zero; you don't have to file taxes. there is no law in the us that says a person can't just disappear.
it turned out the real perpitrator fled to poland where he died in a car crash. i was cleared when the real evidence was presented and all is cool.
THE POINT HERE IS: i was able to hide under the governments nose for years. thousands of people go missing each year and are not found. all the technology we have doesn't make the world smaller. people disappear out here in the desert. they cheat someone and are tied to fire ant hills; never to be heard from again. so it's quite easy for a person to disappear and not be found.
gore would not have been distracted by a foolish vendetta against iraq and would have kept our eyes on making sure afghanistan was in the bag. he also would not have squandered our international support, which would have helped.
so you know gore and he's discussed his plan with you then? or is this just your speculation and what you expected he'd do.
the US would be fighting el queda and islamic extremism whether or not osama has been caught or dead. we also would continue to spend money at the pentagon. actually on 9/11 rumsfield was holding a meeting to determine how they could cut costs. but we would always lead the world in spending we are simply too far ahead of anyone else
isn't he the same guy that on 9/10/01 said the pentagon couldn't find 2.3 trillion dollars worth of funds,...
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
osama still would or could have escaped into pakistan. gore would have stopped at the border just like bush.
could have. but i dont think he would have. anyway, it was conjecture on my part. i think for all the "war president" rhetoric bush tosses around, gore would have handled both of these wars far better than bush has done.
Comments
maybe you should go back and read my post a little more carefully. These are all independent groups calling themselves al-Qaeda. They are not under a centralised organisation or any single leader.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Yes, this is all for the most part true, but a prime financier does not a leader make.
and this: is partly true but based on the common misperception that there is a single leadership overseeing everything. There is not.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
ok good so all of what I said is true.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
No - "most" does not mean "all".
But I suppose ostriches can't hear very well when their heads are buried in the sand.
Most of what you pilfered wholesale from some other source has a lot of truth in it but there remains the underlying fact that Osama bin Laden is not the sole head of some unified organisation.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
yea my arabic is a little shaky. i'm workin on it
he is the symbolic leader and well as the founder.
Fine. Believe what you want. You're clearly not someone who who listens to other people, or to reason. Just decide what you want to believe, whether there's any basis in fact for it, and pretend there's no one who might actually know more about stuff than you. It's a waste of my time and patience trying to have a rational debate with someone who has decided everyone is wrong except them. I'm outta here.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
who me??? nahhhhhhhh
Osama bin laden is the symbolic leader and well as the founder. that is fact
see ya later
the US would be fighting el queda and islamic extremism whether or not osama has been caught or dead. we also would continue to spend money at the pentagon. actually on 9/11 rumsfield was holding a meeting to determine how they could cut costs. but we would always lead the world in spending we are simply too far ahead of anyone else
my first and foremost suggestion would have been to stay the fuck out of iraq and put those 100,000 soldiers in afghanistan to cover every inch and make sure nobody took a piss without our permission until we'd found him and subsequently established a stable democracy there.
however, since our president is a dumbass, i would advocate twisting some serious arms in pakistan to get his location and then dropping some navy seals or something in there to take him out. i dont think an invasion would be necessary. but barring that, yes. pull us the hell out of the clusterfuck that is iraq (a country that had no involvement with terrorism and no nuclear capabilities) and invade pakistan, a country that has made it clear it will harbor terrorists and has nuclear weapons.
we cant. that would be considered an invasion.
invading pakistan would be 100 times the mess that Iraq is
it's not an invasion if they never know about it. but we're not concerned with taking out terrorists. we're concerned about the politics of taking out terrorists. killing bin laden is not as important as showing it off to the american people for ratings.
how would pakistan be worse? india would certainly be happy about it. and if we were going to talk so much shit about terrorist sympathizers and dangerous nuclear powers, pakistan makes more sense than iraq.
let me get this straight, just so i know what you're saying:
osama is bad
but not so bad he's worth pursuing
it was a really good idea to start a war in iraq and we should "stay the course there" becos it's not a clusterfuck and very winnable
but a war in pakistan would be a clusterfuck and is a bad idea becos they actually harbor terrorists and have nuclear weapons?
its nice to have a figurehead u know ... someone everyone can put a good hate on ...
because of the sheer size. there are 180 million people there all of which would rise up and become suicide bombers. India would be happy but wouldnt help.
yes, the worst man alive. yes he is worth pursuing. absoulutely 100% yes. but we simply can not invade pakistan to get him. I dont like it but its true. I hate pakistan even though they have given some level of support. its a tricky balancing act for the president of pakistan.
fuck no. when have I ever said that? a good idea? what the fuck is wrong with you
again, who the fuck are you? of course its a clusterfuck. I never said otherwise. winnable? yes I think it is.
yes much larger and worse then Iraq.
I stated why its a bad idea.
It certainly makes policy easier to dictate...something to rally people around....make even an abstract concept of terrorism be labelled to one face.
However that politcal route has a consequance that being once you paint a face to an abstract concept you will undoublty create some sort of hate not just for the man (where reasoning for ill feelings is more than acceptable) but for who he is, the colour he is, the race he is, etc.
Certainly not all, in fact the majority, will fall into that hate trap but it does create more problems.
fair enough, then what do you propose we do about bin laden?
how i wish al gore had been elected in 2000. we'd have osama in chains, less spending and a balanced budget, and no americans dying in iraq.
whille I agree with the last 2, I dont see how gore is a guarantee osama would be caught.
gore would not have been distracted by a foolish vendetta against iraq and would have kept our eyes on making sure afghanistan was in the bag. he also would not have squandered our international support, which would have helped.
Where do we get these forces to park at the border? Are you going to join the military and do this? No... I didnt think so. So where????
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
osama still would or could have escaped into pakistan. gore would have stopped at the border just like bush.
if I'm called upon to do so I will. thanks for stopping by
Come on you know Gore would have run up the white flag and handed Bin Laden the keys to the White House.
this is the thread that caused all the confusion a few months ago so i'm going to answer your question while clearing my name on this board.
i was wrongfully accused of a crime. my ex-wife told the government the perpitrator was me. she was trying to collect the reward. I DIDN'T DO IT. so i got an attorney to clear my name in a case where it looked impossible to do. with a supposed collaberating witness the governments case was basically a slam dunk. so i transfered everything to my daughter and didn't draw a salary. if your income is zero; you don't have to file taxes. there is no law in the us that says a person can't just disappear.
it turned out the real perpitrator fled to poland where he died in a car crash. i was cleared when the real evidence was presented and all is cool.
THE POINT HERE IS: i was able to hide under the governments nose for years. thousands of people go missing each year and are not found. all the technology we have doesn't make the world smaller. people disappear out here in the desert. they cheat someone and are tied to fire ant hills; never to be heard from again. so it's quite easy for a person to disappear and not be found.
so you know gore and he's discussed his plan with you then? or is this just your speculation and what you expected he'd do.
isn't he the same guy that on 9/10/01 said the pentagon couldn't find 2.3 trillion dollars worth of funds,...
~Ron Burgundy
could have. but i dont think he would have. anyway, it was conjecture on my part. i think for all the "war president" rhetoric bush tosses around, gore would have handled both of these wars far better than bush has done.