i could not agree more...if bin laden is the ego-maniac we all know him to be, he would be flaunting the fact he's still alive. it's not happening. and like you, i heard the report from the experts saying the tape was a hoax. i think the guy is absolutely dead...or he's hanging out with Elvis and Hitler somewhere.
Yet another reason why Junior's 2004 election collapse will make his Father's 1992 collapse look like a walk in the park...unless the Democrats nominate Al Sharpton or Zippy the Pinhead to run for President!
Even if he is dead, I remember hearing are president saying he would get OBL 'DEAD or Alive.' But even if OBL is dead, Al Qaeda is definitely alive. I didn't hear about the 'Swiss voice experts.' The experts that analyzed the audio earlier said that it was indeed OBL. So at best we have conflicting expert testimony. He may be sick, injured and not want to show his face, to reveal his poor health. That would demoralize his side. That's why he's not on Al Jazeera or CNN. But if he is dead then we should find people who know that, or the body. Just assuming that the head of a terrorist organization responsible for killing more than 3,000 U.S. citizens is dead, because he can't be found, and isn't on T.V., and then moving on, isn't doing a thorough job. So dead or alive, there is still more work to be done on OBL.
Great posts by all... I (is that the boss' footsteps??? ) should keep this short, but to bigtexxxxx and heyp I will repose the question... what is the argument for war again? Remind me of the logic (right now, I see Bush holding spaghetti and staring at the wall... his arm seems to be retracting) I'm almost so exhausted by all of this nonsense that I'm prepared to enlist and/or do the work myself. Is it argument simply that Sadaam (ok, quick somebody tell me, is it Sadaam or Saddam, I'm confused now) has some weapons somewhere so we're going to go find them and install a democracy in the ME? Is the argument that Iraq has weapons that can attack the US and that the aluminum tubes he has will be machined for a new nuclear mobile rocket launcher with which he'll slowly roll down to Israel and have his way? Is the argument that Iraq was culpable in 09/11? I tend to agree with treeman that this war would last all of a few days... simply b/c I doubt that Iraqi forces are loyal to Sad(da)am. I assume they remember that 11 years ago they were allowed to walk away. There's always the possibility that we have to fight an urban war... basically Somalia x 10 ^ 5, but Bush... in all of his wisdom... lol, has been instructed what to think about this already. I just want to see some rationalization. So far the president has been incredibly misinformed, or incredibly disingenuous. Iraq is a threat to us, or they aren't. We can't be sweepingly dismissive of the UN yet insist that the rational for war is to implement one of their mandates. Give... us... a... reason... Photos of mysterious trucks going into an alcove aren't necessarily going to do it. heyp's allusion to Iraqi scientists is compelling, but... at... some... point... we have to show the hand. Noone wants a nuclear Iraq. Noone * 2 wants a reason for al Qaeda to be able to outrecruit our own services. A 'probably' by Card... expressions of doubt from McCain, Bob Graham (who knows most everything the president does) and Stormin' Norman should call into question by the most hawkish of us. If I'm reading Bob Graham correctly, he basically thinks that we should go to war with Saudi Arabia and North Korea. If he thinks the administration is silly... if McCain thinks that the administration is being silly... if Card... who most certainly has access to things the president of the United States has access to... if he throws out a 'probably' on the Sunday talk shows... then suffice it to say, the rest of us should think the administration has a lot of work still left to do.
Didn't Clinton once upon a time launch a preemptive strike against Saddam and Iraq because he as well were concerned that he might be producing WMD? Even the liberal's boy Clinton claimed that Iraq was a danger to the world. Albeit I am disappointed there were no movie stars, peace protestors or calls to only act in the event national security is threatened. I am taken back at how parallel the current and aforementioned circumstance are. I think the most asked question now is if Iraq is a threat. Clinton obviously did and so does Bush. Certainly we would be naive to think that Iraq wouldn't continue to defy international will by continuing his production of WMD. I think we also have to consider how many times we are going to have to deal with Saddam because if he still hasn't "gotten it" since the Gulf War the man is clearly a maniacal threat. Just do a search on your choice of news engine and you will find this.
The difference is that Bush isn't talking about a targeted limited strike. Bush is talking about a full scale invasion.
X-PAC, Interesting post. Wow. "stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing" + 5 years of the same = ???
X-PAC, much like what Bush is doing is all about oil, what Clinton did at that time was all about detracting attention from the Lewinski affair. If I recall he ordered those strikes right around the time some deposition was to be given. Strangely, I didn't see anyone holding up any "no blood for BJs" signs at that time.
Yes, but Clinton clearly favored a new government. I don't think an invasion would had been out of the question if they went hard at Iraq rather than just temporarily suspend WMD production for a few weeks. "So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction, and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people."
It all part of the game. Now we can go to war with a knowledge of what weapons he "Supposedly has." Was that not worth the wait. The U.N. got used.
From this thread. Iraq has been allowed to sell Oil for Food, but due to corruption the people aren't getting relief.
Some of us didn't agree with Clinton either. Just because he said it doesn't make it any more palatable.
True...but it addresses, in part, all of the insinuations regarding Bush's personal motives (particularly his oil industry contacts). It's interesting that Clinton considered Saddam such a serious threat...and that was prior to 9-11.
