AFGHANISTAN

[queenbee]

I AM PO'ed!!!!

For 6 years everyone but the president has known that Bin Laden was in Afghanistan. That's where the original "War on Terror" started and then he got sidetracked, picking up the slack that his daddy left with Saddam. So the troops in Afghanistan have been forgotten about, all of the news is about Iraq and guess what??

According to news report, Bin Laden is probably holed up in the Afghanistan/Pakistan mountains!!! with more anti-American followers and we can't get to them.

TALK ABOUT SCREWED UP!!!!!

[AskTheWiseOldMan]

Don't Bee. I felt the same way as you in 2003, but I've learned a lot since then.

Going to Iraq makes a lot of sense but there aren't many in the media who are capable of understanding it ... so we get bombarded by ill-informed punditations that are laced with the paranoia caused by lack of knowledge.

Obviously, most of us have IQ's higher than W's but I'd hope (and bet) that if you had been President you'd have done the same thing. I know that I would have. At the risk of oversimplifying, here's why:

First, we were attacked after decades of suffering through terrorist events both to our own concerns and to those of our allies. At the time of the attacks the world was already under perpetual threat from terrorists and we were demanding action from world leaders. Once attacked at home, the choice was to do nothing or do something. Doing nothing would have strengthened the power of terrorists including Hamas, AlQueda, Hezbollah, etc. I'd have chosen to do something.

Second, of the "somethings" we could do, sending troops to the Middle East to battle and defeat terrorists without using nuclear weapons was the best choice.

We knew from history and the Russians that the terrain and social factors in Afganistan would make any fight there limited to a few key areas. We also knew that terrorism leadership was based more in other areas (Saudi, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, etc.) than in Afghanistan. While the enabling Taliban needed to be destroyed, a complete takeover of Afghanistan was not only impossible, it would not accomplish the objective of quelling mideast terror.

It was also important to establish some sort of a presence in the region where a seed of democracy could be planted. So where to pitch the battles? Saudi? Iran? Palestine? Pakistan? Israel? Egypt? Good luck finding any diplomat or military strategist who advised taking the battles into any of these areas. None did.

Saddam Hussein was a murderer. He had defied the UN mandates for years. He used WMDs on his own people. His sons and top political leaders were murderers and thieves. He was flaunting a hatred for democracy and the freedoms that go with it. He provided considerable funding for Hamas, Hezbollah and AlQueda. As long as he was in power, terrorism flourished. As long as he ran Iraq, terror would be funded. No other country was willing to stop him and even a few leaders in the UN were apparently participating in the corruption.

Even if there had never been any 9/11 attacks, he still had to be stopped for there to be any chance for regional stability and peace in the future.

We had to defeat terror. While some of the enemy was in Afghanistan, we couldn't get to them to fight em and the best potential outcome was limited there. We couldn't fight the battles in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Palestine, Pakistan, Israel, or Egypt, etc.


We had to fight. We had to choose a place to do it that wasn't in the USA. We needed a democratic toehold in the region. Afghanistan and the other nations in the region were not good places. Hussein was already destabilizing the region and funding terror. Whether any were found or not, Hussein boasted of his WMD capability and had already used them on the Kurds and Iranians.

Imagine being in the shoes of the President. Would you have waged war on the terrorists or just laid down and done nothing? If you chose to fight and defend the US, where would you have chosen to do it and why?

Iraq was clearly the best strategic place to wage this war. Logically, it gives the free world the best hope for squelching terrorism.

[queenbee]

I would have "stayed the course". The soldiers that are left in Afghanistan have all but been forgotten, they have said so.

We ship receivers to government installations and to the military people over there. Training for the terrain on Pakistan and Afghanistan takes place in Dahlonega, I know because my son had considered enlisting and was taken on some of the "local areas of interest". They also train in Helen and in the national forest around us.

It seems now that we are relying on the Pakistani officials to seek out the terrorist in the mountains because the US isn't welcome there. (I may be wrong and only got to catch a part of the report). The Pakistan military can't even speak the language of the people in the area.

Yes, we should have handled Saddam while we were close enough to save jet fuel, but come on Bin Laden was the reason for starting this war, he's the one who killed thousand of Americans on American soil. Sadam didn't kill anyone over her and after 6 years we haven't accomplished anything except to lose a lot of money and over 3000 soldiers whose lives can't be measured in dollars.

I hate it for what happend to the people under Saddam's rule, but I feel American should come first when it comes to the American military.

