Where the fuck did I attack you? Was your pinhead comment really necessary? I’ll chalk it up to the fact that this is an unusual situation, but you attack me for no reason like that again, and I won’t let it go.
I asked you a fucking honest question, and there was NO hostility behind my words. Can you deal with that? If so, then good. It was a misunderstanding. If not, then kindly go fuck yourself.
Look Evil Ghandhi, my point is this: you think Bin Laden was likely to have been responsible for this (a reasonable assertion I think). What are you going to do? Wander down to 43 Kabul Boulevard, knock on the door and ask Mr bin Laden to eat lead? Or lay waste to the entire country? Or just bomb little bits, where he might be holing up and hope that not too many Afghanistanis get wasted too?
The essence of terrorist warfare is that these enemies of the United States could never defeat the US military in a conventional sense, so they fight this way. Call it dirty or cowardly or whatever, but it’s been very successful for many years all over the world (I’ve experienced it all my life, althought the cost in lives here (the UK) hasn’t reached anywhere near the unimaginable proportions we’re sensing here). It is extremely difficult to defeat terrorists with simple military might without causing enormous civilian casualties…although I rather suspect that some posters in this thread would think a few hundred thousand Afghanistani lives wouldn’t be too high a price to pay.
On a related note, I just heard someone on TV here locally (idiot on the street-type interview) who used a phrase that I’ve never heard before, on what should be done about this:
“nuclear carpetbombing”
The problem was, he wanted to do it to an undefined region called the “Middle East”, which I assume means everything from Libya to India, Turkey to the Sudan…
Oh, and regarding your “nuke” comment… You’re right, you didn’t use the word “nuke”. You said “We should strike out with all our avalible fury.”
Either way… you were planning on striking against these countries? Against the US as well? Don’t give me that bullshit about McVeigh being dead, because he sure as hell isn’t the only terrorist on American soil.
So, forgive me, Your Royal Fucking Highness, if I mistook one piece of mindless reactionary bullshit for another.
I take your swarmy remark about the U.S. nuking itself as an attack. Both on my post and my intellect.
Especially since my post was to take action against ALL terrorists.
Mc Veigh was dealt with by a nation that seems to have a grip on internal terrorism, but no resolve to meet the external threat.
In direct answer to your question.
I don’t care if Bin Laden was responsible or not. The US shoud demant his extredition within 24 hrs or land 20,000 US troops on Afganhani soil.
If the real culprit is found to be some other, I say we demand their extredition. And look at what Happened in Afghanistan.
If you feel The United States is Incapapable of making such a troop movement. (after the declaration of war) That is your opinion. I think once the casualty list is compiled and the monetary damaged asseesed, we’ll have plenty of recruits. God knows we got the guns
I agree, only make it 200,000. Even if he didn’t do this ( :rolleyes: ), his record speaks for itself. Orchestrating attacks on US Embassies; Threats against America; Running terrorist training camps; and as he claimed he wasn’t responsible for yesterday, he still congratulated those who were.
As far as I am concerned, The Taliban and the citizens of Afghanistan can either help us find him; or they can stand in our way, and prepare to meet their maker.
Um, what ever happened to justice?
And what are these 20,000 troops to do?
What can they achieve that missiles and bombing cannot given that you know where these terrorists live?
How large a body count will you, and the American public, tolerate?
Will you send more troops when necessary?..I have a sense of deja vu.
I’m not trying to mock you at a time when you’re rightly angry and distressed, but can’t realism enter the equation somewhere?
I’m not pissed off? I spend half the night trying to contact friends in NYC and DC to see if they’re still alive and I’m not pissed off?
I see people dying on TV and I’m not pissed off. You assume at lot you ignoramus.
Again, you assume a lot, although the Americans I’ve had the privilege to get to know where not reminiscent of you…so I guess you’re right, I don’t understand Americans like your good self.
Hey, as you said, you don’t care about what happens if it ain’t in the US, but don’t dare tar me with the same brush. When people die, I feel it whether they’re Americans, Brits, or even…seriously, Afghans. Believe it or not.
Alas, I’m reminded of the sad fates of other nations that invaded that country: Macedonia, Britain, and Russia. Alexander had some success but for everybody else it was a sinkhole. It’s never as easy IRL as it seems when you are armchair generalling around a couple beers.
Only send in U.S. troops if Afghanistan gives us permission to go after him. If they won’t then barrages of carpet bombs from B-52’s and Tomahawks demolishing Bin Laden’s camps and suspected hiding places is in order. Bush has already given notice to countries that shelter terrorists. I’ll absolutely love it when he has the evidence and can carry through on it.
Ignoring all problems with flying bombers over the airspace of other countries who might not be pleased about it, how would this be any more succesful than Russia’s attempts to bomb enemy camps in Afghanistan how, exactly?
You see, Bin Laden is rather good at this terrorist lark. He should be - he received at least some of his training from the CIA. He’s also a rather seasoned commander, who led troops against the Russians in Afghanistan for nearly 10 years. He knows the terrain (for reference, it’s mostly mountainous, with lots of caves) and knows how to hide in it.
If you’re going to take the fucker out, I’d guess it’s going to take something a bit more precise than carpet bombing. Something precise would also have the advantage of reducing civilian casualties, which is kind of good too.