I don't think any WMD's were found. But regardless, we should accomplish what we started out to do and then work on the rest.

Wise I do appreciate your input and the time it took to post all of the information above.

[sometimeman]

Wise one, I wish I could type with more than two fingers. I feel like "B" does about this but what you said makes lots of sense.

Right now I feel like Christian Conservatives got screwed by Bush and company. I think the turn aside into Iraq was to capture control of the oil. I think we want to control Iran's oil also. I think we must continue to "sell" oil for dollars and dollars only to keep the dollar where it will have some value. If we fail we will all have to whittle bills and peck with the chickens. 1929 will be a Sunday School picknic compared to what's facing us.

This accounts for 9-11 being a false flag operation. If the nuke lost off the B-52 goes off and we can blame that on the terrorist, we'll bomb Iran into the sand!

[manape]

WOM, you do sound like a wise old man. Bee is wise, too.

Ditto's WOM...

"Imagine being in the shoes of the President. Would you have waged war on the terrorists or just laid down and done nothing? If you chose to fight and defend the US, where would you have chosen to do it and why?

Iraq was clearly the best strategic place to wage this war. Logically, it gives the free world the best hope for squelching terrorism."

I can't blame Bee. Many people feel the same way. W didn't say it would be easy. War IS hell, especially if the enemy is invisable!

[summerose]

I agree with you WOM, President Bush did exactly what he should have done, and he picked the best place to do it too. I just wish it hadn't taken so long and so many lives have been lost.

[sometimeman]

WOM, We have the fire power and ability to annihilate the Iraq's. Where can we get the will?

[shortcircuit]

sometimeman said:

WOM, We have the fire power and ability to annihilate the Iraq's. Where can we get the will?

As long as bleeding heart liberals control most of our news media we will never have the will. And they will make up a poll to prove it if they have to. The whole issue has got me confused, I agree that we need to do our best to protect our country, but why did our government see the need to strip us of part of our civil liberties to do it? And I'm still not really sure what Iraq has in common with the 9/11 attacks.

[AskTheWiseOldMan]

This is what the more liberal media pundits intentionally leave out: Saddam Hussein DID bear significant responsibility for 9/11 and then some.

Saddam's Baathists collaborated, funded, and provided diplomatic assistance to Islamic radicals, hosted training camps and provided sanctuary for Anti-american terrorists in general, al-Qaeda in particular; including Abu Nidal, Abu Sayyaf, Ansar Al-Islam, Arab Liberation Front, Kurdistan Workers Party, Mujahadin e-Khalq, the PLF, the PLO, the 1993 WTC bombers and September 11 conspirators, among others.

Actually factually, Saddam Hussein owned and operated a full-service general store for global terrorists, complete with cash, diplomatic aid, safe haven, training, and even medical attention all in deliberate violation of UN Security Council Resolution 687.

Lets start with funding. Most recently you might recall Tariq Aziz's 2002 announcements that Saddam Hussein, through his VP Taha Yassin Ramadan paid $25,000 and a Certificate of Merit to each family of a homicide bomber. Many Americans were killed by these Saddam-financed bombers, including 14-year old Abigail Litle, the daughter of a Baptist minister.

Then there is the diplomatic assistance for terrorists... This went on for decades. Remember the Achille Lauro and the American Leon Klinghofer who was shot and tossed overboard with his wheelchair? That was the work of Saddam-sponsored Abu Abbas's organization and the PLF. The hijackers surrendered to Egyptian authorities and were on their way to freedom in Tunisia when four U.S. fighter jets forced their airliner to land at a NATO base in Sicily.

Italian officials took the hijackers into custody only to be forced to let Abbas go because he possessed an Iraqi diplomatic passport. Abbas ended up in Baghdad living comfortably in one of Saddam's palaces until he was captured by US forces in April, 2003.

You may also remember the bloodbath in Rome's daVinci Airport during Christmas of 1985 and the simultaneous attack on the Vienna airport. Among the Americans killed that day was John Buonocore III, a 20-year old American student studying in Rome. This was the work of Abu Nidal. Nidal also lived as a Saddam houseguest until 2002.

Nidal's resume also includes the 1974 bombing of a TWA jet over the Ionian Sea and the 1986 hijacking of a Pan Am flight at Karachi (and the execution of American passengers on board). His organization was behind terrorist attacks in 20 countries resulting in 407 confirmed murders (including 22 Americans) and more than 800 injuries.

Then there is Abdul Rahman Yasin, born in Indiana but raised in Iraq. Saddam provided him with a palace and a salary both before and after he - along with fellow Al Quaeda terrorists Ramzi Yusef and Mohammed A. Salameh - was indicted by the U.S. for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that exploded in the 1993 WTC attack. The attack on Manhattan occurred on the 2nd anniversary (February 26) of the retreat of Iraqi forces from Kuwait marking the end of the Gulf War. In just this act, which Yasin admitted was perpetuated on behalf of Saddam Hussein on American soil, five Americans were killed and 1,042 injured.

Have we conveniently forgotten the Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi, one of Uday Hussein's closest friends? Most of us got to know him from the beheading videos and the assassination of Ambassador Lawrence Foley. Remember the Iraqi beheading videos? Remember that the bodies were found in Baghdad? With money and blessings from Hussein, al Zarqawi opened the Ansar al-Islam terrorist training camp in Northern Iraq.

And speaking of Iraqi terrorist training camps, the only way to shut them down was through this invasion. The most notorious was Salman Pak, located 15 miles southeast of Baghdad. When coalition forces arrived they found a sophisticated urban assault training facility, busses, a three-car train for railway attack instruction and even a commercial airliner.

Another Iraqi link to AlQaeda that is conveniently forgotten, but is on page 340 of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on pre-Iraq-War intel, is Ahmad Shakir, an Iraqi VIP facilitator at Iraq's embassy in Malaysia. in January 2000, Shakir met with 9/11 hijackers al Hamzi and al Midhar at the Kuala Lampur airport, and escorted them to a hotel room (paid for by Uday Hussein) where they met with fellow 9/11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash.

Along those lines, Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani was Consul and Secretary at Iraq's Czech embassy between March 1999 and April 2001. On April 8, 2001 and probably other times as well, the Embassy's appointment calender indicates his meeting with his former student, Mohammed Atta. Al-Ani was kicked out of Prague for casing the headquarters of Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Iraq presumably because he planned to blow them up.

One last thought... The survivors of George Eric Smith and Timothy Soulas, both of whom were killed on 9/11, sued Saddam Hussein, the Baathists and the Taliban for damages. After presenting evidence of all of the above, Federal trial Judge Harold Baer, a Clinton appointee ruled that Saddam Hussein's government WAS complicit in the 9/11 attacks and that the Baathist government owed the Plaintiff's $104 million.

As Judge Baer stated in his ruling, "I conclude that the Plaintiffs have shown...by satisfactory evidence to the Court that Iraq provided material support to Bin Ladin and Al Qaeda."


Sources:

1. Madeleine Albright, “How we tackled the wrong tiger.” Melbourne Herald Sun, October 21, 2003, page 19.

2. Anne E. Kornblut, “Kennedy to assail Bush over Iraq war.” Boston Globe, October 16, 2003.

3. Richard Cohen, "Iraqi chaos product of Bush's consistency." Columbia (Missouri) Daily Tribune, May 29, 2004.

4. CBS News, “Gore Takes Aim At Bush: Former Veep Addresses New York Audience.” August 7, 2003.

5. John Kerry, Speech at Temple University, September 24, 2004. VIEW HERE

6. CNN.com, Key points of Thursday's debate. October 1, 2004.

7. Deroy Murdock, “Saddam Hussein’s Philanthropy of Terror.” The Hudson Institute: American Outlook, Fall 2003, page 50.

8. Reuters, “Hussein vows cash for martyrs.” March 12, 2002. Published in The Australian, March 13, 2002, page 9.

9. Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Iraqi Support for and Encouragement of Palestinian Terrorism,” September 30, 2002. This online document provided most of the background on Baathist Iraq’s sponsorship of the anti-Israeli Intifada.

10. Ibid.

11. United Press International, untitled dispatch by Rome, Italy correspondent, Paula Butturini. October 14, 1985. Cited in Paul Crespo, “Evidence Supports That Hussein Had Strong Links With Terrorists,” Miami Herald, June 1, 2004.

12. Dan Murphy, “Iraq to ‘outsource’ counterattacks. Baghdad is using embassies to forge ties with extremist groups to attack US facilities, say Filipino officials.” The Christian Science Monitor, February 26, 2003.

13. Sameer N. Yacoub, “Iraq claims terrorist leader committed suicide.” August 21, 2002 Associated Press dispatch published in Portsmouth Herald, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, August 22, 2002.

14. Associated Press, “Palestinian officials say Abu Nidal is dead.” Posted on USAToday.com, week of August 19, 2002.

15. Sheila MacVicar, “‘America’s Most Wanted’ – Fugitive Terrorists.” ABC News’ “Day One,” July 27, 1994.

16. Ravi Nessman, “Marines capture camp suspected as Iraqi training base for terrorists.” Associated Press, April 6, 2003, 4:14 p.m. EST. Posted by St. Paul Pioneer Press

17. PBS Frontline, “Gunning for Saddam: Should Saddam Hussein Be America’s Next Target in the War on Terrorism?” November 8, 2001. Read interviews and other information at:
18. Nessman, supra.

19. Stephen F. Hayes, “Dick Cheney Was Right: ‘We don’t know’ about Saddam and 9/11.” The Weekly Standard, October 20, 2003.

20. “Saddam’s Files,” (Staff editorial), The Wall Street Journal, May 27, 2004, page A20.

21. Hynek Kmonicek, Czech Ambassador to United Nations, Letter to James Beasley, Jr. February 24, 2003.

22. CBSNews.com, “Court Rules: Al Qaida, Iraq Linked,” May 7, 2003.

[AskTheWiseOldMan]

Here is the link to the very liberal CBS's article on the lawsuit:

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/08/uttm/main552868.shtml


The NRO has several articles on the issue:

1. “The Butcher with Terror Ties.” National Review Online (NRO), January 13, 2006.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200601130811.asp



2. “Smoking in the Background.” National Review Online (NRO), December 21, 2005.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200512211625.asp



3. “Saddam Was Tied to Terror.” National Review Online (NRO), December 13, 2004.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200412131333.asp



4. “HusseinAndTerror.com: Introducing a new resource.” National Review Online (NRO), October 20, 2004.


nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200410200855.asp



5. “Dems, Then & Now: Iraq terror-tie facts changed with the campaign season for Kerry and Co.” National Review Online (NRO), October 7, 2004.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200410071005.asp



6. “There Is a C-O-N-N-E-C-T-I-O-N,” NRO, July 21, 2004.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200407211107.asp



7. “Baathist Fingerprints,” NRO, June 3, 2004.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200406030932.asp



8. “Clarke’s Not Blind,” NRO, March 26, 2004.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200403260858.asp



9. “Graves of Mass Evidence,” NRO, March 19, 2004.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200403190916.asp



10. “The Road to Hell Is Paved with Acts of Terror,” NRO, March 10, 2004

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200403101426.asp



11. “On the Interrogation List: How did Saddam help 9/11 happen?” NRO, December 15, 2003.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200312150842.asp



12. “Saddam Hussein’s Philanthropy of Terror.” The Hudson Institute: American Outlook, Fall 2003, pages 46 – 52.


hudson.org/files/publications/murdocksaddamarticle.pdf



13. “Saddam’s Terror Ties: Iraq-war critics ignore ample evidence,” NRO, October 21, 2003.

nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200310210934.asp



14. “WMD & More: Remember what we have found in Iraq,” NRO, June 17, 2003.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock061703.asp



15. “Another Terror Tie: The evidence against Saddam Hussein continues to stack up,” NRO, April 16, 2003.


www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock041603.asp



16. “At Salman Pak: Iraq’s terror ties,” NRO, April 7, 2003.


www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock040703.asp



17. “The 9/11 Connection: What Salman Pak could reveal,” NRO, April 3, 2003.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock040303.asp



18. “Disarmament Not Good Enough: Getting rid of Saddam,” NRO, March 17, 2003.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock031703.asp



19. “Iraq’s Capability: Let’s not wait for a mushroom cloud,” NRO, September 24, 2002.

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock092402.asp

[sometimeman]

I respect you Wise One. You have more than "done your home work".

I wrestle with when to pray and leave things to God -or- When to say, "God put your spirit on me, let me be your hammer, let me swing and hit hard!"

I want to fight! I want my country to be right! I want my country to be committed.
Don't train me, make a soldier out of me tell me to fight and then not let me.

I want and expect my country to be committed, even to the point of annihilation of the planet. If we are right, then lets do it and kill them until they accept our will. Kill their young men, kill their women, their old men, kill their Grandmothers, toddlers, young children and babies. Kill them until I puke- vomit and am sick of it!
Kill them until they accept our will. If we fight then, fight without rules and FIGHT to win or die!

What is war?

[sometimeman]

youtube.com/watch?v=inyCkCvqRO0

Video's like this take all the fight out of me. I am afraid it is true. Paul Oneal was a good and honorable man!